The energy gain of about two is based on an energy in of 850J which
gives the appearance of having been typed in rather than measured,
possibly based on information about the voltage and current that was
applied. It would have been nice to have had more details. It would
also have been good
In a few million years, that is.
http://thespacereporter.com/2014/01/stunning-astronomers-discover-first-ultr
amassive-black-hole-photo/
Cosmology is not off-topic for LENR, since it can open up an avenue of
understanding. We occasionally go further with personal viewpoints on such
things as the
On Feb 3, 2014, at 9:39 PM, Axil Axil wrote:
Why would you believe DGT could create such a field in the apparatus
they have shown?
Because both Ken Sholders and proton-21 produced cold fusion and
monopole fields using sparks.
Yes Axil, but the spark is applied to the material. DGT does
On Feb 3, 2014, at 9:55 PM, Eric Walker wrote:
On Mon, Feb 3, 2014 at 8:30 PM, Edmund Storms
stor...@ix.netcom.com wrote:
Why do you say this, Eric? Do you have evidence I do not know
about? Can you give a reason why the statements are not correct?
I have seen what you and the others
Our Sun is banging away everyday. A CME is a billion tons of vacuum bang
in my warped(space) model.
On Tue, Feb 4, 2014 at 9:24 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:
In a few million years, that is.
http://thespacereporter.com/2014/01/stunning-astronomers-discover-first-ultr
From: Nigel Dyer
The energy gain of about two is based on an energy in of 850J which gives
the appearance of having been typed in rather than measured,
I must have missed something Nigel.
Are saying the COP of this demo is about 2 ?
On Tue, Feb 4, 2014 at 7:23 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:
I must have missed something Nigel.
Are saying the COP of this demo is about 2 ?
I vaguely recall this as well. I did not watch through the entire video,
but instead just saw segments. I believe Mills claimed power
Hello Bob
In the experiment the amount of fuel was according to R.Mills : 10 microliter.
The amount of energy liberated from the transition of H to H1/4 is 204 eV atom
Peter
From: Bob Higgins
Sent: Tuesday, February 04, 2014 5:04 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Cc: Bob Higgins
Subject: Re:
The demoed COP was slightly above 2.
The claimed potential COP was infinite.
On Tue, Feb 4, 2014 at 9:50 AM, Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Feb 4, 2014 at 7:23 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:
I must have missed something Nigel.
Are saying the COP of this demo
Below can be found at least 12 viable and distinct hypotheses for LENR gain.
Given that some of the listings represent slight variations or enabler
mechanisms there are more than a dozen entries (16). All are related in some
way to hydrogen which is constrained in a lattice, and many require QM
Thanks Peter.
Lets revise the math. We still have approx. 1000J out, and lets presume
204 eV for each conversion of H to 1/4 hydrino state. 204 eV is 3.3E-17
joule, so 1000 J is 3.1E19 transitions. 3.1E19 / 6.02E23 = 5.1E-5 mole.
One mole of H is 1 gram, so the number of H atoms converted is
They dont explicitly say anything about COP, but it a reasonable
interpretation of the display that is shown at 1:17:32. Energy in top
left, COP in the middle. The figures could of course refer to something
else, but I think that if I was doing the experiment then this would be
the figure I
Axil, you have offered an idea for a mechanism that might allow coupling
between a locally large magnetic field and nearby fusion events. I remain
skeptical of this type of effect but I want to understand how it operates
according to your concept.
I have a few questions for you to review
Two readers of CMNS have objected to my posting of a non-nuclear energy
technology, so this will be my last message to CMNS, at least for a while.
The demo was of effects, not working systems. Expectations of energy gain
ratios are premature, for the power requirements of necessary support
From: Nigel Dyer
They dont explicitly say anything about COP, but it a reasonable
interpretation of the display that is shown at 1:17:32. Energy in top
left, COP in the middle. The figures could of course refer to something
else, but I think that if I was doing the experiment
On Tue, Feb 4, 2014 at 11:59 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:
Anyone can claim 100:1 in a theory.
More to the point:
Anyone can claim a theory.
The question is can the theory be experimentally tested? This is and has
always been the problem with cold fusion. Until it is solved,
On Feb 4, 2014, at 9:42 AM, Jones Beene wrote:
Below can be found at least 12 viable and distinct hypotheses for
LENR gain.
Given that some of the listings represent slight variations or enabler
mechanisms there are more than a dozen entries (16). All are related
in some
way to hydrogen
James I liked your comment.
Why not accept COP of 2. Then you can recirculate that a few times and a
factor 64 will be there in 5 more steps.
OK it is not as fantastic and revolutionary as the many theories indicate
(btw they are way over my pay grade). I often see references to airplanes
and the
The SF-CIHT system is virtually identical to the Proton-21 experiment. The
only difference is a few micrograms of water that the copper button
encloses.
The Proton-21 system produces lots of gamma rays. It goes to reason the the
SF-CIHT system will produce a ton of gamma rays.
The proton-21
Just like Proton-21, SF-CIHT must use a huge arc discharge to produce
copper nano-particles from condensing copper plasma. A LENR reaction
happens based on these nano-particles as residual EUV copper ion afterglow
will explode them after nano-particle condensation out of the condensing
copper
While I don't mean to under-celebrate Mills' over-unity success, please
note that this COP of 2 is to THERMAL.
However, In Mills' case, the thermal energy appears to be relatively high
enthalpy and efficient conversion to electrical for feedback to the input
may be possible. With a COP of 2 to
Except for when I have written it, I have never seen the words Magnetism
doesn't exist written.
But this confuses me because while the illusion of magnetism is pretty
convincing we can all agree the expected forces in any magnetic situation
are electric at each end (magnetic fields are created by
may i suggest googling the phrase? 245 results.
On Tue, Feb 4, 2014 at 1:25 PM, John Berry berry.joh...@gmail.com wrote:
Except for when I have written it, I have never seen the words Magnetism
doesn't exist written.
But this confuses me because while the illusion of magnetism is
On Tue, Feb 4, 2014 at 12:16 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:
Axil, you have offered an idea for a mechanism that might allow coupling
between a locally large magnetic field and nearby fusion events. I remain
skeptical of this type of effect but I want to understand how it
On Tue, Feb 4, 2014 at 3:25 PM, John Berry berry.joh...@gmail.com wrote:
Except for when I have written it, I have never seen the words Magnetism
doesn't exist written.
But this confuses me because while the illusion of magnetism is pretty
convincing we can all agree the expected forces in
Pen, googling it finds results but I have not found anything that are
saying the same things.
For instance lines such as 'animal magnetism doesn't exist', or some other
specific form of magnetism.
Or 'magnetism doesn't exist by your logic...'
Harry, you lost me. But saying magnetism is an
John, don't forget the around the line when googling to get exact
phrase only!
On Tue, Feb 4, 2014 at 1:58 PM, John Berry berry.joh...@gmail.com wrote:
Pen, googling it finds results but I have not found anything that are
saying the same things.
For instance lines such as 'animal
There has been recent mainstream interest, primarily by Carver
Meadhttp://www.amazon.com/Collective-Electrodynamics-Quantum-Foundations-Electromagnetism/dp/0262632608,
in reifying the vector potential A possibly at the expense of the B field.
On Tue, Feb 4, 2014 at 2:25 PM, John Berry
Harry--
A photon--light is thought to be an electric field and an orthogonal magnetic
field which oscillate with an amplitude and frequency characteristic of the
energy of the photon, and propagate through space empty space at the speed of
light c. There is no charge that creates the magnetic
While looking at reviews for Caver A. Mead's book, I read a review that
said he made a mistake including voltage in a calculation for
superconductors.
Now I think that there must be voltage of a type in superconductors, there
are 2 types of voltage.
One is the voltage drop across a conductor.
http://phys.org/news/2011-10-physicists-unveil-theory-kind-superconductivity.html
and another
http://phys.org/news/2014-02-result-cheaper-efficient-solar-cells.html
Electrons could become squeezed in that their quantum properties become
delocalized. An electron can be spread out all
Correction
It is hard to tell what is going on if the electron is viewed realistically
rather like a pin ball.
should read
It is hard to tell what is going on if the electron is viewed realistically
like a wave rather than like a pin ball.
On Tue, Feb 4, 2014 at 6:40 PM, Axil Axil
I have realized for many years that magnetism is just another way of observing
moving electric charges. Even though the behavior of the underlying moving
charges can be used to define how they effect other charges, it is more
convenient to express the effects by invoking a magnetic field in
While looking at reviews for Caver A. Mead's book, I read a review that said he
made a mistake including voltage in a calculation for superconductors.
Now I think that there must be voltage of a type in superconductors, there are
2 types of voltage.
One is the voltage drop across a
Thanks Axil, I will continue to review your information and see if I can
determine how it might apply to the positive feedback behavior suggested by
DGT's report. Additional questions may come up from time to time.
The first link you posted concerning the half soliton suggests that it was
On Wed, Feb 5, 2014 at 1:42 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:
While looking at reviews for Caver A. Mead's book, I read a review that
said he made a mistake including voltage in a calculation for
superconductors.
Now I think that there must be voltage of a type in
On Tue, Feb 4, 2014 at 3:58 PM, John Berry berry.joh...@gmail.com wrote:
Pen, googling it finds results but I have not found anything that are
saying the same things.
For instance lines such as 'animal magnetism doesn't exist', or some other
specific form of magnetism.
Or 'magnetism doesn't
On Tue, Feb 4, 2014 at 8:01 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:
The large magnetic field reported by DGT supports the coupling concept,
but there is question as to whether or not the report is accurate.
It is valuable to review again what DGT said in their report.
At the time of
In reply to Axil Axil's message of Tue, 4 Feb 2014 14:25:35 -0500:
Hi,
[snip]
The SF-CIHT system is virtually identical to the Proton-21 experiment. The
only difference is a few micrograms of water that the copper button
encloses.
AFAIK the Proton-21 experiment uses 600 keV electrons. Mills uses
Ah, got it.
Well according to SR all motion or stillness is an illusion.
But I think a better analogy would be calling someone by a different name
because when they are moving their face looks motion blurred.
One important point is that if a magnetic field is created by a net charged
object in
On Tue, Feb 4, 2014 at 4:30 PM, Bob Cook frobertc...@hotmail.com wrote:
Harry--
A photon--light is thought to be an electric field and an orthogonal
magnetic field which oscillate with an amplitude and frequency
characteristic of the energy of the photon, and propagate through space
empty
Why is the voltage impactful: High volts produce LENR and high amps produce
hydrinos?
How does this distinction fit into Mills theory?
On Tue, Feb 4, 2014 at 9:23 PM, mix...@bigpond.com wrote:
In reply to Axil Axil's message of Tue, 4 Feb 2014 14:25:35 -0500:
Hi,
[snip]
The SF-CIHT system
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EK6HxdUQm5s
Using BEC to Slow Down Light
A BEC can slow light down to a snarls pace. Can a BEC in a cold fusion
system be doing something very special to gamma rays?
How to stop light cold.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-8Nj2uTZc10
*Prof. Lene Hau: Stopping light cold *
Remember that the polaritons follow the same math and physics as ultra-cold
atoms but at very much higher temperatures because polaritons are almost
without mass but not quite.
On Tue,
Thanks for the refresher in all things DGT. :-) The link exposes the large
difference between what you are proposing and what they claim.
Dave
-Original Message-
From: Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Tue, Feb 4, 2014 9:22 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:a note
45 matches
Mail list logo
