I think it is not necessary to test something that is known and expected from
theory and experience.
If there is no thermal flow, then there are no temperature differences, this is
known from physics.
So especially when the measurment location is wrapped with thermal isolation a
thermoelement
Krivit has put up the abstract for Takahashi's paper at the JCF-12 meeting.
In it he proposes a WL-like electron capture by a proton. He claims the
energy threshold for this reaction is 272 keV, and that it is exceeded by
600 keV electrons in his magic lattice.
Could someone explain how they get
Axil:
Let me take a stab at your question:
Why should coherent protons be any better at thermalizing gamma radiation
than ordinary protons? (Especially if that coherence is limited to pairs).
The coherent photons are acting as a resonant antenna. I'm sure many have
played around with
I just became aware of this. Zawodny, working for Nasa, has recently
patented a method to create heavy electrons used to produce the cold
fusion effect from the Widom-Larsen theory.
http://tinyurl.com/7sffvkc
http://tinyurl.com/7nznmhz
Heavy electrons exhibit properties such as unconventional
On 2011-12-08 05:53, Aussie Guy E-Cat wrote:
http://citi5.org/launch/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/Energy-Localization-No8-11.ppt
It appears you can see the notes only if you DON'T view the slides in
presentation mode. This might not be possible on all programs that can
read this file. For
On 2011-12-08 04:49, Joshua Cude wrote:
Looking at the slides, it's not surprising he bailed. The talk doesn't
look finished. Like he never got past the introduction.
If you check out presenter slide notes with PowerPoint (not PowerPoint
reader) or OpenOffice/LibreOffice, you can get access
Some interesting items on the subject PLUS and ad for Rossi's Clic glasses:
http://forgetomori.com/2011/science/colored-vibrating-sand-buddhist-singing-bowls-and-levitating-megaliths/
T
Gnorts, Mr. Alien!
Thanks to funding from none other than the US Space Command:
http://www.redorbit.com/news/space/1112435819/seti-back-on-track-after-us-military-funding
and now they will direct their observations to Goldilocks planets
discovered by the Kepler space telescope.
Note the
http://www.laboratoryequipment.com/news-Quantum-Entanglement-Allows-Diamonds-to-Communicate-120511.aspx?xmlmenuid=51
Researchers have managed to get one small diamond to communicate with
another small diamond utilizing quantum entanglement, one of the more
mind-blowing features of quantum
I'd never seen the website before; thanks for the introduction.
Date: Thu, 8 Dec 2011 07:26:33 -0500
From: hohlr...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: [Vo]:Resonance
Some interesting items on the subject PLUS and ad for Rossi's Clic glasses:
Next time we send out some Mars Rovers, we swap the communications antennae
with a Quantum Entangled Crystal (QEX) array, and, voila!
Real-time communications and driving will make the missions much more
productive.
Date: Thu, 8 Dec 2011 14:29:12 +0100
From: michele.comit...@gmail.com
From Robert Michele
http://www.laboratoryequipment.com/news-Quantum-Entanglement-Allows-Diamonds-to-Communicate-120511.aspx?xmlmenuid=51
Next time we send out some Mars Rovers, we swap the communications antennae
with a Quantum Entangled Crystal (QEX) array, and, voila!
Real-time
Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote:
So there was an uninspected volume of about 30 cube centimeters cube.
Right. That's what I said. There is no way equipment in such a small cube
can explain the heat. I said: They have not seen inside the cell (which is
inside the reactor) but the volume of
peter.heck...@arcor.de wrote:
It is necessary to think about unexpected effects:
It is clear, in Rossis setup there was a thermal flow and an unwanted
temperature difference close to the thermoelement.
If the steam inlet was 100 degree and the water outlet was 20 degree then
inbetween in
On Thu, Dec 8, 2011 at 8:54 AM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote:
So there was an uninspected volume of about 30 cube centimeters cube.
Right. That's what I said. There is no way equipment in such a small cube
can explain the heat. I said: They
Isn't the hidden volume 24x24x5= 2880cm^3 large?
2011/12/8 Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com
Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote:
So there was an uninspected volume of about 30 cube centimeters cube.
Right. That's what I said. There is no way equipment in such a small cube
can explain
- Original Nachricht
Von: Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com
An: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Datum: 08.12.2011 15:59
Betreff: Re: [Vo]:Will tests surface mounted thermocouples on pipe
peter.heck...@arcor.de wrote:
It is necessary to think about unexpected effects:
It is
- Original Nachricht
Von: Michele Comitini michele.comit...@gmail.com
An: vortex-l@eskimo.com vortex-l@eskimo.com
Datum: 08.12.2011 14:29
Betreff: [Vo]:Article - Quantum Entanglement Allows Diamonds to Communicate
- Original Nachricht
Von: Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com
An: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Datum: 08.12.2011 15:59
Betreff: Re: [Vo]:Will tests surface mounted thermocouples on pipe
peter.heck...@arcor.de wrote:
It is necessary to think about unexpected effects:
It is
[I sent this message with 2 itty-bitty photos attached. It probably
bounced.]
Okay. I did some rudimentary tests with thermocouples taped to the outside
of flexible braided 1/2 inch pipes under my bathroom sink. I can supply the
gory details if anyone is interested. Summary:
I measured in the
I'd say he missed the whole thing. The vibrations in the dissolved hydrogen
are not like that of a gas in air where the interaction takes place with only
its neighbors. It's a proton conductor and more like a electrical conductor.
The charge movement affects other protons across a
peter.heck...@arcor.de wrote:
How can you say this is incorrect? Do you know everything, great master?
I can say that because Houkes knows what he is doing, other experts
agree with him, and it has been my experience that the water temperature
in a pipe dominates the surface temperature even
- Original Nachricht
Von: Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com
An: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Datum: 08.12.2011 17:00
Betreff: Re: [Vo]:Will tests surface mounted thermocouples on pipe
peter.heck...@arcor.de wrote:
How can you say this is incorrect? Do you know everything,
On Thu, Dec 8, 2011 at 6:54 AM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote:
So there was an uninspected volume of about 30 cube centimeters cube.
In other words 27,000 cc. Not 30 cc. You can't hide a lot of stuff in
some 30,000 cc of space?
Mats referenced a box inside, bolted to the bottom with a heat sink on top,
measuring 30cmx30cmx30cm. He couldn't see inside of it, just a box with some
port connections for hydrogen, heater, and, presumably, RF. So, assuming, say
4cm for the heat exchanger, this could be 30x30x26, or
Unfortunately, it's not quite that simple for two reasons:
1) the secondary flow rate was much higher than the primary, moving the
equilibrium point closer to the hot side
2) the primary flow rate is unknown, and quite possible variable, moving the
equilibrium point back and forth
3) the
for two reasons:...
errr... the third reason was a backup reason
Should either of the first two reasons be disqualified before competition, the
third reason knows whole routine.
From: robert.leguil...@hotmail.com
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Will tests surface mounted
This looks like a macroscopic demo of the pilot wave theory of quantum
mechanics
as demonstrated by John Bush at MIT.
SEE:
Can fluid dynamics offer insights into quantum mechanics?
http://www.physorg.com/news/2010-10-fluid-dynamics-insights-quantum-mechanics.html
On Thu, Dec 8, 2011 at 8:58
All this discussion would be moot if Rossi had bothered to make a run using
the electrical heater to calibrate the measurement system. It wouldn't
rule out cheating but it would rule out cheating by deliberate or
accidental measurement errors.
On 2011-12-06 20:15, Alan J Fletcher wrote:
I've just finished a marathon multi-day session of skimming through the
excellent http://lenr-canr.org http://lenr-canr.org/ library.
Another link for you. It contains documents not included in
http://lenr-canr.org :
http://jcfrs.org/pubs.html
Peter,
You simply need lots of coupled diamonds.
And remember: diamonds are a girl's best friends!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PluRW3_FEt0
mic
2011/12/8 peter.heck...@arcor.de:
- Original Nachricht
Von: Michele Comitini michele.comit...@gmail.com
An:
2011/12/8 Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com:
[I sent this message with 2 itty-bitty photos attached. It probably
bounced.]
Use something like http://imgur.com/ then share the link.
mic
I have suggested a few times that is might prove useful to model cold
fusion processes using liquid drops. Liquid drop models of nuclear
fission were helpful in the the early years of fission research.
Although in the case of cold fusion I think the drops should be
treated as non-newtonian
Mary yet again proves that there are now 101 ways to say the same thing.
we all agree the tests could have been done much better with little effort.
I think that's enough repetition that most readers know your opinion on the
issue.
Stop wasting bandwidth and our time unless it's a point you
Am 08.12.2011 17:20, schrieb Robert Leguillon:
Unfortunately, it's not quite that simple for two reasons:
1) the secondary flow rate was much higher than the primary, moving the
equilibrium point closer to the hot side
2) the primary flow rate is unknown, and quite possible variable, moving the
Is the entanglement robust enough to survive a long shaky trip? I recall
reading that it is not easy to keep the effect for a long time.
Dave
-Original Message-
From: peter.heckert peter.heck...@arcor.de
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Thu, Dec 8, 2011 10:37 am
Subject: Aw:
Am 08.12.2011 19:49, schrieb David Roberson:
Is the entanglement robust enough to survive a long shaky trip? I recall
reading that it is not easy to keep the effect for a long time.
The entanglement of macroscopic objects is probably not stable enough.
It is possible to slow down entangled
Robert Leguillon wrote:
Mats referenced a box inside, bolted to the bottom with a heat sink on
top, measuring 30cmx30cmx30cm. He couldn't see inside of it, just a
box with some port connections for hydrogen, heater, and, presumably,
RF. So, assuming, say 4cm for the heat exchanger, this
On Thu, Dec 8, 2011 at 10:07 AM, Mark Iverson-ZeroPoint
zeropo...@charter.net wrote:
Mary yet again proves that there are now 101 ways to say the same thing… *
***
we all agree the tests could have been done much better with little effort.
I think that’s enough repetition that most
I suppose one could hypothesize that the previous ones were real and this
one is fake
Straw man hypothesis. Nobody claims that.
Widom-Larsen theory asserts that heavy electrons form in regions with a
field strength of 10^11 V/meter.
I believe that nano-metallic waveguides, e.g. tapered (triangular,
pyramidal, conical) crystals can focus electromagnetic fields (with
wavelenghts much larger than the nano-waveguide) to
Peter Heckert peter.heck...@arcor.de wrote:
Thermal insulation can be used to avoid heat loss, but because the absolute
temperature was not much above ambient, not much loss is expected. Anyway,
thermal isolation is cheap and would eliminate the influence of ambient air.
1. Rossi's
Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote:
Jed's well intentioned experiments won't help either unless he gets
himself a heat exchanger or properly simulates it with a nice heavy
steam-heated copper . . .
My tests were rudimentary. But in my opinion, they helped a hell a lot more
than weeks and
Krivit has written another smug, self-satisfied, sneery, sarcastic piece
about the Widom Larsen theory. I posted a reply in the comments, but of
course it won't pass moderation, so I'll post it here as well:
Although I think you are sincere, and your motives are true, as is quite
clear in your
On Thu, Dec 8, 2011 at 11:13 AM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
The water temperature dominates. Perhaps if you had a fan blowing on the
thing that would have a measurable effect.
Perhaps if the thermocouple were in contact with or very close to a very
hot steam duct at the input
Am 08.12.2011 20:13, schrieb Jed Rothwell:
Peter Heckertpeter.heck...@arcor.de wrote:
Thermal insulation can be used to avoid heat loss, but because the absolute
temperature was not much above ambient, not much loss is expected. Anyway,
thermal isolation is cheap and would eliminate the
Here are a few photos:
http://lenr-canr.org/RossiData/T2%20before%20insulating.jpg
http://lenr-canr.org/RossiData/T1%20and%20T2%20insulated.jpg
http://lenr-canr.org/RossiData/Measuring%20water%20temp%20in%20sink.jpg
By the way the hot water temperature varied from around 55°C up to 65°C.
Am 08.12.2011 20:19, schrieb Jed Rothwell:
Mary Yugomaryyu...@gmail.com wrote:
Jed's well intentioned experiments won't help either unless he gets
himself a heat exchanger or properly simulates it with a nice heavy
steam-heated copper . . .
My tests were rudimentary. But in my opinion,
Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote:
Perhaps if the thermocouple were in contact with or very close to a very
hot steam duct at the input end of the primary loop of the heat exchanger
it would have measurable effect?
Perhaps it would if it were very close, but it was not close. You can see
On Thu, Dec 8, 2011 at 1:44 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
Houkes is right. Live with it.
When you no longer have to insist repeatedly that something is right, there
might be a chance that it in fact is.
Peter Heckert peter.heck...@arcor.de wrote:
If there is an air gap of 0.1mm between metal and thermoelement, then it is
not nonsense.
I doubt that. I would like to see you prove it. I do not think this would
cause even a 0.1°C difference.
Can you suggest a way to deliberately introduce such a
On Thu, Dec 8, 2011 at 11:30 AM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
Here are a few photos:
How does this simulate a copper heat exchanger with steam at the input end
where as it happens, the T out thermocouple is also located nearby?
As Peter Heckert and others observed, simply
Am 08.12.2011 20:53, schrieb Jed Rothwell:
Peter Heckertpeter.heck...@arcor.de wrote:
If there is an air gap of 0.1mm between metal and thermoelement, then it is
not nonsense.
I doubt that. I would like to see you prove it. I do not think this would
cause even a 0.1°C difference.
Can you
Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote:
How does this simulate a copper heat exchanger with steam at the input end
where as it happens, the T out thermocouple is also located nearby?
Actually, I was more trying to simulate air trapped under the insulation
with the hot and cold pipes right next
Peter Heckert peter.heck...@arcor.de wrote:
Can you suggest a way to deliberately introduce such a small gap? Perhaps
with a thin piece of paper instead of an air gap?
A thin piece of plastics. This is also good for electrical isolation.
Like Saran wrap? (What you wrap sandwiches with.)
I
Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote:
I suppose one could hypothesize that the previous ones were real and this
one is fake
Straw man hypothesis. Nobody claims that.
Actually, several people have claimed that. Perhaps you are not.
The point is, we know the cell is a small object. If you
On 11-12-08 03:16 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Putting a heat source ~4 away on a copper pipe would bring it much
closer than Rossi's arrangement, because the heat exchanger design
would not be good if the heat conducted to the cold end on the outside
of the pipes. The fact that heat exchangers
Am 08.12.2011 21:31, schrieb Jed Rothwell:
Peter Heckertpeter.heck...@arcor.de wrote:
Can you suggest a way to deliberately introduce such a small gap? Perhaps
with a thin piece of paper instead of an air gap?
A thin piece of plastics. This is also good for electrical isolation.
Like
Stephen A. Lawrence sa...@pobox.com wrote:
In fact, the *goal* of the heat exchanger is to conduct heat from the
primary to the secondary pipes, as rapidly and completely as possible.
Sure, I get that.
Consequently, the primary inlet and the secondary outlet are placed in
extremely
This is exhausting. You're going to blindly believe any evidence supporting
your conclusion, and if I were to give you 10 distinct reasons that the
thermocouple placement is crap, you'll try to dismiss one, and assume it
negates the rest.
Rossi is using a herringbone liquid counterflow heat
Peter Heckert peter.heck...@arcor.de wrote:
Like Saran wrap? (What you wrap sandwiches with.)
IDont know.
Polyethylene nowadays. See:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saran_(plastic)
I probably do not have Saran wrap, but I have something similar.
The thermoelement must not make a hole
Jed, seriously:
If you say, Rossis thermomeasurements are fine, does this mean that you
dont see the possibility for easy and cheap improvements?
All points that are discussed here can be eliminated by better
thermoelement placement almost without efforts and costs.
If somebody does not
Robert Leguillon robert.leguil...@hotmail.com wrote:
This is exhausting. You're going to blindly believe any evidence
supporting your conclusion . . .
Well, two different methods give approximately the same answer is better
than zero methods that you can cite.
Rossi is using a herringbone
Peter Heckert peter.heck...@arcor.de wrote:
If you say, Rossis thermomeasurements are fine, does this mean that you
dont see the possibility for easy and cheap improvements?
Did you read what I wrote about this? What I wrote SEVERAL DOZEN TIMES?!?
Here:
http://lenr-canr.org/News.htm
QUOTE:
In reply to Mark Iverson-ZeroPoint's message of Thu, 8 Dec 2011 02:44:29 -0800:
Hi,
[snip]
Axil:
Let me take a stab at your question:
It wasn't Axil's question, it was mine.
Why should coherent protons be any better at thermalizing gamma radiation
than ordinary protons? (Especially if that
Am 08.12.2011 22:17, schrieb Jed Rothwell:
If somebody does not admit this, then he must be a blind mouse.
I not only admitted it, I emphasized it in my report. However, these
problems -- bad as they are -- do not negate the findings.
They do negate the findings. To prove a billion dollar
On Thu, Dec 8, 2011 at 12:54 PM, Robert Leguillon
robert.leguil...@hotmail.com wrote:
This is exhausting. You're going to blindly believe any evidence
supporting your conclusion, and if I were to give you 10 distinct reasons
that the thermocouple placement is crap, you'll try to dismiss one,
Peter Heckert peter.heck...@arcor.de wrote:
If there is an air gap of 0.1mm between metal and thermoelement, then it
is not nonsense. [Meaning there is a problem]
I offered to check for this. Heckert suggested a piece of plastic to create
the gap. Now he writes:
I will check your claim about
In reply to Terry Blanton's message of Wed, 7 Dec 2011 18:58:50 -0500:
Hi,
[snip]
I think the most obvious explanation is that the beam isn't perfect, and the
occasional fast particle hits the wall and knocks a fleck of material off it.
The impact of such a fast particle in solid matter
Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote:
Thanks for that, Robert. I hope Jed reads it with care several times. I
am a bit surprised he didn't know about counterflow.
Since I discussed the counterflow here previously, you are bit mistaken.
I suggest you explain how a heat exchanger that is
On Thu, Dec 8, 2011 at 3:17 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
Did you read what I wrote about this? What I wrote SEVERAL DOZEN TIMES?!?
Unfortunately repetition does not make it true.
Although some experts question these results, most believe that the reactor
must have produced
I was planning to do this test anyway, to find the temperature difference
between a copper pipe and the water temperature. Just curious.
This will be on the hot water pipe.
- Jed
On Thu, Dec 8, 2011 at 1:49 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
If you have a good reason to believe there is a problem with measuring
temperature by putting a thermocouple on a pipe, please tell us what it is.
There is no problem in measuring temperature on a pipe in general
At 12:54 PM 12/8/2011, Robert Leguillon wrote:
Coming in late on this.
General comments : your plastic-pipe situation is a poor model of Rossi's
copper heat-exchanger manifold.
Let's give you some numbers to
show you how futile this is, and how Houke's method is insufficient to
model the
On Thu, Dec 8, 2011 at 1:52 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
I suggest you explain how a heat exchanger that is ~95% efficient could
conduct a great deal of heat on the outside to a themocouple beyond the
outlet
I think we have some difference of opinion about where exactly and
On Thu, Dec 8, 2011 at 2:54 PM, Robert Leguillon
robert.leguil...@hotmail.com wrote:
1) We don't know the flow rate of the primary, but Rossi says it's 15
l/h, and you've never known him to lie, so let's assume 15 l/h, or 4.17 g/s
I don't think this can be right, because this is already
Alan J Fletcher a...@well.com wrote:
At 12:54 PM 12/8/2011, Robert Leguillon wrote:
Coming in late on this.
General comments : your plastic-pipe situation is a poor model of Rossi's
copper heat-exchanger manifold.
Very poor. I was testing only one aspect of the claim: the effect of
Am 08.12.2011 22:49, schrieb Jed Rothwell:
Peter Heckertpeter.heck...@arcor.de wrote:
So what are you saying? Is there a problem with a 0.1 mm gap, or is there
not? Are you asking me to waste my time doing a test that will not prove
anything?
I have never asked you to do this. It was your
Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote:
There is no problem in measuring temperature on a pipe in general
especially if the thermocouple is properly bonded to the pipe and somewhat
insulated from the surroundings.
I have shown there is no problem even if the thermocopule is improperly
bonded.
Peter Heckert peter.heck...@arcor.de wrote:
I know what happens when a transistor is not firmly connected to the
heatsink.
How does that relate to a thermocouple connected to a pipe? What kind of
surface are you attaching to, of what composition? What are the temperature
differences you
On Thu, Dec 8, 2011 at 2:17 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
Prove it. Do a test and prove it.
Sorry Jed, that's a fair amount of work and it would be for very little
reassurance because the experiment was so loose, there were many other
known and unknown ways, already alluded
On Thu, Dec 8, 2011 at 2:23 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
Okay, so tell me how to do it INCORRECTLY. I shall try it using the worst
method you can think of, and we will see if your incorrect method makes a
significant difference.
I'll tell you but you won't do it. Get a
Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote:
I'll tell you but you won't do it. Get a countercurrent heat exchanger
and hook up the primary input to a good healthy flow of dry steam.
If you purchase one and ship it to me, I will try it. My address is at
LENR-CANR.org.
- Jed
On Thu, Dec 8, 2011 at 2:30 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote:
I'll tell you but you won't do it. Get a countercurrent heat exchanger
and hook up the primary input to a good healthy flow of dry steam.
If you purchase one and ship it to me,
Jed, if I find the time tomorrow during work, I do the test myself.
This is better. I fear your test will not be correct.
I will use a resistor in an aluminium housing as a heat source and two
thermoelements and two instruments.
One thermocouple will be in close metallic contact to the resistor
From Peter,
Jed, if I find the time tomorrow during work, I do the test myself.
This is better. I fear your test will not be correct.
It is good that you are performing the experiment yourself and that
you will post the results. We all would love to see the results.
OTOH, what is behind this
Peter Heckert peter.heck...@arcor.de wrote:
I will use a resistor in an aluminium housing as a heat source and two
thermoelements and two instruments.
One thermocouple will be in close metallic contact to the resistor and the
other will be isolated by a piece of duct tape.
Duct tape is thick
On Thu, Dec 8, 2011 at 3:02 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
Rossi did a much better job mounting the TC that I did, as you see in the
video. Yugo claims she cannot see where it is mounted. The location seems
clear to me. Someone uploaded a still photo from the video showing the
I had a good chuckle upon revisiting my Journal of Nuclear Physics
article at:
http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=179
The comment is by Emma Russel, the famous cold fusion nuclear
physicist whose work was documented in the movie The Saint. 8^)
Best regards,
Horace Heffner
OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson svj.orionwo...@gmail.com wrote:
It seems to me that while you do not say it outright, as if you are
trying to be polite in mixed company, you are inferring that Jed will
end up botching the job, or worse, cheat.
It is very likely I would botch the job. That is to
Hi All,
I'd just like to put this hypothesis out there to get some feedback and see
where the major flaws are:
-
Small spheres with dielectric-metal interfaces only support surface plasmon
polaritons with the spherical harmonic waves of the l=1 mode (the lowest),
implying that normal
Jed,
All what is required is that in the first experiments the trick used was
different.
In the first experiments calorimetry was based on how much vaporization was
achieved.
When people demanded a different way of calculating heat production the
trick changed and now the access to the inner core
Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote:
I have to admit there is so much information scattered about on the
internet that I sometimes lose track of some.
Too true. I should gather more in the RossiData folder.
All I remember about the thermocouple picture was that it was taken
after the
On Thu, Dec 8, 2011 at 3:25 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
Nope. The video was taken as he unwrapped the tape and revealed the
location of the TC. When the TC was revealed, Rossi stopped and pointed at
it, and held the picture for a moment. Someone uploaded that frame, showing
From the script:
Emma Russell: Who are you?
Simon Templar(Horace Heffner): Nobody has a clue. Least of all me.
... knowing where Emma hid the secret formula, I will surmise that many of
us would like to get their hands on it g
-Original Message-
From: Horace Heffner
I had a good
No, Mary, the endless repetition from the same person of the same old thing
is what annoys me. In one of your posts, where you interspersed your
comments with the other person's, I counted 4 or 5 instances where you
repeated the same basic point, but 5 different ways. Yeah, we get it, ok?
RE:
Just up on the NET site:
... Michelson explained that MITRE Corp. is a federally funded research and
development center that is sanctioned by Congress to work in the public
interest exclusively with government. It helps government with some of its
hardest systems engineering problems and with its
On Thu, Dec 8, 2011 at 7:22 PM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:
Just up on the NET site:
... Michelson explained that MITRE Corp. is a federally funded research and
development center that is sanctioned by Congress to work in the public
interest exclusively with government. It helps
Another step closer to producing Ac kWhs:
http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=563cpage=4#comment-142311
On Thu, Dec 8, 2011 at 4:53 PM, Aussie Guy E-Cat
aussieguy.e...@gmail.com wrote:
Rossi has selected the primary circuit fluid
Oh good! What is it?
1 - 100 of 121 matches
Mail list logo
