There is a discrepancy on the HV power indeed.
At some moment in the video Mats remarked that he measured 1100 Watt input
power of the HV unit.
There was no instant response to that remark. The wall dispay indicated
around 200-250 Watt HV input power to the reactor.
Despite the fact that it was
In reply to Jones Beene's message of Sun, 28 Jul 2013 07:25:39 -0700:
Hi,
[snip]
Proton capture is net endothermic
with nickel and leads to significant radioactivity.
1H+58Ni = 59Cu + 3.419 MeV
1H+60Ni = 61Cu + 4.801 MeV
1H+61Ni = 62Cu + 5.866 MeV
1H+61Ni = 58Co + 4He + 0.489 MeV
1H+62Ni =
In reply to Jones Beene's message of Sun, 28 Jul 2013 07:25:39 -0700:
Hi,
[snip]
BTW - It is seldom emphasized enough that proton fusion of all elements of
higher atomic mass than iron are net endothermic.
How do you calculate this?
Regards,
Robin van Spaandonk
thanks, I've completed with details I have found before
http://www.lenr-forum.com/showthread.php?2229-Info-on-Luca-gamberale-(Defkalion-Europe-ex-Mose-SRL)p=5601#post5601
an interview in italian of Luca
I agree with precisely what you say.
No vote, nor market, nor consensus decide what is true of false...
however the problem is not what IS, but what IS ACCEPTED, and what you DO.
Taleb moto about flesh in the game is that if you have buck or flesh in
the game, you invest more energy to control
Nice, you have some very good stuff on lenr-forum.
Some other observations:
- The web there in milan looks pretty deep with connections between
defkalion / mose / celani / pirreli
- It looks like Luca was working for Mose SRL during the intervening
years. Wonder why he hides that.
Beside that question, one participant ajb on lenr-forum make a quick
optimistic computation,
based on the safe assumption that Defkalion is fooling nobody...
(I hear the moderate and hard skeptics moan already).
People on this list should enjoy this 400-second video
http://tinyurl.com/m7b6wvr
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 3:11 AM, Teslaalset robbiehobbiesh...@gmail.comwrote:
HV units should have a higher efficiency than observed.
The ones I have researched are 50% efficient at best.
Wow!
Thanks Vorl!
I'll pass this on!
Regards,
Steven Vincent Johnson
svjart.OrionWorks.com
www.zazzle.com/orionworks
tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/newvortex/
-Original Message-
From: Vorl Bek [mailto:vorl@antichef.com]
Sent: Monday, July 29, 2013 5:41 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
From Blaze:
Our entire economic system is based on this thing called money.
It's how we value opportunities. I'm not a materialist, but
I do appreciate having this objective measurement.
As to I, to a certain extent.
Is it perfect? Obviously not. But it'll have to do until
I would add that, this radical economic change is rushing in upon us.
BusinessInsider reports that 80% of Americans are unemployed, dependent on
welfare or living near the poverty line. Areas such as Spain may be far worse.
Hi Robin,
None of those reactions are net exothermic.
You failed to include the energy necessary to overcome the Coulomb barrier,
which was the gist of the original message.
In all cases that high level of threshold energy, which must be expended, is
greater than the yield. Tunneling does not
http://www.fourmilab.ch/documents/sftriple/nanofuse.html
Written by John Walker, the founder of AutoDesk and co-author of AutoCAD,
is amazingly prescient. While not totally compliant with the theories we
discuss on CF it is astounding that it was written in 1989!
The amount of heat that is generated by the DGT device should be adequate to
keep the reaction going without the additional heat from the resistors. This
is somewhat different than Rossi's case because of the relative magnitude of
the difference between the internal heat generated and that
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 9:20 AM, Chris Zell chrisz...@wetmtv.com wrote:
**
I would add that, this radical economic change is rushing in upon us.
BusinessInsider reports that 80% of Americans are unemployed, dependent on
welfare or living near the poverty line. Areas such as Spain may be far
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 9:21 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:
Fusion of elements with mass numbers (the number of protons and neutrons)
greater than 26 uses up more energy than is produced by the reaction. Thus,
elements heavier than iron cannot be fuel sources in stars.
I agree! What a great ride.
Dave
-Original Message-
From: OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson orionwo...@charter.net
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Mon, Jul 29, 2013 8:18 am
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Ride a Shuttle Booster Rocket
Wow!
Thanks Vorl!
I'll pass this on!
Regards,
The demonstration we just witnessed by DGT should modify the minds of many
sitting upon the fence. But, I recall the story about being able to lead a
horse to water, but not being able to make it drink. This might be the
situation regarding LENR. Many of the skeptics are just not capable of
Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote:
BusinessInsider reports that 80% of Americans are unemployed, dependent on
welfare or living near the poverty line. Areas such as Spain may be far
worse.
80% might be *under* employed. Citation, please.
The wording is a little confusing. This
Thanks for the updates
Interesting, but we should be careful about credentials in industry. I
don't know if the Wright brothers have great credential, neither Lumière
brothers, Edison, ...
Luca gamberale have a great CV, but could be interpreted as very fringe...
I know there was link between
The geometry forms as a result of a dynamic process. The geometry forms the
interface.
* *
*The *dynamic process involves mutual attraction of nanoparticles which
drives the nanoparticles to clump together to form cavities, holes, voids,
cracks… (Interfaces between nanoparticles).
The IRM
We have seen such a change in our society with the industrial revolution,
when less people were needed to feed the others...
what happen ? they moved to factory... it was hard at the beginning, huge
poverty, social struggle, marxism, paternalism, social security, and in the
60s it was working well
Is there really a coherent theory that has been bandied about that even
approximate's Walker's 1989 speculations?
If so, is there an experimental test of said theory?
If so, was the result positive?
If so, Walker may be prevailed upon to replicate it.
Walker's net worth was in the hundreds of
There has been an entire field of electrochemistry that has developed
experimental procedures which quantify this area.
I estimate about 1800 people in the world work in this area.
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 11:47 AM, James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote:
Is there really a coherent theory
Hey! That technosocialist POS that set back progress in space by 3 decades
was good for something after all!
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 8:43 AM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:
I agree! What a great ride.
Dave
-Original Message-
From: OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson
Hardly specific enough to meet the criterion I set forth.
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 10:57 AM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote:
There has been an entire field of electrochemistry that has developed
experimental procedures which quantify this area.
I estimate about 1800 people in the world
Why the space shuttle was technosocialist?
Confused.
Giovanni
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 11:05 AM, James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote:
Hey! That technosocialist POS that set back progress in space by 3
decades was good for something after all!
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 8:43 AM, David
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.space/N9ISaLUUyOw/tEiseAK-oh0J
Newsgroups: sci.space
Path:
gmd.de!xlink.net!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!spool.mu.edu!uunet!magnesium.club.cc.cmu.edu!cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!crabapple.srv.cs.cmu.edu!j...@pnet01.cts.com
From: j...@pnet01.cts.com (Jim Bowery)
Subject:
I am looking at the Josephson version of the Defkalion video, here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HHEtnTO3h6s
It is a little more blurry than the original. At time 39:03 the numbers on
the screen can be read. Total input is 1918 W. Output is 4295 W. T_in is
25.29°C, T_out 132.13°C, and the flow
On 07/29/2013 04:01 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
This is very conservative estimate of the heat output.
- Jed
Yes, here's Mats' comment:
The output was led down into a sink. Initially water was pouring down,
but at high temperatures there was no water dropping at all.
Craig cchayniepub...@gmail.com wrote:
Yes, here's Mats' comment:
The output was led down into a sink. Initially water was pouring down,
but at high temperatures there was no water dropping at all.
http://matslew.wordpress.com/
Defkalion, at the beginning of the demonstration, made a
At this level, it should be possible to power a steam electric generator to
provide the inputs.
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 3:48 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:
They(DGT) intentionally left out the vaporization as a gift to the
skeptics according to what was stated. There is
They(DGT) intentionally left out the vaporization as a gift to the skeptics
according to what was stated. There is evidence that the water was vaporized
into steam which was then superheated to dry vapor. I calculated over 20
kilowatts was being delivered.
Dave
-Original Message-
David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:
They(DGT) intentionally left out the vaporization as a gift to the
skeptics according to what was stated. There is evidence that the water
was vaporized into steam which was then superheated to dry vapor. I
calculated over 20 kilowatts was being
Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:
This is what 1.6 liters per hour of dry steam looks like:
** **
http://www.ajmadison.com/ajmadison/images/large/MR100_Steam_Floor_Head.jpg
I cannot tell the scale of that picture. How big is the plume? Are you sure
it is 1.6 L/hour? That seems a
From: Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net
Sent: Monday, July 29, 2013 2:19:58 PM
Before getting too worked up over the implications, there is a bit of
a credibility gap.
This is what 1.6 liters per hour of dry steam looks like:
James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote:
There is no video of the steam output.
Are you sure? Someone told me there is. Have your reviewed the full 8
hours?
The credibility gap is better demonstrated -- as I implied -- by the
failure to drive a steam turbine to provide the input electricity.
Alan Fletcher a...@well.com wrote:
Doesn't look at all dry to me. If it was, you'd see a large gap of
invisible steam before you saw any droplets -- visible steam.
Good point, although maybe the head is blocking the view.
The Hydrodynamics ~100 kW steam plume was invisible for a couple of
From what I recall from watching the stream life, is that they had water
running down the waste entry in parallel to cool off the output of the
reactor (being dry steam in optimum running state).
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 11:19 PM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:
Before getting too
John Hadjichristos July 29, 2013 at 11:23 AM
Dear Maryyugo
Why don't you come in one of our labs to conduct a test? It should be
independent, right? Under one condition: declare in public (say here,
in this blog) your name and qualifications to check that you can
conduct a really independent
On 07/29/2013 05:52 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com mailto:jabow...@gmail.com wrote:
There is no video of the steam output.
Are you sure? Someone told me there is. Have your reviewed the full 8
hours?
I watched it all, and though I may have missed a moment or
Presuming (of course) that's actually John Hadjichristos.
If it isn't, still, well done anonymous troll.
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 3:04 PM, blaze spinnaker
blazespinna...@gmail.com wrote:
John Hadjichristos July 29, 2013 at 11:23 AM
Dear Maryyugo
Why don't you come in one of our labs to
On 07/29/2013 06:07 PM, Craig wrote:
Mats Lewan did observe that there was NO water in the steam during the
hot part of the run. Craig
At the beginning of the demonstration, they also manually checked the
flow against the meter, by measuring the weight of the water after two
minutes of flow --
John Hadjichristos would never allow a troll to misrepresent him.
John H reads ego out religiously so such a scam would certainly be detected.
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 6:10 PM, blaze spinnaker
blazespinna...@gmail.comwrote:
Presuming (of course) that's actually John Hadjichristos.
If it
Yeah, it looks relatively authentic to me.
MY annoys me to no end, but I admit - nice comeback:
maryyugoJuly 29, 2013 at 12:29 PM
I have a better idea, John. Why don't you get Jed Rothwell to provide
some independent testing and experts for you? I have contact with him
and I will help him make
On Mon, 29 Jul 2013 15:10:26 -0700
blaze spinnaker blazespinna...@gmail.com wrote:
Presuming (of course) that's actually John Hadjichristos.
If it isn't, still, well done anonymous troll.
Just to make sure it is seen by readers of this list, here are MY's
two replies. I doubt
The problem with dry steam is that it is invisible and Mats merely
observed on the basis on what he thought was the sound of hissing gas
through the tubes to determine presence and flow rate.
Hardly scientific.
MY's suggestion of having Jed run it would immediately be rejected by
the skeptics as yet another test by a believer
Yeah, I think that sort of the point. If John was serious he can't
really complain about Jed who's shown himself to be rather fanatical
about this.
Jed, are you up for this? Hopefully you'll chime in on the blog and
say you'll do it.
Why not? We should all go there and say We Want Jed!
Jed has a cool beard, so I want him.
2013/7/29 blaze spinnaker blazespinna...@gmail.com
Yeah, I think that sort of the point. If John was serious he can't
really complain about Jed who's shown himself to be rather fanatical
about this.
Jed, are you up for this? Hopefully you'll chime in
It would be a great excuse to re-run the English demo with a full 8 hr vacuum
on the argon so they get to full output and then let Jed take a look at that
steam output.. just venting the steam outside the room so we can see it on
video to see if any portion is dry would be a big boost... In
This seems a little unfair to Mats. He calibrated the flow rate at the start
of the demonstration and found that the real rate was actually greater than the
indication by a few percent. This was performed at several different flow
rates.
Unless you assume that DGT faked the flow rate
In this video there is a quick look at the steam tube inserted into the
drain.
http://new.livestream.com/triwu2/Defkalion-US
I saw it, but now I can't find it. It is around the 1 hour mark, I think. I
wrote down 1:09 but now I can't find it.
It was not very revealing. It did not show the steam
I find it difficult to assume anything but dry steam at 150 C and atmospheric
after such a long travel inside the pipe. Any water vapor would be heated by
the high temperature steam traveling through it. This process should result in
lower temperature but dry steam after several feet within
Sorry to keep throwing Mats report at you, but this is an easy
observation. Either the output contained water, or it didn't. If you
believe in forgery, then anything is possible, of course; but otherwise,
there's no doubt that it was steam.
- no consideration was taken to vaporization enthalpy.
Defkalion will likely not measure the steam enthalpy. Don't insist on it.
That's an obligatory gift.
--
Daniel Rocha - RJ
danieldi...@gmail.com
Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com wrote:
Jed has a cool beard, so I want him.
People seemed to enjoy my luncheon talk at ICCF18. Many people complemented
me, including two people I roundly insulted in the talk: Steve Jones and
Graham Hubler.
Someone said, we didn't know you knew so much. I
If I recall correctly they showed steam in the blank run.
- Reply message -
From: Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: [Vo]:Defkalion apparently ignored heat of vaporization
Date: Mon, Jul 29, 2013 6:52 PM
In this video there is a quick look at the steam
Have you seen Steve Krivit?
2013/7/29 Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com
Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com wrote:
Jed has a cool beard, so I want him.
People seemed to enjoy my luncheon talk at ICCF18. Many people
complemented me, including two people I roundly insulted in the talk:
No steam was generated during the argon run. The temperature was too low.
Dave
-Original Message-
From: hohlraum hohlr...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Mon, Jul 29, 2013 7:13 pm
Subject: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Defkalion apparently ignored heat of vaporization
If I recall
Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com wrote:
Have you seen Steve Krivit?
He did not attend. I saw his badge was prepared, but he did not come.
Abd was there!
- Jed
Interesting the reason they didn't increase the flow rate was because
[23/07/2013 22:11:08] Mats Lewan: I asked -- the answer is that the
flow from the water pipe is not enough
http://www.quantumheat.org/index.php/en/follow/general-updates/309-iccf-fun
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 1:01 PM, Jed
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 1:48 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:
I calculated over 20 kilowatts was being delivered.
That seems like a lot. Here is 10 kilowatts:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eN5-nhcjH_Alist=PLF5DF775E5D70960F
Eric
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 5:17 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:
Simple is good! They achieved that with this test
My favorite simple test -- boil a large barrel of water for an extended
period of time, feeding it with a measured input flow to keep the water
topped off, and
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 3:24 PM, Vorl Bek vorl@antichef.com wrote:
I'd also like to know how you can feel
comfortable in testing a nuclear fusion device, with limited
experience, with guests present, without any radiation monitoring
and without any meltdown or explosion protection for the
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 3:46 PM, Roarty, Francis X
francis.x.roa...@lmco.com wrote:
just venting the steam outside the room so we can see it on video to see
if any portion is dry would be a big boost… In fact John could easily
release a video of that now to be verified later..
ROFLMAO - MaryYugo chickening out of a chance to prove everyone wrong. Classic.
Original Message
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Re: Nicely Played, John Hadjichristos
From: Vorl Bek vorl@antichef.com
Date: Tue, July 30, 2013 8:24 am
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
On Mon, 29 Jul 2013 15:10:26
Jed sed:
[Krivit] did not attend. I saw his badge was prepared, but he did not
come.
Abd was there!
I saw the photographs of Mr. Lomax! Boy, he's a lot furrier than I had
imagined!
Nice smile.
Regards,
Steven Vincent Johnson
svjart.OrionWorks.com
www.zazzle.com/orionworks
Yes. I can criticize but not verify.
Interesting, but we should be careful about credentials in industry. I
don't know if the Wright brothers have great credential, neither Lumière
brothers, Edison, ...
Luca has been working labs all his life. I'm sure he understands
measurement error. He also has a track record of publishing
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 3:41 AM, Vorl Bek vorl@antichef.com wrote:
People on this list should enjoy this 400-second video
http://tinyurl.com/m7b6wvr
Thank you Vorl. That was really neat.
Also a cautionary tale -- this is what will happen to a person if you're
cut loose and your jet pack
blaze spinnaker blazespinna...@gmail.com wrote:
In my opinion, Luca Gamberale is the most credible member of the DGT
team (so far). The more I hear from him the better:
Anyone with english transcripts to the live stream from their DGT lab
in Milan the day before the English one?
It was
As long as he is there working on the team I don't see why you care whether
he was part of this demo.
Come on... of everyone, Luca is the one who understands this the best.
I want to read something (that I can at least auto translate) where he
says DGT is above board, I know exactly what's
blaze spinnaker blazespinna...@gmail.com wrote:
Come on... of everyone, Luca is the one who understands this the best.
I want to read something (that I can at least auto translate) where he
says DGT is above board . . .
The fact that he is there, and he stays there, seems like pretty good
The fact that he is there, and he stays there, seems like pretty good
evidence to me. I trust that as much as I would trust a statement from him
saying this is legitimate research. If he did not think it was legit,
surely he would not stay, would he?
If the money is OK and he needs it, he
blaze spinnaker blazespinna...@gmail.com wrote:
If he did not think it was legit,
surely he would not stay, would he?
If the money is OK and he needs it, he might. He's not liable for
fraud until he starts lying to people.
I think it is unlikely that someone with his professional resume
In reply to Jones Beene's message of Mon, 29 Jul 2013 06:21:43 -0700:
Hi Jones,
Where they talk about endothermic reactions, they are talking about fusion of an
element with itself, not with Hydrogen.
This is because in stars, by the time the mid-level elements are formed, the
Hydrogen *in the
I wrote:
I think it is unlikely that someone with his professional resume would
stay there if he thought there was fraud or funny business. I do no think
he would do that for an OK level of money. Because if there is fraud, his
reputation will be ruined and he will never again be allowed to
Needless to say, this is mere speculation on my part. It is not proof of
anything. People sometimes do inexplicable things.
I more or less agree with your assessment, however, I think it's even
much more unlikely that he'd go on publicly available video and start
committing fraud.
My point
From: blaze spinnaker blazespinna...@gmail.com
Sent: Monday, July 29, 2013 7:55:38 PM
My point is, they finally have someone who has a track record. I
want to hear everything from him.
I'm sure that if you put up the $40M/whatever for a license -- you'd get all
the face-time you wanted.
They won't do an independent *public* test. It is much less likely that
they'd do for a big research facility if not for a commercial interest.
That is silly right now and they don't remotely need it.
2013/7/29 Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com
I am still not 100% convinced by Defkalion.
DGT might want to impress patent evaluators, peers, and customers.
They may want to stay under the radar as long as possible. I don't blame
them for this.
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 11:10 PM, Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.comwrote:
They won't do an independent *public* test. It is much less
They don't need any of that. The public appearance is just a call for
scientific collaboration.
2013/7/30 Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com
DGT might want to impress patent evaluators, peers, and customers.
They may want to stay under the radar as long as possible. I don't blame
them for this.
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 8:10 PM, Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com wrote:
They won't do an independent *public* test. It is much less likely that
they'd do for a big research facility if not for a commercial interest. That
is silly right now and they don't remotely need it.
Really? They
No, it is just an invitation to see they are not cheating.
2013/7/30 blaze spinnaker blazespinna...@gmail.com
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 8:10 PM, Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com
wrote:
They won't do an independent *public* test. It is much less likely that
they'd do for a big research
I don't want to hear about MY since she/he is a disruptive force in LENR
politics.
Is blaze spinnaker a reincarnation of MY? I am beginning to wonder.
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 11:35 PM, blaze spinnaker
blazespinna...@gmail.comwrote:
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 8:10 PM, Daniel Rocha
Mary is all bark and no bite.
Dave
-Original Message-
From: Craig Brown cr...@overunity.co
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Mon, Jul 29, 2013 9:49 pm
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Re: Nicely Played, John Hadjichristos
ROFLMAO - MaryYugo chickening out of a chance to prove everyone
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 8:40 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote:
I don't want to hear about MY since she/he is a disruptive force in LENR
politics.
I'm hardly the only one that brings up that name here. I think Terry
has, and Jed just did.
I agree, Yugo is annoying though. If you'd
I would like to hear more theory discussed. LENR needs good scientifically
credible theory presented to lend it credibility. How are you in that
area? When MY was here, mailboxes became full with tons of nonsense and
important subjects were bypassed as a result.
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 11:48
Lousy :)
Well, the subject is very important and certainly not nonsense, but if
Vortex is meant to be technical discussion only, I can certainly take
this elsewhere.
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 8:56 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote:
I would like to hear more theory discussed. LENR needs good
Well, the subject is very important and certainly not nonsense,
Which subject: Luca Gamberale or Mary Yugo?
On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 12:07 AM, blaze spinnaker
blazespinna...@gmail.comwrote:
Lousy :)
Well, the subject is very important and certainly not nonsense, but if
Vortex is meant to be
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 8:56 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote:
I would like to hear more theory discussed. LENR needs good scientifically
credible theory presented to lend it credibility. How are you in that
area? When MY was here, mailboxes became full with tons of nonsense and
-Original Message-
From: mix...@bigpond.com
Where they talk about endothermic reactions, they are talking about fusion
of an
element with itself, not with Hydrogen.
Not true. Cosmologists are talking about ALL possible nuclear reactions.
There are many types of nucleosynthesis
Hi All, Wow!
I've been watching and thinking about the Delkcalion (cold fusion?)
experiment, and wondered what you guys thought was actually happening
there. It was a great demonstration. That small device certainly seemed
to get wildly hot. If H gas + some nano-NI powder generated that
did you read?
http://www.slideshare.net/ssusereeef70/2012-0813-iccf17-paperdgtgx
On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 12:54 AM, Chuck Sites cbsit...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi All, Wow!
I've been watching and thinking about the Delkcalion (cold fusion?)
experiment, and wondered what you guys thought was
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 9:54 PM, Chuck Sites cbsit...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi All, Wow!
I've been watching and thinking about the Delkcalion (cold fusion?)
experiment, and wondered what you guys thought was actually happening there.
It was a great demonstration. That small device certainly
97 matches
Mail list logo
