Particle 1 was analyzed and found to contain Ni62. Its photo shows that its
tubercles were not melted and the particle was therefore cold. Your
reasoning must be reversed. Particle 1 came from the COLDEST part of the
reactor. The induction coil is also cold and must have been located close
to the n
Following on to this line of thought ... Given the temperatures that the
reactor had been operating in actual operation, many of the constituents of
the fuel powder would have either melted, vaporized, or sintered to the
inside of the reactor core vessel. Thus, when removing the ash for test,
the c
The fact the the Ni62 particle was still functional and had its tubericles
intact points to the fact the particles was not melted and was no hotter
than the outside of the reactor. To explain this LENR miracle, see my
thread called: Super-fluidic heat flow.
On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 12:57 PM, Bob H
In a recent email, Ed Storms observed that the sample of the Lugano ash
that was tested was probably not at all representative of the material that
was active in the reactor core. At the temperatures measured, many of the
materials would have melted (or vaporized), and those that did not melt
were
-Original Message-
From: Brad Lowe
http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=853&cpage=12#comment-992087
Quoting Rossi: "We think that our process, the so called “Rossi Effect”, is, as
a serendipity, also a system to produce 62Ni, because only this fact can
explain the formation of
FYI, you can search all of Rossi's blogs using this handy link:
http://www.rossilivecat.com/all.html
Here is an entry from Aug. 28 2014 where Rossi states that his Rossi
effect seems to enrich nickel to Ni62, and that Ni62 seems to improve
the efficiency of the reaction. H
http://www.journal-of-
ilto:jone...@pacbell.net]
>> Sent: Saturday, October 11, 2014 4:35 PM
>> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
>> Subject: RE: Isotope conversion completeness, was RE:
>> [Vo]:Pomp weighs in
>>
>>
>> Ok - I can buy the c
Thanks!
Harry
On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 12:44 AM, Robert Ellefson
wrote:
> Harry and Jones,
>
>
>
> I do not believe that the discovery of highly-enriched isotopes is the
> result of fraud. I think that the variable fractions of isotopes between
> the surface and the bulk of the ash indicates th
Harry and Jones,
I do not believe that the discovery of highly-enriched isotopes is the result
of fraud. I think that the variable fractions of isotopes between the surface
and the bulk of the ash indicates that isotopic enrichment was occurring
in-situ. The apparent fact (if true) that th
___
> From: Jones Beene [mailto:jone...@pacbell.net]
> Sent: Saturday, October 11, 2014 4:35 PM
> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
> Subject: RE: Isotope conversion completeness, was RE:
> [Vo]:Pomp weighs in
>
>
> Ok - I c
I
f I read the information correctly reactor is only transparent to
I.R. below a wavelength of about 5 microns ( almost 0% transmissive
at wavelengths longer than 5 microns) and they used I.R. cameras that
were sensitive in the range of 7.5 microns and 13 microns. Therefor
the cameras woul
-Original Message-
From: mix...@bigpond.com
...and besides there is the "little" matter of all that excess energy.
"All that excess?"
In fact, here is nothing that can be called scientifically proved excess
energy at all... this is because the experiment is fatally flawed in using a
IR
put some more thoughts into this
>> message:
>>
>> http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg98422.html
>>
>>
>> -Bob
>>
>>
>>
>> _
>>
_
> From: Jones Beene
> [mailto:jone...@pacbell.net]
> Sent: Saturday, October 11, 2014 4:16 PM
> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
> Subject: RE: I
On Sat, Oct 11, 2014 at 5:02 PM, Jones Beene wrote:
Why is the Ni62 nearly pure? The reaction was stopped for reasons which were
> pre-planned, and not related to a depletion of reactants. They made this
> clear.
>
There was an earlier thread about the possibility of "burn-in," where early
in th
]
Sent: Saturday, October 11, 2014 4:16 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: RE: Isotope conversion
completeness, was RE: [Vo]:Pomp weighs in
Let me put
In reply to Robert Ellefson's message of Sat, 11 Oct 2014 13:24:55 -0700:
Hi,
[snip]
>
>While this still only represents a small sample of the complete reactor ash,
>I have a difficult time believing that a substantial fractionation of nickel
>isotopes occurred. I suspect that most of the other f
RE:
[Vo]:Pomp weighs in
Ok - I can buy the cyclic reaction, but how do you explain
the great preponderance of Li-6 in the ash, compared to all other isotopes?
That does not indicate a cycle so much as a major shift... and where are the
intermediaries in the nearly
...@pacbell.net]
Sent: Saturday, October 11, 2014 4:16 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: RE: Isotope conversion
completeness, was RE: [Vo]:Pomp weighs in
Let me put it this
_
From: Jones Beene [mailto:jone...@pacbell.net]
Sent: Saturday, October 11, 2014 4:16 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: RE: Isotope conversion completeness, was RE:
[Vo]:Pomp weighs in
Robert,
Whether you know it or not, you may have put another nail in
coffin of any faint hope that this report is valid, and not a fraud. What's
more, in answer to Ransom, it could be a deliberate fraud.
Let me put it this way, if wh
the key argument is that we don't have a theory on how it works, and we
have no idea if Ni62 is active, an ash, or anything...
heat is produced, and this man have to learn calorimetry like Huizenga,
Parks,
and most nuclear physicist who imagine that they are the center of the
world, and disdain wh
David,
I strongly disagree with the conclusions you have expressed regarding the
ash sample isotope fraction.
First, as I explain in this (rather-long-winded) mail from yesterday, the
ENTIRE ASH SAMPLE BULK was analyzed by ICP-MS as consisting of 99.3%
enriched Ni-62.
( see: htt
be required.
Dave
-Original Message-
From: Eric Walker
To: vortex-l
Sent: Sat, Oct 11, 2014 11:29 am
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Pomp weighs in
On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 8:52 PM, David Roberson wrote:
I may have missed the paragraph that stated the amount of material that was
taken
I looked into the diffusion of tritium from reactor pipes and discovered
that oxygen, carbon, moly, and silicon can slow hydrogen diffusion by 20
orders of magnitude. You might wonder why all of these elements were
present in the fuel load. Rossi is very cleaver.
On Sat, Oct 11, 2014 at 11:42 AM,
Please read the paper. Levi says the tube is sintered.
Sintered alumina would have about 6% porosity. It will not contain hydrogen at
high or low temperature.
However, it is unclear as to whether the fuel was admitted already inside a
separate hermetically sealed ampoule.
If so, that
So its may be possible the main energy source is pep>D and associated
reactions. This may also gives D for neutron striping reactions.
Torulf.
On Sat, 11 Oct 2014 08:42:26 -0700, Eric Walker wrote:
On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 9:01 PM, Jones Beene wrote:
Sorry - but this
reactor is made of al
On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 9:06 PM, Robert Lynn
wrote:
>
> more magic involved? fusion + fission transmutations that release copious
> neutrinos with no gammas, betas, neutrons or alphas?
>
Apart from a few suggestions here and there, the main reactions that have
been considered in the isotope threa
On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 9:01 PM, Jones Beene wrote:
>
>
> Sorry – but this reactor is made of alumina – which is a proton conductor.
> Beta alumina is among the best proton conducting ceramics but you would
> never use any form of alumina if you wanted to retain a supply of hydrogen
> after startu
On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 8:52 PM, David Roberson wrote:
I may have missed the paragraph that stated the amount of material that was
> taken from within the reactor as ash. Did they recover approximately the
> same amount as was put in?
>
Approximately 1 gram of fuel was added at the start of the
On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 8:07 PM, Robert Lynn
wrote:
>
>
>- The uniformity of the Ni ash concerns me, the burn mechanism somehow
>converts all natural Ni isotopes (smaller and larger!! so fusion and
>fission in evidence) to Ni62, but with miraculously no radioactive isotopes
>produce
It may be hard to get ro operating temp with only the electric power supply
and no LENR.
Bob Cook
Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE SmartphoneRobert Lynn
wrote:
Excellent point. Would be easy enough to do a second control run even now
to add some confidence to the calorimetry. The alum
this question can change the COP, not the bottom line :
at lower input power, the temperature is much higher for the active version.
2014-10-10 7:40 GMT+02:00 Eric Walker :
> On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 7:44 PM, Jed Rothwell
> wrote:
>
> This is wonderfully simple calorimetry. The easiest I have seen
Excellent point. Would be easy enough to do a second control run even now
to add some confidence to the calorimetry. The alumina + wire will be
off-the-shelf all someone need do is ask Rossi for specs of tube and wire -
he should be happy to provide them in the interests of clarity.
On 10 Octobe
On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 7:44 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
This is wonderfully simple calorimetry. The easiest I have seen in cold
> fusion. If you cannot understand this, you cannot understand any
> experiment, and you know nothing about this subject.
>
To be honest, the calorimetry left some things t
Axil Axil wrote:
> The testers should not have run the reactor at 1400C.
>
I do not think they knew it would get that hot.
> That high operational temperature would have partially melted many of the
> nickel particles thereby reducing the power output of the test reactor.
> Melted particles
>From an electromagnetic point of view, nickel and lithium perform the same
no matter how many neutrons are included in their nuclei.
The testers should not have run the reactor at 1400C. That high operational
temperature would have partially melted many of the nickel particles
thereby reducing th
Axil Axil wrote:
This is correct thinking and a real path to truth.
>
> On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 4:23 AM, Alain Sepeda
> wrote:
>
>> tthe isotopic shift observed is probably only a side effect of the real
>> reaction.
>> from others LENR experiments one can suspect that hydrogen is the fuel,
>> an
Chris Zell wrote:
>
> I think a line is being crossed in regard to the accusations made. While
> there are many points to be debated, accusing professionals of being part
> of a fraud is something that should answered in a courtroom as defamation.
>
I agree with your sentiments, but people hav
This is correct thinking and a real path to truth.
On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 4:23 AM, Alain Sepeda wrote:
> tthe isotopic shift observed is probably only a side effect of the real
> reaction.
> from others LENR experiments one can suspect that hydrogen is the fuel,
> and that Ni is just modified.
>
I think a line is being crossed in regard to the accusations made. While there
are many points to be debated, accusing professionals of being part of a fraud
is something that should answered in a courtroom as defamation.
-
Stefan Israelsson Tampe wrote:
yes, they probably choosed the most extreme sample to make a statement.
>
I do not think they chose the samples. I think they only analyzed two and
they reported on both. If they had analyzed 10 or 20 I think they would've
said so.
- Jed
I think this report was very good from many aspects. I understand from the
comments that the Pomp's of this world now have one and only one way to
deny the existence of Rossi's E-cat and that is to say that Rossi is an
fraud and a magician.
As much as I want to be critical and as much as it is OK t
Stephen Pomp asserts that it is possible to use commercially available
isotopes to make an ash sample that gives the same values as measured in
the report. Setting aside the issues of how Rossi would switch samples and
his motivation for doing so, we should ask if Pomp is exaggerating the
correspon
Thanks this looks fine.
Rossi have to declare watt material he
used.
On Thu, 9 Oct 2014 09:41:33 -0600, Bob Higgins wrote:
Jones,
I think you have far insufficient data to jump to the conclusion that
this is no longer a Ni-H reaction. Earlier, the hotCat used stainless,
and it worked just
Jones, I think you have far insufficient data to jump to the conclusion
that this is no longer a Ni-H reaction. Earlier, the hotCat used
stainless, and it worked just fine. Before that, it was just added H2
gas. Just because alumina is used now does not mean it is "beta alumina"
or even uncoate
yes, they probably choosed the most extreme sample to make a statement.
On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 5:06 PM, Ron Wormus wrote:
>
>
> --On Thursday, October 09, 2014 5:07 AM -0400 Craig Haynie <
> cchayniepub...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>> It does look like the system ran until its fuel was exhausted.
>>
--On Thursday, October 09, 2014 5:07 AM -0400 Craig Haynie
wrote:
It does look like the system ran until its fuel was exhausted.
"The unused fuel shows the natural isotope composition from both SIMS
and ICP-MS, i.e. 58 Ni (68.1%), 60 Ni (26.2%), 61 Ni (1.1%), 62 Ni
(3.6%), and 64 Ni (0.9%
wrote:
>
> The fraud hypothesis is an obvious option.
>
If it is so obvious then please explain how it would be done. By Rossi, I
mean. Obviously if Levi et al. wanted to commit fraud they could simply
publish fake data. They could make up the whole thing without doing an
experiment.
You should p
At 05:46 PM 10/8/2014, Jones Beene wrote:
Many things do not
add up here, especially the drastic changes from the original
E-Cat.
I don't have any problem with the design evolution.
The original "warm" cat went from a large tube boiler to a
small tube boiler to a kettle.
The hotcat went from a la
A Nickel Hydrogen reactor without hydrogen.
The isotope shift end
at the same time the experiment stop.
The fraud hypothesis is an
obvious option.
Torulf
Robert Lynn wrote:
> I'll continue to observe, and hold some hope, but given the track record
> of sub-par demos and rumours of unpublished negative results . . .
>
1. This was a superb demo, not subpar.
2. All experiments have unpublished negative results as well as published
ones. A negative
That is true, Fran - but as of now – this is looking more unbelievable to me
than the very first Rossi demo – the “steam or hot-air” version.
This is no longer a hydrogen reactor. That is a huge change in focus. As
someone else has commented, at least now Rossi has now backed himself into a
corne
From: Axil Axil
>The dimethyl siloxane type of polymer will confine hydrogen
since oxygen carbon and silicon all keep hydrogen from escaping.
No, that is incorrect. As Steve High says, this material was never in the
reactor.
This is a high temperature polymer adhe
A point of clarification if I might. The siloxane was never present in the
reactor. It was the adhesive used to fix the ash particles, after removal
from the reactor, so they could be analyzed for isotopic composition. The
odd thing about the isotopic analysis: if you read the appendix you will
not
: Wednesday, October 08, 2014 8:47 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: EXTERNAL: RE: [Vo]:Pomp weighs in
Many things do not add up here, especially the drastic changes from the
original E-Cat.
The more I read the more skeptical is my outlook on this.
Could some clever troll have gotten hold of
On 10/09/2014 07:00 AM, Roarty, Francis X wrote:
And being a 3^rd part test I would assume Rossi does not have access
or opportunity to switch out anything.
From page 7 of the report:
"The dummy reactor was switched on at 12:20 PM of 24 February 2014 by
Andrea Rossi who gradually
brought
And being a 3rd part test I would assume Rossi does not have access or
opportunity to switch out anything.
From: Blaze Spinnaker [mailto:blazespinna...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, October 08, 2014 10:26 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Pomp weighs in
Jed, perhaps someone
Two things:
On 10/08/2014 11:07 PM, Robert Lynn wrote:
The uniformity of the Ni ash concerns me, the burn mechanism somehow
converts all natural Ni isotopes (smaller and larger!! so fusion and
fission in evidence) to Ni62, but with miraculously no radioactive
isotopes produced?
Patterson, in
gt; Dave
>>
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Jed Rothwell
>> To: vortex-l
>> Sent: Wed, Oct 8, 2014 10:51 pm
>> Subject: Re: [Vo]:Pomp weighs in
>>
>> Blaze Spinnaker wrote:
>>
>>
>>> I can't imagine how,
tthe isotopic shift observed is probably only a side effect of the real
reaction.
from others LENR experiments one can suspect that hydrogen is the fuel,
and that Ni is just modified.
that the surface of the powder is pure Ni62 maye be simply that it is
cooked by the reactions, stay stable, and wo
bad logic
even a fraudster cannot change the physics of heat.
a fraudster need to control his environment. he makes pony show.
he ensure condition for his fraud. he does not let people play with his
reactor, choose methods...
the fraud hypotheis are empty... they don't even consider the consequ
this is an old tactic that Beaudette debunked.
the physicist ignore voluntarily that heat above chemistry level is a
nuclear ash.
maybe Jed can make a better historical perspective than me.
as I've read, the chemist were so bad in particle detection, and physicist
so bad in calorimetry, that sinc
The dimethyl siloxane type of polymer will confine hydrogen since oxygen
carbon and silicon all keep hydrogen from escaping.
On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 1:19 AM, Axil Axil wrote:
> The Lithium Aluminum Hydride was not added to the fuel mix for its good
> looks. The Hydride had a definite purpose. Sor
The Lithium Aluminum Hydride was not added to the fuel mix for its good
looks. The Hydride had a definite purpose. Sorry, the reactor is a Nickel
Hydrogen reactor.
On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 12:01 AM, Jones Beene wrote:
>
>
> Sorry – but this reactor is made of alumina – which is a proton conductor.
gt; to the extreme temperatures.
>>
>> Dave
>>
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Jed Rothwell
>> To: vortex-l
>> Sent: Wed, Oct 8, 2014 10:51 pm
>> Subject: Re: [Vo]:Pomp weighs in
>>
>> Blaze Spinnaker wrote:
>>
&
the
isotopic shifts in Ni and Li.
-Bob
From: David Roberson [mailto:dlrober...@aol.com]
Sent: Wednesday, October 08, 2014 9:13 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Pomp weighs in
I agree with you that it is quite a coincidence for them to stop the
reaction at exactly the
o the extreme temperatures.
Dave
-Original Message-
From: Jed Rothwell
To: vortex-l
Sent: Wed, Oct 8, 2014 10:51 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Pomp weighs in
Blaze Spinnaker wrote:
I can't imagine how, but perhaps what was left behind inside the reactor when
added to the ash
Axil
To: vortex-l
Sent: Wed, Oct 8, 2014 11:58 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Pomp weighs in
It looks like the nickel particles were embedded in a Lithium Aluminum Hydride
powder and some sort of silicon glue (a dimethyl siloxane type of polymer ) was
used to kept the particles in place.
On Wed
of the reactor due
> to the extreme temperatures.
>
> Dave
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Jed Rothwell
> To: vortex-l
> Sent: Wed, Oct 8, 2014 10:51 pm
> Subject: Re: [Vo]:Pomp weighs in
>
> Blaze Spinnaker wrote:
>
>
>> I can't i
Sorry – but this reactor is made of alumina – which is a proton conductor. Beta
alumina is among the best proton conducting ceramics but you would never use
any form of alumina if you wanted to retain a supply of hydrogen after startup.
All of the initial hydrogen is gone within an hour d
> to the extreme temperatures.
>
> Dave
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Jed Rothwell
> To: vortex-l
> Sent: Wed, Oct 8, 2014 10:51 pm
> Subject: Re: [Vo]:Pomp weighs in
>
> Blaze Spinnaker wrote:
>
>
>> I can't imagine how, but perha
due to the extreme temperatures.
Dave
-Original Message-
From: Jed Rothwell
To: vortex-l
Sent: Wed, Oct 8, 2014 10:51 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Pomp weighs in
Blaze Spinnaker wrote:
I can't imagine how, but perhaps what was left behind inside the reactor when
added to th
In the ash sample from this test each particle is very different in many
ways. You cannot do that particle by particle customization commensally.
On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 11:42 PM, H Veeder wrote:
> According to Pomp you can fake the ash with commercially available samples.
> Now perhaps Pomp's cl
Each LENR system has a unique transmutation character based on the way the
magnetic field emitters are deployed. In fact, each nickel particle
produces a different reaction.
You should read and understand Appendix 3 to educate your preconceptions.
On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 11:38 PM, Axil Axil w
According to Pomp you can fake the ash with commercially available samples.
Now perhaps Pomp's claim is an exaggeration and it is only possible to
roughly approximate the ash.
I'll let the experts decide.
Harry
On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 11:25 PM, Axil Axil wrote:
> Can you get Ni62 at 90% enragem
NiH2 >Zn*> Ni + He
2H(1) + Ni(64) > Zn(66)* Step1
Zn(66)* > Ni(62) + He(4) Step 2
You also suffer from the nuclear physics syndrome where reactions are fixed
over all systems. Each LENR system has a unique transmutation
character based on the way the magnetic field emitters are deployed. In
fact
so the claim is essentially that this soup of elements were also consumed
to exhaustion, without changing power input or output as their quantities
reduced, in an amazingly perfect process that has as its only product the
highest binding energy Ni62 (also consuming Ni64) and without creating any
ob
Each nickel particle had a different surface presentation and isotopic
content. That would be hard to get COTS.
On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 11:25 PM, Axil Axil wrote:
> Can you get Ni62 at 90% enragement from a commercial source? Why not just
> add some copper to the ash, it is cheaper to create tha
Can you get Ni62 at 90% enragement from a commercial source? Why not just
add some copper to the ash, it is cheaper to create that fraud.
On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 11:21 PM, H Veeder wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 11:15 PM, Axil Axil wrote:
>
>> You have some unfounded assumptions in your thi
On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 11:15 PM, Axil Axil wrote:
> You have some unfounded assumptions in your thinking that are the same
> assumption that the testers suffer from.
>
> The reaction does not center on the nickel or the lithium. The LENR
> transmutation is done in the hydrogen and the aluminum an
You have some unfounded assumptions in your thinking that are the same
assumption that the testers suffer from.
The reaction does not center on the nickel or the lithium. The LENR
transmutation is done in the hydrogen and the aluminum and other elements.
Did you see this line on page 53?
Sample
De-cloaking long term lurker.
Latest test result issues that raise my suspicions:
- The uniformity of the Ni ash concerns me, the burn mechanism somehow
converts all natural Ni isotopes (smaller and larger!! so fusion and
fission in evidence) to Ni62, but with miraculously no radioactive
It is strange if the ash contents really do resemble what is available
commercially.
I read one suggestion on facebook, that the reactor could contian special
compartments like a magician's trick box . One thing goes in and a
different thing comes out depending on how the box is manipulated.
Ha
On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 9:40 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
> James Bowery wrote:
>
> Unfortunate that in this day and age of trivial-cost 24/7 video
>> surveillance that there isn't a complete audio-video log of such a critical
>> experiment. Such precautions would, of course, be unprecedented but no
Blaze Spinnaker wrote:
> I can't imagine how, but perhaps what was left behind inside the reactor
> when added to the ash would show that no isotopic shifts took place.
>
Sorry, but that makes no sense. The material that came out proves there are
isotopic shifts. What stayed behind cannot "unpr
Blaze Spinnaker wrote:
> I'm not interesting in debating the other aspects of the experiment
> because of the complexities involved in calorimetry.
>
This is wonderfully simple calorimetry. The easiest I have seen in cold
fusion. If you cannot understand this, you cannot understand any
experime
James Bowery wrote:
Unfortunate that in this day and age of trivial-cost 24/7 video
> surveillance that there isn't a complete audio-video log of such a critical
> experiment. Such precautions would, of course, be unprecedented but no
> more so than the purported impact of the technology.
>
The
Blaze Spinnaker wrote:
Jed, perhaps someone is trying to discredit Rossi and thought this was the
> best way to do so.
>
Do you mean, someone else swapped out the ash, putting in unnatural
isotopic materials?
I do not think that is possible. Only Levi et al. and Rossi came in contact
with the r
notice that there was no copper transmutation in this test. The reason:
whenever you deploy the power in a different way, you change what the
powder will produce in the reaction. Rossi glued the powder down using a
silicon glue. He wanted to spread the powder out. He did not pack the
powder into a
Unfortunate that in this day and age of trivial-cost 24/7 video
surveillance that there isn't a complete audio-video log of such a critical
experiment. Such precautions would, of course, be unprecedented but no
more so than the purported impact of the technology.
On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 9:21 PM, B
Jed, perhaps someone is trying to discredit Rossi and thought this was the
best way to do so.
On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 7:22 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
> Blaze Spinnaker wrote:
>
> If Rossi switched out the ash, he's a fraud. End of story.
>>
>
> Here is something you think about. Why would he switc
Lithium and nickel are just the spark plugs of the reaction. Other elements
were transmuted but the ash analysis did not pick this part of the reaction
mechanism up. There was a preconception of what the reaction should look
like that has no basis in reality.
On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 10:21 PM, Blaze
Blaze Spinnaker wrote:
If Rossi switched out the ash, he's a fraud. End of story.
>
Here is something you think about. Why would he switch out the ash? What
possible benefit would that bring to him? What motivation would he have?
The answers are no reason, none and none. Reasons:
1. The people
Another possibility is that someone switched out the ash on Rossi to
discredit him However, I would have assumed that Rossi would have
complained about that immediately on his blog
On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 7:19 PM, Orionworks - Steven Vincent Johnson <
orionwo...@charter.net> wrote:
> Blaze sed:
Blaze sed:
> If Rossi switched out the ash, he's a fraud. End of story.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K%C3%BCbler-Ross_model
See item #3: Bargaining
Regards,
Steven Vincent Johnson
svjart.orionworks.com
zazzle.com/orionworks
>From Blaze
> I'm not interesting in debating the other aspects of the experiment because
> of the
> complexities involved in calorimetry.
But Mom! Why can't I stay up till 10:00 PM?
Because I told you so. Now go to bed!
Regards,
Steven Vincent Johnson
svjart.orionworks.com
zazzle.com/orionw
Jed sez:
> Pomp, pomp, pomp:
Because the bible of nuclear physics tells me so.
Regards,
Steven Vincent Johnson
svjart.orionworks.com
zazzle.com/orionworks
Jed, don't you think it is strange that the isotopic composition of the ash
closely resembles what is commercially available.
Also the ash is free of other elements that were present before the run.
That would make sense if the ash came from a commercial source
which didn't contain these elements.
One possibility that I haven't seen discussed is that the internals of the
reactor are responsible for the change in composition in some way. I
can't imagine how, but perhaps what was left behind inside the reactor when
added to the ash would show that no isotopic shifts took place.
On Wed, Oct
1 - 100 of 113 matches
Mail list logo