On Mon, May 06, 2013 at 02:06:49PM -0400, Jed Rothwell wrote:
I doubt it. Here are some mass produced devices similar to a cold fusion
cell. An ordinary person at home cannot make them with off-the-shelf
components:
NiCad battery
Computer CPU chip
Catalytic converter
Fuel cell
All of
On Mon, May 6, 2013 at 10:21 AM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.comwrote:
First of all, all data requires interpretation.
Of course, but review papers generally report interpretations of the
authors, rather than perform primary interpretation, especially on data
communicated privately, at
On Mon, May 6, 2013 at 10:21 AM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.comwrote:
Nevertheless, when many people report seeing the same behavior, the
reality of this behavior grows. You take the approach that none of the
claimed behavior has been observed, consisting instead of bad
interpretation
On Mon, May 6, 2013 at 1:59 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote:
Joshua Cude is reminiscent of the old geezers who righteously proclaimed
from their wheelchairs that man would never fly, set in their sclerotic
attitudes pressed into their brains through years behind the reins of their
http://physics.aps.org/synopsis-for/10.1103/PhysRevLett.110.185005
After centuries of observation, lightning is still a puzzle: it is not yet
fully known how thunderclouds acquire electrical charge and what initiates
the discharge. Two factors are thought to be important: small water or ice
citing cold fusion as usual example.
Scientific fraud, sloppy science – yes, they happen
http://theconversation.com/scientific-fraud-sloppy-science-yes-they-happen-13948
This is a shame.
Once a false narrative becomes widespread it is difficult to erase it from
the mass media and the popular imagination. Years ago I hoped that the
Internet would make it easier for people to learn the truth, but that has
not happened much. Mythology and distorted versions of
My response:
This article is an excellent example of the confluence of sloppy journalism
with sloppy science. The journalistic investigators of cold fusion were
beset by problems similar to those besetting the scientific investigators.
The most prominent and early example was Jerry E. Bishop,
James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote:
Although they were not able to have his award rescinded, they were able to
get the AIP, in their award statement, basically censure Mr. Bishop even as
they awarded him.
Bishop himself seemed conflicted about cold fusion. He did not want to hear
anything
TEST
The title of this discussion seems to have the conniptions.
If anyone would like to comment on this again I suggest you create a new
thread with a different title
- Jed
Joshua, cold fusion is either a real phenomenon in Nature or it is
not. You argue that it is not real, but simply the result of many
mistakes made repeatedly by many well trained scientists. Regardless
of what is suggested as evidence, you will find a way to reject it.
While this approach
After his treatment by the AIP, who can blame Bishop for being conflicted
about cold fusion both because we're all conflicted about it because
virtually none of us are the true believers the shit-for-brains
pseudoskeptics make us out to be, and because there is tremendous value
demanding
That won't work.
The problem is at your end, Jed.
On Tue, May 7, 2013 at 9:44 AM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
TEST
The title of this discussion seems to have the conniptions.
If anyone would like to comment on this again I suggest you create a new
thread with a different
Test. Please ignore.
Test response. Let's see if James Bowery is right and this is something at
my end.
- Jed
Nope. No recursive explosion of Re: Re: Re:
It must be something like the dash in the title. The Eskimo.com mail system
is bonkers.
- Jed
The reason I said it is at your end is that when I responded to the same
threads, no explosion happened whereas when you responded, it did happen.
At least that's the way it appeared at this end.
On Tue, May 7, 2013 at 10:08 AM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
Nope. No recursive
On Tue, May 7, 2013 at 9:48 AM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com wrote:
Regardless of what is suggested as evidence, you will find a way to reject
it.
This is often stated, but of course it's nonsense. Who could reject a
phenomenon that replaces fossil fuels? That powers a car without
This is a test to determine whether the problem with response prefix
explosion was caused by funny windows characters such as –
which appeared in the title of the prior thread.
A test response.
On Tue, May 7, 2013 at 10:26 AM, James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote:
This is a test to determine whether the problem with response prefix
explosion was caused by funny windows characters such as –
which appeared in the title of the prior thread.
Yep.
Thank you, world's richest man.
On Tue, May 7, 2013 at 10:27 AM, James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote:
A test response.
On Tue, May 7, 2013 at 10:26 AM, James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote:
This is a test to determine whether the problem with response prefix
explosion was caused
Cude would argue that there isn't a newly discovered (new is of course
relative) phenomenon and that everyone investigating it is deluded, incompetent
or both. What he can't explain is why anyone would run around the internet
trying to stop people from investigating a phenomenon. It makes no
On Tue, May 07, 2013 at 10:25:11AM -0500, Joshua Cude wrote:
On Tue, May 7, 2013 at 9:48 AM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com wrote:
Regardless of what is suggested as evidence, you will find a way to reject
it.
This is often stated, but of course it's nonsense. Who could reject a
Well said, Randy.
It is a mystery why someone with considerable talent would indulge in this
kind of negativity, when at best the greatest satisfaction that can be
derived from it - is far exceed by the risk that the questioned effect is
real, but can be understood - but the peer pressure and
James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote:
Yep.
Thank you, world's richest man.
Probably not Microsoft's fault. But hey, let't blame 'em! They are guilty
of a lot of things.
- Jed
Eugen Leitl eu...@leitl.org wrote:
This is often stated, but of course it's nonsense. Who could reject a
phenomenon that replaces fossil fuels? That powers a car without
refueling?
This is precisely my problem with claimed evidence for CF/LENR.
Read history and you will see that many
Thanks for the response, Ransom. I agree, interacting with Cude is
not useful. If you have any questions, I would be glad to respond.
Ed Storms
On May 7, 2013, at 9:34 AM, Randy wuller wrote:
Cude would argue that there isn't a newly discovered (new is of
course relative) phenomenon and
“If man ever flies, it will not be within our lifetime, not within a
thousand years.” - Wilbur Wright to his brother Orville
Not only did Wilbur have a most difficult problem to solve, he also had to
contend with negativity from all sides, incompetence in his field, and the
cynics that are
On May 7, 2013, at 9:55 AM, Eugen Leitl wrote:
On Tue, May 07, 2013 at 10:25:11AM -0500, Joshua Cude wrote:
On Tue, May 7, 2013 at 9:48 AM, Edmund Storms
stor...@ix.netcom.com wrote:
Regardless of what is suggested as evidence, you will find a way
to reject
it.
This is often stated,
On Sat, May 4, 2013 at 3:50 PM, Joshua Cude joshua.c...@gmail.com wrote:
That the size of the claimed effect has gotten smaller ... which is
consistent with pathological science.
***Hagelstein wrote this editorial shortly after having his latest LENR
experiment run for several MONTHS in his lab.
On Mon, May 6, 2013 at 2:53 AM, Joshua Cude joshua.c...@gmail.com wrote:
LENR+ is so 2011. I think the future is in LENR++ or maybe objective LENR.
Nickel and light water are certainly easier to obtain than Pd and heavy
water, but you still have to mine nickel, and refine it. LENR++ uses
Cude wrote:
You should keep an open mind to the possibility that cold fusion is not
the Wright brothers' airplane. Maybe it's Blondlott’s N-rays. It’s
Fedyakin’s polywater.
These things were never replicated. Only one lab briefly claimed to
replicate polywater, and it soon retracted. These
Kevin O'Malley kevmol...@gmail.com wrote:
***Hagelstein wrote this editorial shortly after having his latest LENR
experiment run for several MONTHS in his lab. How has the size of the
claimed effect gotten smaller . . .
It has not gotten smaller. Especially considering the fact that the
Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com wrote:
CF/LENR is not a giant effect. It is a phenomenon of Nature that is not
understood well enough to make large yet.
On rare occasions it has been large, when people used very large cathodes.
Mizuno observed several days of heat after death at about
Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com
viahttp://support.google.com/mail/bin/answer.py?hl=enctx=mailanswer=1311182
eskimo.com
7:48 AM (2 hours ago)
to vortex-l
Joshua, ...You argue that it is not real, but simply the result of many
mistakes made repeatedly by many well trained scientists.
***In
I sincerely do not understand this collective exercise in masochism
based on discussion with a bravo as Joshua Cude.
He simply makes intentionally the error that considers CF's temporary
problems as a sign that. CF does not exist
Let's better concentrate on the problems of reproducibility and
Nice argument, Kevin. Of course, that is why science demands
replication. No two scientists will likely make the same mistake. As a
result, the behavior, if repeated many times, becomes real. That
threshold has been passed by cold fusion. Now the challenge is to do
studies that show why
Kevin O'Malley kevmol...@gmail.com wrote:
Since there have been more than 14,700 replications (see below) . . .
This is a tally of individual test runs. I believe it was done by a grad
student I believe, at the Institute of High Energy Physics, Chinese Academy
of Sciences. However, they did
Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com wrote:
I sincerely do not understand this collective exercise in masochism
based on discussion with a bravo as Joshua Cude.
It is not a bad idea to clarify the facts from time to time, for the
benefit of people such as Eugen Leitl. People should read the
Peter, the response to Cude is for educational purposes, which you of
all people should understand and support. Many readers of Vortex share
Cude's views. We need to educate them. Cude is their spokesman. The
other people might learn by having some of the challenges answered.
Nevertheless,
I wrote:
In Storms' book I think there are 180 positive excess heat studies. Each
one typically reflects several excess heat events. A few were based on
dozens of events.
Note that the number of failed tests within a study is not relevant. If
anything, some failed tests should give us
http://www.google.com/url?sa=trct=jq=esrc=sfrm=1source=webcd=40ved=0CHYQFjAJOB4url=http%3A%2F%2Fciteseerx.ist.psu.edu%2Fviewdoc%2Fdownload%3Fdoi%3D10.1.1.29.695%26rep%3Drep1%26type%3Dpdfei=81IkT-zMDYr10gGU0LzsCAusg=AFQjCNF5SQt3JVNF_ecKuWA6uwMNrthKgQsig2=155KUMofVJ27VAps7p8Pxw
Gas Mixture with an
Dear Ed,
Cude is- in the best sense of the wording a paid killer. It is possible he
pays but this does not change much.
I was always open to discuss about those two critical problems. also with
low success rate (BTW Mizzou has said they have 20% success rate with their
Pd-D electrochemical
Thanks for the reference, Jed.
In that paper by Johnson, they quote Craven Letts. Do you think it was
this paper that National Instruments proceeds from when they reviewed the
literature and cited more than 180 replications?
D. Craven and D. Letts, “The enabling criteria of electrochemical
DGT tells all as stated as follows in their paper
TECHNICAL CHARACTERISTICS PERFORMANCE OF THE DEFKALION’S HYPERION
PRE-INDUSTRIAL PRODUCT
Rydberg State Hydrogen (RSH) atoms are short lived, even though their size
is relatively big, and they form special bonds with each other. Usually
acting
Kevin O'Malley kevmol...@gmail.com wrote:
In that paper by Johnson, they quote Craven Letts. Do you think it was
this paper that National Instruments proceeds from when they reviewed the
literature and cited more than 180 replications?
I do not know. However, that is approximately the
Kevin O'Malley kevmol...@gmail.com mailto:kevmol...@gmail.com wrote:
In that paper by Johnson, they quote Craven Letts.
Cravens and Letts is here, by the way:
http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/CravensDtheenablin.pdf
This is an important paper.
- Jed
*
Acknowledgments
*
We would like to acknowledge and thank JED ROTHWELL, Ed Storms, Dieter
Britz, Bill Collis
and Steve Krivit for their diligent archival/historical work in preserving
the record of CMNS.
Our review was based largely upon their work.
***Come on, Jed, admit it. That's why you
Kevin O'Malley kevmol...@gmail.com wrote:
We would like to acknowledge and thank JED ROTHWELL, Ed Storms, Dieter
Britz, Bill Collis
and Steve Krivit for their diligent archival/historical work in preserving
the record of CMNS.
Our review was based largely upon their work.
***Come on, Jed,
This is the greatest point that proved me that is was a psychiatric problem.
Not the least student may dare to use that argument seriously.
it is clear it is not an honest critic... or they should get back to the
college, to learn science.
I know that is violent, but i find no excuse for a
It's not that often that one can engage with someone who is demonstrably
off by 4400 orders of magnitude. That's like saying a flea can fly fast
enough to knock over an elephant. Oops, scratch that, the flea would need
to be able to destroy 8 or 9 planets in a row. Well, actually, it's more
Kevin O'Malley kevmol...@gmail.com wrote:
It's not that often that one can engage with someone who is demonstrably
off by 4400 orders of magnitude.
That's hilarious! As they say, you win the internets today. You have pwoned
Cude.
That's like saying a flea can fly fast enough to knock over
Randy wuller wrote:
What he can't explain is why anyone would run around the internet
trying to stop people from investigating a phenomenon. It makes no
sense and is probably a symptom of the very negative period (I would
describe it as the age of pessimism) we find ourselves living
On Tue, May 7, 2013 at 4:10 PM, Alain Sepeda alain.sep...@gmail.com wrote:
either a generation of scientist get their PhD in cereal box, or they hide
an inconvenient fact. that they cannot find a definitive reason not to
accept LENR .
Or they suffer from cognitive dissonance having invested
http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Max_Planck
Max Planck:
A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and
making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die,
and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it.
Wissenschaftliche Selbstbiographie. Mit
On Tue, May 7, 2013 at 6:16 PM, Kevin O'Malley kevmol...@gmail.com wrote:
Science advances one funeral at a time.
Attempts to accelerate advancement requires a capital crime.
(assonance and alliteration)
And your post was the 666th email in my outlook/vortex folder... who's funeral
spell were you casting?
From: Terry Blanton [mailto:hohlr...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, May 07, 2013 7:36 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Hagelstein's editorial
On Tue, May 7, 2013 at 6:16
On Tue, May 7, 2013 at 7:41 PM, Roarty, Francis X francis.x.roa...@lmco.com
wrote:
And your post was the 666th email in my outlook/vortex folder… who’s
funeral spell were you casting?
LOL! I suppose someone should pay astute attention.
(alliteration and assonance)
;)
On Tue, May 7, 2013 at 8:34 AM, Randy wuller rwul...@freeark.com wrote:
**
Cude would argue that there isn't a newly discovered (new is of course
relative) phenomenon and that everyone investigating it is deluded,
incompetent or both. What he can't explain is why anyone would run around
the
Rossi interview (Stirling Allen and Frank Acland)
Main news : A
Early in the interview, Rossi explained that the 1 MW plant that I saw
demonstrated on October 28, 2011 was not delivered to the confidential military
customer. There were many glitches that needed to be worked through first:
Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.com wrote:
. . . there appears to be little to be lost in pushing out criticism that
later turns out to have been unfounded nonsense. Some appear to feel
empowered to say whatever negative things they please without worrying that
they might turn out to be wrong
Interview with Andrea Rossi About 1 MW E-Cat Plant Delivery
http://pesn.com/2013/05/07/9602310_Interview_with_Andrea_Rossi_About_1-MW-E-Cat-Plant_Delivery/
Scientists must Study the Nuclear Weak Force to Better Understand LENR
- David Niebauer
http://oilprice.com/Alternative-Energy/Nuclear-Power/Scientists-must-Study-the-Nuclear-Weak-Force-to-Better-Understand-LENR.html
Lattice Energy LLC- Technical Discussion-NTSB Logan Dreamliner Runaway
Data Suggest High Local Temps-May 7 2013
http://www.slideshare.net/lewisglarsen/lattice-energy-llc-technical-discussionntsb-logan-dreamliner-runaway-data-suggest-high-local-tempsmay-7-2013
The discussion of the energetics of
64 matches
Mail list logo
