Re: [Vo]:New paper from Holmlid.

2017-01-20 Thread Jones Beene
Russ George wrote: The devil is in the details. The presence of helium but absence of tritium if ‘muon catalyzed fusion’ is present is a puzzling. Unless the channel is potently redirected to 4He which coherent behavior might allow for. This is why I brought up Takahashi and his TSC

[Vo]:LENR INFO, MODEL OF INOVATION

2017-01-20 Thread Peter Gluck
http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2017/01/jan-20-2017the-history-of-science.html Peter -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com

Re: [Vo]:New paper from Holmlid.

2017-01-20 Thread ROGER ANDERTON
Einstein messed things up. Energy is some sort of scalar of some sort of a vector quantity. When you have mass [M] multiplied by some sort of velocity [v] by velocity [v] again. The velocities are vectors, so you either have vector product and scalar product from that, or you are looking at

Re: [Vo]:New paper from Holmlid.

2017-01-20 Thread mixent
In reply to Axil Axil's message of Fri, 20 Jan 2017 16:44:39 -0500: Hi, [snip] I was hoping someone here would show me the error of my ways, before I made a complete fool of myself in public. (yes, I know I have already done that.) :) I think I may have found either my mistake or Einstein's. ;)

RE: [Vo]:New paper from Holmlid.

2017-01-20 Thread Russ George
The point being that either 'speed' is more than sufficient to whack the ball out of the ballpark which is a most interesting piece of the puzzle. -Original Message- From: mix...@bigpond.com [mailto:mix...@bigpond.com] Sent: Friday, January 20, 2017 3:04 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com

Re: [Vo]:New paper from Holmlid.

2017-01-20 Thread mixent
In reply to Russ George's message of Fri, 20 Jan 2017 17:40:12 -0800: Hi, [snip] >Might you provide a ref or few to the comment. " It is well known that when >you shine a laser through a plasma, you get a bench top GeV particle >accelerator." Are the necessary conditions present in Holmlid's

Re: [Vo]:New paper from Holmlid.

2017-01-20 Thread mixent
In reply to Russ George's message of Fri, 20 Jan 2017 17:40:12 -0800: Hi, [snip] >Might you provide a ref or few to the comment. " It is well known that when >you shine a laser through a plasma, you get a bench top GeV particle >accelerator."

Re: [Vo]:New paper from Holmlid.

2017-01-20 Thread mixent
In reply to 's message of Thu, 19 Jan 2017 12:34:13 -0800: Hi, [snip] >If the muons are charged, they can be focused and polarized in a magnetic >field. Hence they can be made to react more readily with polarized electrons >in a lattice and their energy harvested in a

Re: [Vo]:New paper from Holmlid.

2017-01-20 Thread mixent
In reply to Russ George's message of Fri, 20 Jan 2017 17:40:12 -0800: Hi, https://phys.org/news/2015-11-discovery-enable-portable-particle.html Quote:- "This effect is known as relativistic self-focusing, and becomes more pronounced as the plasma density increases." Note that Holmlid claims

RE: [Vo]:New paper from Holmlid.

2017-01-20 Thread bobcook39923
Does anyone understand how 75% of the particles produced are neutral with significant kinetic energy? It would seem that the neutral particles must come from decay of another particle with significant kinetic energy to start with, and that the neutral particle shares some of that energy and

Re: [Vo]:New paper from Holmlid.

2017-01-20 Thread mixent
In reply to Axil Axil's message of Thu, 19 Jan 2017 11:58:00 -0500: Hi, [snip] >http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0169895 I think Holmlid made a mistake in his velocity calculation. (Either that, or I did). He equates 500*MeV/u to 0.75 c. I think this derives

Re: [Vo]:New paper from Holmlid.

2017-01-20 Thread Axil Axil
The is a comment section in the PLOS/1 format where a reader can submit corrections as required for evaluation by the author. Why not submit this proposed correction through this comment method. On Fri, Jan 20, 2017 at 4:21 PM, wrote: > In reply to Axil Axil's message of

Re: [Vo]:New paper from Holmlid.

2017-01-20 Thread mixent
In reply to Russ George's message of Fri, 20 Jan 2017 15:29:37 -0800: Hi Russ, [snip] >The point being that either 'speed' is more than sufficient to whack the >ball out of the ballpark which is a most interesting piece of the puzzle. I agree, however before I accept it, I would prefer to know

RE: [Vo]:New paper from Holmlid.

2017-01-20 Thread Russ George
Might you provide a ref or few to the comment. " It is well known that when you shine a laser through a plasma, you get a bench top GeV particle accelerator." Are the necessary conditions present in Holmlid's experiment? -Original Message- From: mix...@bigpond.com

[Vo]:III progress report

2017-01-20 Thread Frank Znidarsic
Tubes for the 1920's are no longer commonly available. The 1A5 pentode from the 1930 is still available for about $5. I modified the radio to accept the 1A5's. The radiola III requires four battery voltages 5V, 1.5 V, 20V, and 40V. I am making and AC adapter for the radio. I did not want

RE: [Vo]:New paper from Holmlid.

2017-01-20 Thread Russ George
The devil is in the details. The presence of helium but absence of tritium if ‘muon catalyzed fusion’ is present is a puzzling. Unless the channel is potently redirected to 4He which coherent behavior might allow for. As for “proton annihilation” Holmlid only says that the experiment does not

Re: [Vo]:New paper from Holmlid.

2017-01-20 Thread Axil Axil
Regarding: 4) A laser pulse is required to produce the annihilation event in protons - the weak force is not involved at this point. The weak force must be amplified because all radioactive isotopes produced by the reactions are instantaneously stabilized including tritium from DD fusion. On