how to manipulate time?
Fran
From: Ron Kita [mailto:chiralex.k...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2012 7:07 AM
To: vortex-l
Subject: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:Oil Price.com features Brillouin CF Reactor
Greetings All,
In case that you haven t see this before:
http://oilprice.com/Energy
in 2012 as we discover how to manipulate time?
Fran
From: Ron Kita [mailto:chiralex.k...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2012 7:07 AM
To: vortex-l
Subject: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:Oil Price.com features Brillouin CF Reactor
Greetings All,
In case that you haven t see
]
Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2012 7:07 AM
To: vortex-l
Subject: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:Oil Price.com features Brillouin CF Reactor
Greetings All,
In case that you haven t see this before:
http://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/New-LENR-Machine-is-the-Best-Yet.html
Respectfully
@eskimo.com
Sent: Tue, Apr 24, 2012 2:50 pm
Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:Oil Price.com features Brillouin CF Reactor
Brillouin expects the test of the new Hot Tube model at SRI will be capable of
delivering steam at temperatures from 400ºC to 500ºC (750-932ºF).
This means that SRI will build
Well, the short answer is instantaneous. The Brillo boys are using a variant
of W-L theory, which to the thinking of many of us has more holes than
Dunkin’ – since neutrons activate everything in the surroundings … but with
a curious twist. That twist makes it fully falsifiable - and if it proves
of helium. That would help to clarify
the data.
Dave
-Original Message-
From: Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Tue, Apr 24, 2012 4:39 pm
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Oil Price.com features Brillouin CF Reactor
Well, the short answer is instantaneous
On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 11:50 AM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote:
What gives the Rossi type reactor its power is the secret sauce and the
Rossi reaction is different from and more powerful than the Brillouin
reaction.
Considering that Rossi hasn't revealed how the E-Cat system works I
How does the initiating step differ from the electron-capture
proposed in W-L papers?
Hasn't someone here rebutted the physics of e-c capture?
Not freshly minted?
Jones Beene wrote:
Well, the short answer is instantaneous. The Brillo boys are using a
variant
of W-L theory, which to the
In reply to Jones Beene's message of Tue, 24 Apr 2012 13:39:12 -0700:
Hi,
Note that enhanced electron capture is also a characteristic of Hydrino capture
or Horace's theory. The difference being that with these theories the electron
capture happens either concurrent with or after the proton
On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 12:48 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:
I have not seen any reference to transformation of nickel to copper as
Rossi claims and I was wondering if anyone else has seen any references.
Why would all of the freshly minted neutrons collect with protons only
On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 7:18 PM, pagnu...@htdconnect.com wrote:
Hasn't someone here rebutted the physics of e-c capture?
The rebuttals I've seen involve the p + e- - n + v reaction that is
usually understood to occur between an inner shell electron and a proton in
a nucleus, or of the heavy
On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 8:58 PM, Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.com wrote:
But this statement from Wikipedia could lead one to wonder whether the
cathode (nickel, palladium, tungsten, etc.) is the secret catalyst:
I'm using cathode too broadly here -- I mean the metal substrate within
which
http://motls.blogspot.com/2012/02/cold-fusion-colloquium-at-cern.html?utm_source=feedburnerutm_medium=feedutm_campaign=Feed%3A+LuboMotlsReferenceFrame+%28Lubos+Motl%27s+reference+frame%29utm_content=Google+Reader
Motl is very rough agains CF, and seems not aware of SPAWAR, and other
replication
-colloquium-at-cern.html?utm_source=feedburnerutm_medium=feedutm_campaign=Feed%3A+LuboMotlsReferenceFrame+%28Lubos+Motl%27s+reference+frame%29utm_content=Google+Reader
Motl is very rough agains CF, and seems not aware of SPAWAR, and other
replication.
please, don't be aggressive, he have strong
://motls.blogspot.com/2012/02/cold-fusion-colloquium-at-cern.html?utm_source=feedburnerutm_medium=feedutm_campaign=Feed%3A+LuboMotlsReferenceFrame+%28Lubos+Motl%27s+reference+frame%29utm_content=Google+Reader
Motl is very rough agains CF, and seems not aware of SPAWAR, and other
replication.
please, don't
=feedutm_campaign=Feed%3A+LuboMotlsReferenceFrame+%28Lubos+Motl%27s+reference+frame%29utm_content=Google+Reader
Motl is very rough agains CF, and seems not aware of SPAWAR, and other
replication.
please, don't be aggressive, he have strong ego, strong competence, but
few moderation in his
=feedburnerutm_medium=feedutm_campaign=Feed%3A+LuboMotlsReferenceFrame+%28Lubos+Motl%27s+reference+frame%29utm_content=Google+Reader
Motl is very rough agains CF, and seems not aware of SPAWAR, and other
replication.
please, don't be aggressive, he have strong ego, strong competence, but
few
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Tuesday, 14 February 2012 12:21 AM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Lubos motll, physicis talk of CERN CF conference, and bash
it...
Peter is right. Ignore him is the best thing, although it is hard. He was
banned(sort of) from Harvard due his strong opinions on women and black
*Subject:* Re: [Vo]:Lubos motll, physicis talk of CERN CF conference, and
bash it...
Peter is right. Ignore him is the best thing, although it is hard. He was
banned(sort of) from Harvard due his strong opinions on women and black
people. He's been unemployed for around 5 years because
His career will suffer for poor timing, while other respected skeptics are
retiring from the field in the face of the growing evidence, they are letting
the young blood charge forward to take their place under the oncoming bus.
Although there was once good reason to be skeptical those reasons
He thinks males are smarter, blacks are the dumbest, gypsies are the most
annoying race(also very dumb), jews are at the top of human species.
2012/2/13 Roarty, Francis X francis.x.roa...@lmco.com
His career will suffer for poor timing, while other “respected” skeptics
are retiring from the
I don't feel that “respected” skeptics are retiring from the field in the
face of the growing evidence... you should read Judith Curry... in fact it
seems that, fair or not, the history is tumbling... first rats start to
flee the drowning boat...
anyway, about LM, I've always been shocked by his
abour recent claim of coldfusion experiement in MIT IAP
http://blog.newenergytimes.com/2012/02/04/lenr-researchers-reject-significance-of-swartzs-claim/
it seems the claims ils much less interesting that we heard.
few minutes, few milliwatts, no change.
maybe I missed the point,
: Vortex List
Assunto: [Vo]:FYI: CF claims at MIT IAP was 80mW not high COP... no change..
abour recent claim of coldfusion experiement in MIT IAP
http://blog.newenergytimes.com/2012/02/04/lenr-researchers-reject-significance-of-swartzs-claim/
it seems the claims ils much less interesting that we
Alain Sepeda alain.sep...@gmail.com wrote:
abour recent claim of coldfusion experiement in MIT IAP
http://blog.newenergytimes.com/2012/02/04/lenr-researchers-reject-significance-of-swartzs-claim/
it seems the claims ils much less interesting that we heard.
few minutes, few milliwatts, no
Vortex:
By coincidence I will be in Chicago on the 11th and in the Spirit of the
year of Cold Fusion :) I thought I would go see the film. Anyone from the
Vortex planning to attend the event. Just Curious.
Ransom
http://www.137films.org/NewsDetailPage/Work-in-progress-screening.
The
The Antagonists is a better-directed epithet. Although pseudo-skeptics
does capture an important dimension of the crime against humanity, it
doesn't get as close to the heart of the matter. Perhaps a phrase
involving establishment would be even better. The Inquisitors might be
better than The
What about a sequel called the Agonists ... a documentary about the drama
of ditto-skepticism on the vortex forum... up to the infamous Purge of
2012 ...
Agony being the operative word and 'Agonism' being the political doctrine
of embracing conflict and acknowledging the positive value of
To place any sort of mailing list purge in the same context as the
purge of rational scientific discourse that occurred within 40 days
and 40 nights of the cold fusion announcement by Fleischmann and Pons
is making a galaxy out of a mole hill.
On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 4:25 PM, Jones Beene
-
http://www.137films.org/NewsDetailPage/Work-in-progress-screening.
The Believers test screening February 11
Work-in-Progress Screening of The Believers at The Gene Siskel Film Center
If you've been waiting to see our new film, The Believers, now is
your chance! The Chicago Council
sorry, the correct link is
http://www.137films.org/NewsDetailPage/Work-in-progress-screening.aspx
Harry
On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 3:50 PM, Harry Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote:
-
http://www.137films.org/NewsDetailPage/Work-in-progress-screening.
The Believers test screening
...
note that he says too that Russian labs are on the domain too.
there is a local CF conference advertised here...
I says that Japanese are more tolerant with that kind of non consensual
domain.
he says that himself work on the domain without support nor funding, but
without annoyance.
about
On Sat, Jan 28, 2012 at 12:09 PM, Alain Sepeda alain.sep...@gmail.com wrote:
anyway just a remark, he says that 21 Chinese labs are working on the
domain.
Only 21? This is good. I can get my NicH heater at Walmart now. I
despise Home Despot.
T
by the way, and an awful French nationalist [?] , I've informed Areva of
defkalion test call...
they will probably ignore it and answer politely.[?]
stupidity is an option, and some take that option often.
2012/1/28 Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com
On Sat, Jan 28, 2012 at 12:09 PM, Alain
On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 6:56 PM, Giovanni Santostasi
gsantost...@gmail.comwrote:
There is an example that is interesting.
Gravitational wave detection.
As a practical field was created more than 40 years ago and no detection
has been done yet.
Doesn't fit the question though, since the
On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 7:19 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
Charles Hope lookslikeiwasri...@gmail.com wrote:
Are there any examples of pathological science persisting 20 years without
being properly debunked?
Not to my knowledge. Unless you count things like water memory,
, just as happened in 1989, when
people still had reason to trust the judgement of PF.
The reason CF-18 doesn't stand for cold fusion is most likely because cold
fusion is illusory.
On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 7:33 PM, Harry Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote:
Geocentrism took over 1000 years to debunk.
But considering it was accepted by the mainstream, it was not a
pathological science.
On 11-12-15 11:46 PM, Mary Yugo wrote:
On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 7:19 PM, Stephen A. Lawrence sa...@pobox.com
mailto:sa...@pobox.com wrote:
Were those experiments done *before* or *after* onset of rigor mortis?
Fresh cadavers-- and it was quite a while ago for the study I
remember.
On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 2:51 AM, Joshua Cude joshua.c...@gmail.com wrote:
It's very difficult in the case of acupuncture to do blank controls; you
know when someone sticks a needle in you.
Yes, which makes testing sticking needles in you very difficult to test.
But traditional Chinese
On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 6:34 AM, Stephen A. Lawrence sa...@pobox.comwrote:
**
As it happens, once breast cancer has metastasized into the bones it's
considered stage 4, incurable by conventional means, so she may not have
missed much by failing to have it properly diagnosed...
It used to
Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote:
As Stan Szpak says, scientists believe whatever you pay them to believe.
Nice broad brush indictment which is mostly wrong. Consider Jonas Salk as
an example -- he gave the world the Salk polio vaccine without royalties
and without a patent.
He is
On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 11:28 AM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.comwrote:
Normally I encourage people keep reading when they encounter difficulties
and are confused, but in your case perhaps it was best to stop.
Robust and credible results would not require anyone to read long and
Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote:
Robust and credible results would not require anyone to read long and
convoluted papers numbering in the thousands.
So you are looking for short, well-written, and highly convincing papers?
Most people I know would say these two fit the bill:
On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 12:06 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.comwrote:
Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote:
Robust and credible results would not require anyone to read long and
convoluted papers numbering in the thousands.
So you are looking for short, well-written, and highly
dismiss a paper or a
discovery because I have difficulty understanding it.
Thanks, I'll look.
If you're looking for interesting CF papers, and if you're looking for
papers that show evidence that the researchers knew what they were
doing, you might take a look at this honker:
http
or
a discovery because I have difficulty understanding it.
Thanks, I'll look.
If you're looking for interesting CF papers, and if you're looking for
papers that show evidence that the researchers knew what they were
doing, you might take a look at this honker:
http://www.google.ca/url?sa=trct
Stephen A. Lawrence sa...@pobox.com wrote:
If you're looking for interesting CF papers, and if you're looking for
papers that show evidence that the researchers knew what they were doing,
you might take a look at this honker . . .
A direct link:
http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat
Jed sez:
...
(By the way, I did not love the challenge of making programs work
in 4 kB, but I did meet it.)
Back in the 70's I was hired by the State of Wisconsin to work on an
IBM 360 Model 20, with 32k of memory. This was a mainframe computer. I
was in charge of the edit check program that
One point worth reiterating on this thread (although someone will be sure to
get in the last bit of negativism) is about the bogus argument of Lawrence
and Yugo . that belittles an LENR experiment which was only successful one
time in ten, or produced only 68% gain at most.
GET REAL . these
On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 2:27 PM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:
** **
The Yugo-esque mentality of years past, firmly pronounced that quantum
tunneling was either an observational error, or a freak exception of
extremely low probability that will stay in the lab. Fast forward three
From: Mary Yugo
I think you're misreading my intent. I am only arguing against some
people's apparent certainty regarding Rossi and Defkalion.
Well, I completely agree that such certainty is both rampant - and misplaced
(and sometimes silly). With one major caveat.
Although Rossi has
On 11-12-16 05:27 PM, Jones Beene wrote:
One point worth reiterating on this thread (although someone will be
sure to get in the last bit of negativism) is about the bogus argument
of Lawrence and Yugo ... that belittles an LENR experiment which was
only successful one time in ten,
You
MY wrote:
I can also determine if proper scientific method has most likely been
followed. Rossi and Defkalion fail *miserably* in both categories I know
about.
You can't fail at something that you never agreed to achieve.
Rossi has said from the out-set (i.e., January 2010) that he was
Are there any examples of pathological science persisting 20 years without
being properly debunked? Are there any examples of new science remaining on the
fringe for 20 years before being finally accepted into the mainstream?
On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 5:50 PM, Charles Hope
lookslikeiwasri...@gmail.comwrote:
Are there any examples of pathological science persisting 20 years without
being properly debunked? Are there any examples of new science remaining on
the fringe for 20 years before being finally accepted into the
There is an example that is interesting.
Gravitational wave detection.
As a practical field was created more than 40 years ago and no detection
has been done yet.
The theoretical prediction of gravitational waves by Einstein happened
about 90 years ago. He claimed it was an interesting theoretical
On 16 December 2011 02:47, Joshua Cude joshua.c...@gmail.com wrote:
Contrary to popular argument, science actually celebrates novelty and
revolution, and scientists are not afraid of disruptive experiments; they
crave them. Fame, glory, funding, and adoration come to those who make
On 16 December 2011 02:56, Giovanni Santostasi gsantost...@gmail.com wrote:
There is an example that is interesting.
Gravitational wave detection.
This is also sad thing. Because once we had to chance to disprove
Inflation theory once and for all by detecting gravitational wave
signature of big
Charles Hope lookslikeiwasri...@gmail.com wrote:
Are there any examples of pathological science persisting 20 years without
being properly debunked?
Not to my knowledge. Unless you count things like water memory, which may
be real after all, and acupuncture and chiropractic, which seem to
No, that was not accepted very well at all. Only a small quantity of open
minded theoretical physicists (most of them are considered fringe by the
mainstream) are publishing papers just in case the phenomena exists but it
will take a few more years to confirm it.
2011/12/15 Jouni Valkonen
Well, there is a reason why neutrinos travel faster than light and not
other particles. Starships are not made of neutrinos so even if the results
would be proven to be right for neutrinos it would not apply
to conventional matter.
Giovanni
On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 7:09 PM, Jouni Valkonen
Joshua Cude wrote:
Contrary to popular argument, science actually celebrates novelty and
revolution, and scientists are not afraid of disruptive experiments; they
crave them.
This is complete bullshit. Most scientists neither fear nor celebrate
disruptive experiments. They do not give a
On 16 December 2011 03:22, Giovanni Santostasi gsantost...@gmail.com wrote:
Well, there is a reason why neutrinos travel faster than light and not other
particles. Starships are not made of neutrinos so even if the results would
be proven to be right for neutrinos it would not apply
to
Geocentrism took over 1000 years to debunk.
The Law of CoE might take as long to debunk.
Harry
On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 8:19 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
Charles Hope lookslikeiwasri...@gmail.com wrote:
Are there any examples of pathological science persisting 20 years
On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 5:19 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
Charles Hope lookslikeiwasri...@gmail.com wrote:
Are there any examples of pathological science persisting 20 years without
being properly debunked?
Not to my knowledge. Unless you count things like water memory,
On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 5:27 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
Joshua Cude wrote:
Contrary to popular argument, science actually celebrates novelty and
revolution, and scientists are not afraid of disruptive experiments;
they
crave them.
This is complete bullshit. Most
It is not that simple. Relativity would not be completely dismissed by
these superluminal results. We don't know yet what is going on exactly. SR
and GR have been proven right in many instances and for large parameter
spaces.
Giovanni
On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 7:31 PM, Jouni Valkonen
On 16 December 2011 03:39, Giovanni Santostasi gsantost...@gmail.com wrote:
It is not that simple. Relativity would not be completely dismissed by these
superluminal results. We don't know yet what is going on exactly. SR and GR
have been proven right in many instances and for large parameter
You have to assume something funny about the mass of the neutrino no matter
what even in Lorentz theory.
You would still need infinite amounts of energy for a massive object to
reach the speed of light.
I don't see how switching to Lorentz theory would help to make a massive
body going faster than
On 16 December 2011 04:15, Giovanni Santostasi gsantost...@gmail.com wrote:
I don't see how switching to Lorentz theory would help to make a massive
body going faster than light.
I am sorry if you have trouble with the eye sight. This why it is more
important to ask, why we have such a cosmic
On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 8:33 PM, Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote:
You'd better hope it's not, says the water in my toilet, the water in the
sewers, the water exposed to toxic metals in mines, and the water used to
clean slaughter houses, after accidents, in mortuaries and infectious
I don't follow.
Sorry if the neutrinos results are true we need to admit the violation of
Lorentz-invariance is possible.
How your creation of strong artificial fields would do that? How neutrinos
accomplish the same?
Can you explain?
Giovanni
On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 8:48 PM, Jouni Valkonen
On 11-12-15 08:33 PM, Mary Yugo wrote:
On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 5:19 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com
mailto:jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
Charles Hope lookslikeiwasri...@gmail.com
mailto:lookslikeiwasri...@gmail.com wrote:
Are there any examples of pathological
On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 7:19 PM, Stephen A. Lawrence sa...@pobox.comwrote:
**
Were those experiments done *before* or *after* onset of rigor mortis?
Fresh cadavers-- and it was quite a while ago for the study I remember. As
to MRI and CT studies of the same phenomenon, I'm pretty sure
On Dec 15, 2011, at 4:27 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
The only metric that matters is moola.
A memorable phrase with catchy alliteration.
Many applications too. 8^)
Best regards,
Horace Heffner
http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
Abraham H. Maslow (1962), *Toward a Psychology of Being*: *I suppose it is
tempting, if the only tool you have is a hammer, to treat everything as if
it were a nail.*
On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 11:46 PM, Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 7:19 PM, Stephen A. Lawrence
On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 6:26 PM, pagnu...@htdconnect.com wrote:
Joshua,
I believe, Zawodny does explain the creation of ULM neutrons through the
plasmonic creation of heavy electrons. See (slide 16) of
http://newenergytimes.com/v2/news/2011/36/2010-Zawodny-AviationUnleashed.pdf
That's not
Hi,
I've found this article
http://www.infinite-energy.com/images/pdfs/mitcfreport.pdf
by Eugene F. Mallove (chief science writer for the MIT News Office, when
FleishmanPos paper make scandal)
and inside (main story page 12) he cleary state, (with exhibits) that MIT
have made a fraud , to
Alain Sepeda alain.sep...@gmail.com wrote:
and inside (main story page 12) he cleary state, (with exhibits) that
MIT have made a fraud , to pretend
they did not reproduce the FP experiment, and get no anomalous heat...
it is his own accusation, and I'm not sure I can trust it without
Lattice Energy LLC-LENRs and Cold Fusion are Different Concepts - Dec 13 2011
http://dev2.slideshare.com/lewisglarsen/lattice-energy-llclenrs-and-cold-fusion-are-different-conceptsdec-13-2011
I don't know if anyone stopped to think that WL claims are much more
spectacular than Rossi's. While Rossi's claims only refer to small black
boxe(s), WL includes things that work with the ecat's super qualities plus
that nearly all natural phenomena should include some LENR, almost like all
On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 10:42 AM, Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.comwrote:
I don't know if anyone stopped to think that WL claims are much more
spectacular than Rossi's. While Rossi's claims only refer to small black
boxe(s), WL includes things that work with the ecat's super qualities plus
The topic now is WL theory... Rossi's claims are just too shy in comparison.
2011/12/13 Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com
On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 10:42 AM, Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.comwrote:
I don't know if anyone stopped to think that WL claims are much more
spectacular than Rossi's.
The statement from Lattice Energy LLC strikes me as essentially
saying: Accept no other theory than our own. IOW, product placement.
If LE LLC eventually gets around to unveiling their own Dog Pony
show, meaning the presentation of a product (or just a prototype),
then by all means, let the
, December 13, 2011 12:12 PM
Subject: [Vo]:New Posting from Lattice Energy - LENR compared to CF
Lattice Energy LLC-LENRs and Cold Fusion are Different Concepts - Dec 13
2011
http://dev2.slideshare.com/lewisglarsen/lattice-energy-llclenrs-and-cold-fusion-are-different-conceptsdec-13-2011
On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 12:12 PM, pagnu...@htdconnect.com wrote:
Lattice Energy LLC-LENRs and Cold Fusion are Different Concepts - Dec 13
2011
As usual, he points out
1) the absurdity of breaching the Coulomb barrier in ordinary fusion, which
would take something approaching 100 keV for
On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 2:42 PM, Randy Wuller rwul...@freeark.com wrote:
Members of the Vortex:
I joined last night to address an issue raised by Maryyugo. Being a lawyer I
really have no special expertise in the sciences and thus have little to
offer on technical issue. Thus, not wanting to
left many observers with the distinct impression
that certain corners of the CF field have a bone to pick. Much of
the pickings seem to be blatant product placement. Accept no
imitations other than our own brand.
Regards
Steven Vincent Johnson
www.OrionWorks.com
www.zazzle.com/orionworks
Joshua,
I believe, Zawodny does explain the creation of ULM neutrons through the
plasmonic creation of heavy electrons. See (slide 16) of
http://newenergytimes.com/v2/news/2011/36/2010-Zawodny-AviationUnleashed.pdf
I am unsure as to whether Zawodny is correct, but page 9 of INTENSE
FOCUSING OF
Larsen starts talking at 3:20: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OVRLcC21F14
On 2011-06-17 04:45, Harry Veeder wrote:
New video in italian with some historical excerpts in english.
As far as I can understand from comments in the blog where the video
originally appeared, a version subtitled in english will be posted at a
later time.
Cheers,
S.A.
New video in italian with some historical excerpts in english.
Harry
Low Energy Nuclear Revolution
http://vimeo.com/25150844
by Giacomo Guidi
1 day ago1 day ago: Wed, Jun 15, 2011 3:24pm EST (Eastern Standard Time)
Un ingegnere e uno scienziato presentano al pubblico un controverso
Steven Chu looks at Lattice-assisted Nuclear Reactions Cold Fusion
http://the-explorer.com/steven-chu-looks-at-lattice-assisted-nuclear-reactions-cold-fusion/2011/3429583.html/
Was Chu at the conference on the weekend?
Harry
That's big news for the fiel of LANR/LENR/Cold Fusion. Another sign that it
is getting closer to the mainstream.
On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 4:30 PM, Harry Veeder hlvee...@yahoo.com wrote:
Steven Chu looks at Lattice-assisted Nuclear Reactions Cold Fusion
Harry Veeder wrote:
Steven Chu looks at Lattice-assisted Nuclear Reactions Cold Fusion
http://the-explorer.com/steven-chu-looks-at-lattice-assisted-nuclear-reactions-cold-fusion/2011/3429583.html/
Was Chu at the conference on the weekend?
Hey what? What is this article about, anyway? If
-Original Message-
From: Harry Veeder
Was Chu at the conference on the weekend?
No
The story was posted by someone named tina:
http://the-explorer.com/author/tina/
Harry
Jed Rothwell wrote:
Harry Veeder wrote:
Steven Chu looks at Lattice-assisted Nuclear Reactions Cold Fusion
On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 4:50 PM, Harry Veeder hlvee...@yahoo.com wrote:
The story was posted by someone named tina:
http://the-explorer.com/author/tina/
Tina provides no evidence that Chu even knows what LANRs are. There
are no citations in the article.
T
On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 5:01 PM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 4:50 PM, Harry Veeder hlvee...@yahoo.com wrote:
The story was posted by someone named tina:
http://the-explorer.com/author/tina/
Tina provides no evidence that Chu even knows what LANRs are.
101 - 200 of 577 matches
Mail list logo
