date:20140831

Clearly Dr. Va'vra has not given up his belief in the existence of the DDL
states, as his 2013 paper is proposing DDL as a possible explanation for
the galactic 511keV signal.  He says in this paper that the previous
calculations were based on the QM formulations of the 1920's and that the
problem should be solved using modern QED.  For this, he refers to Dr.
James Vary  (Iowa State University) who is apparently continuing the DDL
work with his graduate students.  Apparently Dr. Vary also checked the DDL
work done by Dr. Va'vra and found no errors.

Here are some interesting points I have noted from reading these DDL papers:

   - The Shrodinger equation is not a relativistic model.  It doesn't
   predict the DDL states and it is not entirely accurate even in the ground
   state due to relativistic effects not being included.  The slower the
   electron is traveling (larger radius states), the more accurate its
   solution is.


   - The Klein-Gordon equation (KG) added special relativistic effects to
   the model, but not spin.  The KG equation predicts a single DDL state that
   is very about 350 Fermi equivalent Bohr radius (the normal ground state
   hydrogen is 52,900 Fermi, and a muon orbit would be about 250 Fermi).


   - The Dirac equation includes both special relativity and spin.  Dr.
   Va'vra's solutions to the Dirac equation predict many DDL levels.  These
   levels are solutions to the S- portion of the equation normally discarded
   because conventional formulations predicts an infinity at r=0 because a
   point source is presumed for the nucleus.  This is solved by re-formulating
   the problem with a distributed charge source model for the nucleus.  The
   resulting solution predicts the normal hydrogen states more accurately than
   the Shrodinger and KG equations.  The Dirac DDL solutions include states
   with orbits less than 300 Fermi.


   - None of these equations model the effects of the 2-body mass problem.
It is well known that the Earth and the Sun orbit around the common center
   of mass and the Earth causes the Sun to wobble in its position.  This
   effect is not accounted for in any of these equations.


   - These DDL states appear to not have enough angular momentum to create
   or absorb a photon [Meulenberg].  So, it becomes problematic for how energy
   is transferred into or out of an atom to change DDL states.  With this
   being the case, an auxiliary atom or coupled system is needed that can
   exchange energy.  This is a problem for detection of DDL states.


   - The DDL atom is also so small, it behaves more like a quasi-neutron
   and has a very low reaction cross-section.  It will readily pass through
   containers.


   - Most agree that if two DDL hydrogen isotope atoms form a DDL molecule,
   they will fuse immediately (within 10's of picoseconds).

Bob Higgins


On Sat, Aug 30, 2014 at 11:46 PM, Bob Cook frobertc...@hotmail.com wrote:

  Jones--

 Thanks for that repeat.

 I missed it the first time.

 Eric also identified the recent (2013) Va’vra paper, which is quite
 interesting including it reluctance to try to discuss theory, this being a
 change from his actions in the 1993 paper.  I wonder what changed his mind
 about addressing theory?

RE: [Vo]:LENR - dark mater - DDL connection--

Bob,

 

Another interesting possibility has come up (within the hour, actually)  – 
which can be called “meta-states” of dark matter. These are accumulated 
meta-states in the sense that the 511 keV line comes not from a decay of any 
particle, but instead there are macro accumulations of coherent particles, 
which can be a condensate, which act together as a cohesive unit – over and 
above the particles involved. More on that in a subsequent post.

 

From: Bob Higgins 

 

Clearly Dr. Va'vra has not given up his belief in the existence of the DDL 
states, as his 2013 paper is proposing DDL as a possible explanation for the 
galactic 511keV signal.  He says in this paper that the previous calculations 
were based on the QM formulations of the 1920's and that the problem should be 
solved using modern QED.  For this, he refers to Dr. James Vary  (Iowa State 
University) who is apparently continuing the DDL work with his graduate 
students.  Apparently Dr. Vary also checked the DDL work done by Dr. Va'vra and 
found no errors.

 

Here are some interesting points I have noted from reading these DDL papers:

* The Shrodinger equation is not a relativistic model.  It doesn't 
predict the DDL states and it is not entirely accurate even in the ground state 
due to relativistic effects not being included.  The slower the electron is 
traveling (larger radius states), the more accurate its solution is.

* The Klein-Gordon equation (KG) added special relativistic effects to 
the model, but not spin.  The KG equation predicts a single DDL state that is 
very about 350 Fermi equivalent Bohr radius (the normal ground state hydrogen 
is 52,900 Fermi, and a muon orbit would be about 250 Fermi).

* The Dirac equation includes both special relativity and spin.  Dr. 
Va'vra's solutions to the Dirac equation predict many DDL levels.  These levels 
are solutions to the S- portion of the equation normally discarded because 
conventional formulations predicts an infinity at r=0 because a point source is 
presumed for the nucleus.  This is solved by re-formulating the problem with a 
distributed charge source model for the nucleus.  The resulting solution 
predicts the normal hydrogen states more accurately than the Shrodinger and KG 
equations.  The Dirac DDL solutions include states with orbits less than 300 
Fermi.

* None of these equations model the effects of the 2-body mass problem. 
 It is well known that the Earth and the Sun orbit around the common center of 
mass and the Earth causes the Sun to wobble in its position.  This effect is 
not accounted for in any of these equations.

* These DDL states appear to not have enough angular momentum to create 
or absorb a photon [Meulenberg].  So, it becomes problematic for how energy is 
transferred into or out of an atom to change DDL states.  With this being the 
case, an auxiliary atom or coupled system is needed that can exchange energy.  
This is a problem for detection of DDL states.  

* The DDL atom is also so small, it behaves more like a quasi-neutron 
and has a very low reaction cross-section.  It will readily pass through 
containers.

* Most agree that if two DDL hydrogen isotope atoms form a DDL 
molecule, they will fuse immediately (within 10's of picoseconds).

Bob Higgins

 

Bob Cook wrote:

 

Jones--

 

Thanks for that repeat.

 

I missed it the first time.

 

Eric also identified the recent (2013) Va’vra paper, which is quite interesting 
including it reluctance to try to discuss theory, this being a change from his 
actions in the 1993 paper.  I wonder what changed his mind about addressing 
theory?

Re: [Vo]:LENR - dark mater - DDL connection--

On Sun, Aug 31, 2014 at 8:07 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:

Another interesting possibility has come up (within the hour, actually)  –
 which can be called “meta-states” of dark matter. These are accumulated
 meta-states in the sense that the 511 keV line comes not from a decay of
 any particle ...


Just one point of detail -- I read Va'vra as saying that if you sum all of
the photon energies from a hydrogen atom going to DDL across a full solid
angle, this will add up to 511 keV.

Eric

RE: [Vo]:LENR - dark mater - DDL connection--

Another interesting possibility has come up (within the hour, actually)  – 
which can be called “meta-states” of dark matter (as emitting entities). These 
are accumulated macro-states in the sense that the signature line comes not 
from a decay of any particle, but instead from accumulations of coherent 
particles, which can be a condensate, and which act together as a cohesive unit 
– over and above the particles involved. 

 

This possibility has come up in regard to fragmentation of a Bose-Einstein 
condensate, which can occur given repulsive inter-particle interactions and a 
non-uniform external potential. The paper is older: “Some Remarks on the 
Fragmentation of Bose Condensates” by Spekkens et al. 
http://arxiv.org/pdf/quant-ph/9802053.pdf

 

If one starts with that paper, then adds this: 

http://web.mit.edu/physics/greytak-kleppner/publications/LT22_Talk.pdf

which treats atomic hydrogen as a composite boson which can be condensed, all 
of it raises the remote possibility that the emitting species in question 
(which would correspond to “dark matter” in general) is not necessarily a 
single entity but is a relic of the breakup of larger accumulations of dark 
matter. 

 

If we were talking about a BEC of atomic hydrogen as being dark matter, then 
the radiation which has been seen in the 3.7 keV range for instance, could be 
attributed to the breakup of a larger condensate – except that it seems 
improbable at first that there would be a favored size… which would need to be 
the case if there was a single line, but maybe not. 

 

Fragmentation of a Bose-Einstein condensate, along with recombination and even 
a macro-level of oscillating coherence can occur given bosonic repulsive 
inter-particle interactions and a non-uniform external potential. To 
paraphrase: It is customary to approximate the ground state of a coherent 
system of particles (spin free bosons) by the Hartree-Fock state, and as a 
normalized single particle wavefunction.  One can, also consider states where 
the form is normalized but orthogonal single-particle wavefunctions, where we 
distinguish the first as ‘single condensates’ and the second as ‘dual 
condensates’ … so that what we identify as a characteristic signature of dark 
matter is in fact a relic of shifting condensate orientation – possibly 
representing the passage of gravity waves within a cloud of dark matter.

 

It gets curiouser and curiouser…

 

From: Bob Higgins 

 

Clearly Dr. Va'vra has not given up his belief in the existence of the DDL 
states, as his 2013 paper is proposing DDL as a possible explanation for the 
galactic 511keV signal.  He says in this paper that the previous calculations 
were based on the QM formulations of the 1920's and that the problem should be 
solved using modern QED.  For this, he refers to Dr. James Vary  (Iowa State 
University) who is apparently continuing the DDL work with his graduate 
students.  Apparently Dr. Vary also checked the DDL work done by Dr. Va'vra and 
found no errors.

 

Here are some interesting points I have noted from reading these DDL papers:

* The Shrodinger equation is not a relativistic model.  It doesn't 
predict the DDL states and it is not entirely accurate even in the ground state 
due to relativistic effects not being included.  The slower the electron is 
traveling (larger radius states), the more accurate its solution is.

* The Klein-Gordon equation (KG) added special relativistic effects to 
the model, but not spin.  The KG equation predicts a single DDL state that is 
very about 350 Fermi equivalent Bohr radius (the normal ground state hydrogen 
is 52,900 Fermi, and a muon orbit would be about 250 Fermi).

* The Dirac equation includes both special relativity and spin.  Dr. 
Va'vra's solutions to the Dirac equation predict many DDL levels.  These levels 
are solutions to the S- portion of the equation normally discarded because 
conventional formulations predicts an infinity at r=0 because a point source is 
presumed for the nucleus.  This is solved by re-formulating the problem with a 
distributed charge source model for the nucleus.  The resulting solution 
predicts the normal hydrogen states more accurately than the Shrodinger and KG 
equations.  The Dirac DDL solutions include states with orbits less than 300 
Fermi.

* None of these equations model the effects of the 2-body mass problem. 
 It is well known that the Earth and the Sun orbit around the common center of 
mass and the Earth causes the Sun to wobble in its position.  This effect is 
not accounted for in any of these equations.

* These DDL states appear to not have enough angular momentum to create 
or absorb a photon [Meulenberg].  So, it becomes problematic for how energy is 
transferred into or out of an atom to change DDL states.  With this being the 
case, an auxiliary atom or coupled system is needed that can exchange energy.  
This is a problem for detection of DDL

Re: [Vo]:LENR - dark mater - DDL connection--

This is in part because Va'vra hypothesizes that it may be possible to
produce DDL transitions with multiple photons.  If multiple photons are
involved, there is nothing to insure that all photon components would come
out in the same direction (like a laser).  Hence, you would have to
integrate all of the photon energies in 4pi solid angle in an instant and
look to see if they added up to the 511keV.  It is not clear how Va'vra
envisions that these photons would be catalyzed out of the DDL atom,
because as Meulenberg points out, the DDL electrons have insufficient
angular momentum to absorb or emit a photon.  Thus, to get multiple photons
out, it would seem that multiple other atoms must be coupled to the DDL
electron to extract energy from it and then those other atoms would emit
the extracted energy as a photon.  Starts to sound like Mills, doesn't it?

Bob

On Sun, Aug 31, 2014 at 9:17 AM, Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.com wrote:

 On Sun, Aug 31, 2014 at 8:07 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:

 Another interesting possibility has come up (within the hour, actually)  –
 which can be called “meta-states” of dark matter. These are accumulated
 meta-states in the sense that the 511 keV line comes not from a decay of
 any particle ...


 Just one point of detail -- I read Va'vra as saying that if you sum all of
 the photon energies from a hydrogen atom going to DDL across a full solid
 angle, this will add up to 511 keV.

 Eric

Re: [Vo]:LENR - dark mater - DDL connection--

I wrote:

Just one point of detail -- I read Va'vra as saying that if you sum all of
 the photon energies from a hydrogen atom going to DDL across a full solid
 angle, this will add up to 511 keV.


Looking at the 2013 paper again, that is just one of two possibilities.
 One possibility is that the DDL gives off a 511 keV emission (explaining
the signal in the cosmic background) and the other is that the DDL
emissions sum up over a solid angle (not explaining the signal, presumably)
[1].  He does something similar with the capture cross section of DDL
hydrogen -- it might or might not be all that high (p. 6).

Eric


[1] http://arxiv.org/pdf/1304.0833v3.pdf, p. 5

Re: [Vo]:SunCell - Initial Replication Attempt

Hi Jack,

I have started doing a little digging into the electrical implementation of
typical spot welders.  Basically it appears that the spot welder arms are
just the output of a low voltage transformer (probably with a saturating
core).  What this means is that the output will be AC current and voltage.
 One thing to test is to make sure that the spot welder arms are open
circuit to the primary.

   - Can you measure the DC resistance between the arms and the ground
   terminal on the power plug?

We need to make sure that you will not damage your oscilloscope.  Also,
since the output is AC, it may be safer to measure the current with a
clip-on current probe.  If you don't have one, you can make one.  However,
if you use a clip-on probe, you will have to calibrate it with an AC
current.  I will also draw a diagram for how I think you can make your
measurement and will post it.

Bob


On Sun, Aug 31, 2014 at 6:57 AM, Jack Cole jcol...@gmail.com wrote:

 Bob,

 I'm getting ready to work on implementing what you suggested.

 Could you take a look at this sketch to see if this is what you are
 suggesting for hooking up the oscilloscope?


 http://www.lenr-coldfusion.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/power-measurement.png

 I won't be able to do 10 amps for calibration, but I can do anything up to
 5 amps with my lab power supply.

 Best regards,
 Jack



 On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 6:39 PM, Bob Higgins rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com
 wrote:

 Jack,

 You are on the verge of the LENR precipice - where you dive off into the
 meat of the phenomenon.  What you are seeing is that it is hard to discover
 whether anything special has been achieved.  How do you whether something
 special has happened?  Well, you need to measure the energy balance.  Only
 if you measure more energy out than is put into the reaction with
 electrical power and chemical enthalpy, did something special happen.  A
 big flash doesn't tell you anything.  A flashbulb can be ignited with an AA
 battery and will make a very bright flash - due to the chemical energy of
 the burning metal.  This spot welder will create a plasma hot enough to
 ignite many metals and when you put the water there it dissociates to
 provide a high concentration of O2 - you get the chemical effect of the
 burning metal.

 Mills claims that his metal host is not burned and is re-usable.  That
 must be a really refractory metal to not burn at plasma temperatures.
  Let's say that he is correct.  The plasma still dissociates the H2O into
 H, O, OH, H2, and O2 and these will re-combine within the ejecta creating a
 hydrogen flash which will be very hot and bright.  Did he produce
 over-unity?  I wasn't convinced by what I saw that he showed.

 Jumping over the precipice, you will need to use one of the big copper
 arms as a current shunt.  Connect a lead across two points on one arm.  Use
 another calibrated source to run X known amps (lets say 10A) of current
 across the two points and see what voltage you get out.  Calculate the
 shunt resistance as a calibration factor.  Now you can use a digital
 storage oscilloscope to measure the differential voltage and capture the
 current waveshape.  Next you need an oscilloscope connection across the two
 arms to simulaneously (with the current measurement) measure the voltage
 across the contacts - the connections don't have to be super close to the
 contacts because the voltage drop across the big conductors will be small.
  Then you can capture the voltage waveform.  I don't think it will exceed
 50V.  To test, you can put a diode to capacitor across the gap and capture
 the peak voltage to know what you will need to protect against.  You will
 need the simultaneous voltage and current waveform to calculate the input
 energy.  There are other ways to do this, but this provides a lot of
 information.

 So how do you measure the power out?  You can build a water calorimeter.
  In fact, you could fire the whole thing inside high resistance deionized
 water which would do a pretty good job of capturing all of the heat.  You
 would need to put a blackened piece of pipe around it in the water to
 capture the light and thermalize it into the water.  If you embed the
 electrodes reasonably well into the water, you may be able to avoid most of
 the error for the heat that goes into the electrodes.  Calculate heat by
 temperature rise of the water.  With practice, you will be able to measure
 the joules (energy) in and joules out from heat rise.  You will need to
 stir the water and measure the water in multiple points.  You will need an
 insulated container.

 Either that, our you need to be good at telling stories about the big
 fish that got away (is this Mills?).

 BTW, I applaud your efforts.

 Bob Higgins


 On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 2:13 PM, Jack Cole jcol...@gmail.com wrote:

 Now that I have demonstrated a roughly equivalent level of light with
 nitinol (comparing dry and dipped in water), I believe it invalidates the
 hypothesis that

RE: [Vo]:LENR - dark mater - DDL connection--

There is a third possibility – that Va’vra is measuring something completely 
different… since as I recall, he is trying to explain a phenomenon of the Milky 
Way, and the others who see emissions from distant galaxies in the range of 3.5 
keV are seeing a characteristic emission of dark matter which is far removed. 

 

The emission line which they see (5 or 6 different papers) is red-shifted, but 
is not clear if the originating radiation is 3.7 keV or not. At any rate it is 
NOT as Mills suggests, the 3.4 keV which he calculates, since the red-shift 
would lower that. So we know that Mills is wrong, if nothing else as his value 
is lower than what is actually seen, when it should be higher.

 

The fourth possibility is the most likely. Va’vra is seeing positron 
annihilation, which he tries to marginalize as a possibility, but it is too 
coincidental to be otherwise.

 

From: Eric Walker 

 

Just one point of detail -- I read Va'vra as saying that if you sum all of the 
photon energies from a hydrogen atom going to DDL across a full solid angle, 
this will add up to 511 keV.

 

Looking at the 2013 paper again, that is just one of two possibilities.  One 
possibility is that the DDL gives off a 511 keV emission (explaining the signal 
in the cosmic background) and the other is that the DDL emissions sum up over a 
solid angle (not explaining the signal, presumably) [1].  He does something 
similar with the capture cross section of DDL hydrogen -- it might or might not 
be all that high (p. 6).

 

Eric

 

 

[1] http://arxiv.org/pdf/1304.0833v3.pdf, p. 5

RE: [Vo]:LENR - dark mater - DDL connection--

It is worth mentioning in the context of:


http://web.mit.edu/physics/greytak-kleppner/publications/LT22_Talk.pdf
which treats atomic hydrogen as a composite boson … which
can be (has been) condensed, all of it raises the remote possibility that
the emitting species in question (which would correspond to “dark matter”)
is not necessarily a single entity but is a relic of the transitory breakup
of accumulations of dark matter. 

The DDL is notably a composite boson – and moreover, it is one which would
possibly condense at a relatively high temperature, given that a parameter
which controls ease of condensation is the limitation of freedom of
movement. 

Thus, we can argue that dark matter is a strange kind of hydrogen
condensate, which forms massive clouds which do not densify into stars. The
reason for that is still a mystery, but the “placeholder” explanation is
that within the cloud of dark matter there is a repulsive force which is
greater than gravity. Magnetism is a good candidate, especially in the guise
of rapidly alternating polarity, which itself can be defined as the virtual
monopole state.

If we were talking about a BEC of atomic hydrogen as being
dark matter, then the radiation which has been seen in the 3.7 keV range for
instance, could be attributed to the transitory breakup of a larger
condensate…

… so that what we identify as a characteristic signature of
dark matter is in fact a relic of shifting condensate orientation – possibly
representing the passage of gravity waves within a cloud of dark matter.

It gets curiouser and curiouser…



attachment: winmail.dat

Re: [Vo]:LENR - dark mater - DDL connection--

One of the dark matter theories that has gained favor through the
observation of many instances of circumstantial evidence for its existence
is based on a soliton that is light years in size. The unexplained emission
lines that are being observed could be that of the EMF single frequency
which allows the soliton to maintain its quantum mechanical correlations
between the ensemble members.

A large entangled structure needs something to keep all the members
correlated. That single frequency might be what is being detected.




On Sun, Aug 31, 2014 at 11:28 AM, Bob Higgins rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com
wrote:

 This is in part because Va'vra hypothesizes that it may be possible to
 produce DDL transitions with multiple photons.  If multiple photons are
 involved, there is nothing to insure that all photon components would come
 out in the same direction (like a laser).  Hence, you would have to
 integrate all of the photon energies in 4pi solid angle in an instant and
 look to see if they added up to the 511keV.  It is not clear how Va'vra
 envisions that these photons would be catalyzed out of the DDL atom,
 because as Meulenberg points out, the DDL electrons have insufficient
 angular momentum to absorb or emit a photon.  Thus, to get multiple photons
 out, it would seem that multiple other atoms must be coupled to the DDL
 electron to extract energy from it and then those other atoms would emit
 the extracted energy as a photon.  Starts to sound like Mills, doesn't it?

 Bob

 On Sun, Aug 31, 2014 at 9:17 AM, Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.com
 wrote:

 On Sun, Aug 31, 2014 at 8:07 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:

 Another interesting possibility has come up (within the hour, actually)
  – which can be called “meta-states” of dark matter. These are accumulated
 meta-states in the sense that the 511 keV line comes not from a decay of
 any particle ...


 Just one point of detail -- I read Va'vra as saying that if you sum all
 of the photon energies from a hydrogen atom going to DDL across a full
 solid angle, this will add up to 511 keV.

 Eric

Re: [Vo]:LENR - dark mater - DDL connection--

While Va'vra is recently trying to connect the 511 keV galactic signal with
DDL hydrogen, his theory about multi-photon DDL transitions is older.  He
has been doing work with spark discharge in hydrogen and uses a large
cylindrical scintillator with an axial hole to look for coincident
detection of multiple photons, that he thought may add up to 511 keV.

Of course, the 511 keV galactic signal is not Va'vra's observation.  He was
just citing that with a speculation that DDL hydrogen could be implicated.

One of the things that QED analysis may provide a better handle on is how
DDL transitions might occur.  Meulenberg states that DDL state electrons do
not have sufficient angular momentum for photon transactions, making it
difficult to visualize how DDL state transitions occur.  Shrodinger, KG,
and Dirac really don't contain information about the photon interaction
with the electron, but QED does.

Bob


On Sun, Aug 31, 2014 at 9:42 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:

  There is a third possibility – that Va’vra is measuring something
 completely different… since as I recall, he is trying to explain a
 phenomenon of the Milky Way, and the others who see emissions from distant
 galaxies in the range of 3.5 keV are seeing a characteristic emission of
 dark matter which is far removed.



 The emission line which they see (5 or 6 different papers) is red-shifted,
 but is not clear if the originating radiation is 3.7 keV or not. At any
 rate it is NOT as Mills suggests, the 3.4 keV which he calculates, since
 the red-shift would lower that. So we know that Mills is wrong, if nothing
 else as his value is lower than what is actually seen, when it should be
 higher.



 The fourth possibility is the most likely. Va’vra is seeing positron
 annihilation, which he tries to marginalize as a possibility, but it is too
 coincidental to be otherwise.



 *From:* Eric Walker



   Just one point of detail -- I read Va'vra as saying that if you sum all
 of the photon energies from a hydrogen atom going to DDL across a full
 solid angle, this will add up to 511 keV.



 Looking at the 2013 paper again, that is just one of two possibilities.
  One possibility is that the DDL gives off a 511 keV emission (explaining
 the signal in the cosmic background) and the other is that the DDL
 emissions sum up over a solid angle (not explaining the signal, presumably)
 [1].  He does something similar with the capture cross section of DDL
 hydrogen -- it might or might not be all that high (p. 6).



 Eric





 [1] http://arxiv.org/pdf/1304.0833v3.pdf, p. 5

Re: [Vo]:LENR - dark mater - DDL connection--

Hydrogen will most likely will preferably assume a metastable state in
which  a one dimensional crystalline form of Rydberg matter is surrounded
 by a cloud of many electrons in orbit around a long string like core of
many protons.


On Sun, Aug 31, 2014 at 12:49 PM, Bob Higgins rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com
wrote:

 While Va'vra is recently trying to connect the 511 keV galactic signal
 with DDL hydrogen, his theory about multi-photon DDL transitions is older.
  He has been doing work with spark discharge in hydrogen and uses a large
 cylindrical scintillator with an axial hole to look for coincident
 detection of multiple photons, that he thought may add up to 511 keV.

 Of course, the 511 keV galactic signal is not Va'vra's observation.  He
 was just citing that with a speculation that DDL hydrogen could be
 implicated.

 One of the things that QED analysis may provide a better handle on is how
 DDL transitions might occur.  Meulenberg states that DDL state electrons do
 not have sufficient angular momentum for photon transactions, making it
 difficult to visualize how DDL state transitions occur.  Shrodinger, KG,
 and Dirac really don't contain information about the photon interaction
 with the electron, but QED does.

 Bob


 On Sun, Aug 31, 2014 at 9:42 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:

  There is a third possibility – that Va’vra is measuring something
 completely different… since as I recall, he is trying to explain a
 phenomenon of the Milky Way, and the others who see emissions from distant
 galaxies in the range of 3.5 keV are seeing a characteristic emission of
 dark matter which is far removed.



 The emission line which they see (5 or 6 different papers) is
 red-shifted, but is not clear if the originating radiation is 3.7 keV or
 not. At any rate it is NOT as Mills suggests, the 3.4 keV which he
 calculates, since the red-shift would lower that. So we know that Mills is
 wrong, if nothing else as his value is lower than what is actually seen,
 when it should be higher.



 The fourth possibility is the most likely. Va’vra is seeing positron
 annihilation, which he tries to marginalize as a possibility, but it is too
 coincidental to be otherwise.



 *From:* Eric Walker



   Just one point of detail -- I read Va'vra as saying that if you sum
 all of the photon energies from a hydrogen atom going to DDL across a full
 solid angle, this will add up to 511 keV.



 Looking at the 2013 paper again, that is just one of two possibilities.
  One possibility is that the DDL gives off a 511 keV emission (explaining
 the signal in the cosmic background) and the other is that the DDL
 emissions sum up over a solid angle (not explaining the signal, presumably)
 [1].  He does something similar with the capture cross section of DDL
 hydrogen -- it might or might not be all that high (p. 6).



 Eric





 [1] http://arxiv.org/pdf/1304.0833v3.pdf, p. 5

[Vo]:Anyone want to debate Darwinian Evolution with me in VortexB

2014-08-31 Thread Jojo Iznart

Folks, things are slow here, but some crybabies are complaining that I am 
cluttering VortexL, burdening them and imposing on them.   So, I am not going 
to start a new Darwinian Evolution thread here.

But, I am issuing a challenge to anyone who thinks they understand Darwinian 
Evolution better than me, to please show up in VortexB and debate it with me.  
Heck, you have thousands of books with irrefutable proof; so dispatching me 
with your well-informed retorts should be easy.  You should be able to 
dismantle my fairy-land arguments quickly.

So, how about it, any takers?  (Jed?,  Nigel?, James?, Lixa?, jwinter?, Sunil?, 
Rocha?, Ian Walker?)  Anyone willing to give it a try to silence me and a 
chance to embarrass me and put me back into my fairyland?

Please indicate your willingness to participate in VortexB, by responding on 
this thread.  If there are enough people accepting my challenge, I will get the 
ball rolling by posting on Irreducible Complexity.  Or, you can start the ball 
rolling by posting a Darwinian Evolution topic of your choice in VortexB.  
Don't start the discussion here, lest we burden and impose on the deep 
thinking and meditation of some people.

If you don't accept my challenge, please have enough integrity to forever not 
refer to my beliefs as a fairytale.  Fair Enough?  Put up or shut up.

Oh, please don't hide behind your I don't want to waste time or I don't want 
to debate cause that will only give them some credibility nonsense.  I am 
mocking your beliefs.  I am mocking the stupidity of Darwinian Evolution and 
questioning the intelligence of those who believe in it..  Stand up and defend 
it with your honor.  Let's have fun!!!





Jojo

Re: [Vo]:LENR - dark mater - DDL connection--

On Sun, Aug 31, 2014 at 10:06 AM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote:

Hydrogen will most likely will preferably assume a metastable state in
 which  a one dimensional crystalline form of Rydberg matter is surrounded
  by a cloud of many electrons in orbit around a long string like core of
 many protons.


Sounds vaguely like a hydroton.  ;)

Eric

Re: [Vo]:SunCell - Initial Replication Attempt

Hi Jack,

I have created some diagrams to help communicate the setups that I am going
to describe.  It on my Google drive at:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B5Pc25a4cOM2MTlIX1pwMC1PdHc/edit?usp=sharing


These setups presume that when you measure between the high current bars
and the pins of the 120VAC input plug, that in all cases you measure an
OPEN circuit (infinite resistance).  If this is not the case, then we need
to re-think the setups ... but it should be the case.

Referring to the set of diagrams in the file above, the setups are
described as follows:

Setup 1:  This is to measure the peak voltage out of the welder during a
spot weld.  Do this with a voltmeter and the circuit shown.  The voltage
you measure will be the AC peak voltage.  The actual voltage that is
present will be about +/- (the measured voltage + about 1V).  This
measurement will be done without the oscilloscope so as to see what voltage
is coming out of the welder to insure that your oscilloscope can handle the
voltage range.

Setup 2:  Measure the resistance of the welding bar as a current shunt.
 Even though the actual current will be AC, the resistance for a current
shunt can be measured with DC.  The actual current that is required in the
measurement is not critical as long as the value supplied (I_BC) is known.
 The current should be the max. the source can provide to get best
accuracy.  So, put your supply into current limit mode and crank up the
current limit until the max for the supply is reached.  Measure the voltage
(V_BA) across the points B-A.  The resistance will be R=V_BA  /I_BC .  This
is your current shunt resistance.

Setup 3:  Measure the spot welding waveforms.  Use a heavy wire to connect
from point B to the oscilloscope ground terminal.  No current should be
flowing in this conductor, but you want its resistance to be lower than the
resistance from the probes shields to that ground point.  That way if you
get an anomalous ground current, it won't flow through the probes.  In
fact, I would begin this test with no ground connections for the probes.
 In fact, once you get a handle on the voltages, you will probably not want
to use 10x probes, you will want a straight through connection.  The
voltage sources you are measuring are extremely low impedance and can
easily drive the low impedance of the oscilloscope without the 10x probe.
 You will get cleaner signals without the 10x probes, but I would measure
with the probe first.  The voltage you measure in channel 1 as shown will
be the voltage as a function of time.  I would trigger on this voltage's
rising edge.  The voltage on channel 2 is the NEGATIVE of the voltage
across the shunt resistor.  When calculating power, you will need to
multiply this trace by -R to get the current vs. time.  This was done to
avoid the need for signal subtraction in only a 2-channel scope.

It may be necessary, as I mentioned in a previous post to create a
compensating loop to subtract out current induced error voltages in these
measurements. Think of that as a possible future improvement in accuracy of
what you are measuring.

Bob

On Sun, Aug 31, 2014 at 6:57 AM, Jack Cole jcol...@gmail.com wrote:

 Bob,

 I'm getting ready to work on implementing what you suggested.

 Could you take a look at this sketch to see if this is what you are
 suggesting for hooking up the oscilloscope?


 http://www.lenr-coldfusion.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/power-measurement.png

 I won't be able to do 10 amps for calibration, but I can do anything up to
 5 amps with my lab power supply.

 Best regards,
 Jack

Re: [Vo]:LENR - dark mater - DDL connection--

2014-08-31 Thread Alain Sepeda

the book of Ed Storms beside his theory put the finger on key weirness of
LENr evidence.

one is that Iwamura experiments shows a fusion of heavy nucleus with an
even number of deuterons, precisely one that lead to a stable result...
finding an explation for those two weirness is a key.
the even number is explained by the hydroton, but the stable nucleus, as
far as i understood does not.

tritium is a key too...
hydrogen fusion results is not known, and Ed propose some successive fusion
to deuterium, tritium, helium, and why not more...(it is not clear for me)
not far from the ladder of Brillouin.

maybe Ni62/64/60/61 specificities in E-cat will lead to some new key facts
to sort out the theories...

many keys, but many more doors.



2014-08-31 20:51 GMT+02:00 Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.com:

 On Sun, Aug 31, 2014 at 10:06 AM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote:

 Hydrogen will most likely will preferably assume a metastable state in
 which  a one dimensional crystalline form of Rydberg matter is surrounded
  by a cloud of many electrons in orbit around a long string like core of
 many protons.


 Sounds vaguely like a hydroton.  ;)

 Eric

Re: [Vo]:LENR - dark mater - DDL connection--

One more facet of the DDL connection is that chemically bound DDL molecules
are entirely possible - such as D^D and D^D^.  Meulenberg proposes that
these pico-molecules will fuse in 10s of picoseconds.  It is likely
that pico-molecules could form inside of Ed Storms' hydroton.  These
pico-molecules could be responsible for fusion with heavy nuclei, and given
the wierd-ness of the input to the heavy nucleus, it is not inconceivable
that wierd-ness could result - for example the formation of a stable
heavy nucleus.

I don't think I entirely believe Meulenburg's lochon hypothesis (binding of
2 electrons), but his DDL papers are well worth reading for the context of
LENR from DDL state hydrogen isotopes.

Bob


On Sun, Aug 31, 2014 at 2:18 PM, Alain Sepeda alain.sep...@gmail.com
wrote:

 the book of Ed Storms beside his theory put the finger on key weirness of
 LENr evidence.

 one is that Iwamura experiments shows a fusion of heavy nucleus with an
 even number of deuterons, precisely one that lead to a stable result...
 finding an explation for those two weirness is a key.
 the even number is explained by the hydroton, but the stable nucleus, as
 far as i understood does not.

 tritium is a key too...
 hydrogen fusion results is not known, and Ed propose some successive
 fusion to deuterium, tritium, helium, and why not more...(it is not clear
 for me)
 not far from the ladder of Brillouin.

 maybe Ni62/64/60/61 specificities in E-cat will lead to some new key facts
 to sort out the theories...

 many keys, but many more doors.



 2014-08-31 20:51 GMT+02:00 Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.com:

 On Sun, Aug 31, 2014 at 10:06 AM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote:

 Hydrogen will most likely will preferably assume a metastable state in
 which  a one dimensional crystalline form of Rydberg matter is surrounded
  by a cloud of many electrons in orbit around a long string like core of
 many protons.


 Sounds vaguely like a hydroton.  ;)

 Eric

RE: [Vo]:LENR - dark mater - DDL connection--

From: Bob Higgins 

 

One more facet of the DDL connection is that chemically bound DDL molecules are 
entirely possible - such as D^D and D^D^.  Meulenberg proposes that these 
pico-molecules will fuse in 10s of picoseconds. 

 

The problem with this hypothesis is simple. Mizuno presented the most robust 
experiment in the history of LENR – a full 600% more gain than the next best 
experiment (Roulette/Pons) and guess what – no sign of fusion. No mass-4. No 
gammas. But plenty of excess heat.

 

If there was a route to fusion via DDDL - then it should have shown up in the 
thirty days of the Mizuno experiment. Since there was no evidence of fusion in 
the most important experiment since 1989, it is fair to say that we should 
focus elsewhere.

 

Why invent a fusion pathway when you do not need one to show gain? Going to the 
DDL is sufficient to explain thermal gain. If we stop there, then we do not 
need Storm’s brain-dead explanation for lack of gammas.

 

The best explanation for lack of gammas – the only explanation needed – is lack 
of fusion.

 

Jones

Re: [Vo]:Someones Kickstarting a free energy device...

2014-08-31 Thread John Berry

No, it means he is important! Too important to waste his energy pressing
the shift button.


2014-09-01 2:07 GMT+12:00 Alexander Hollins alexander.holl...@gmail.com:


 https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1673957641/free-energy?ref=category_popular

 all caps means he's REALLY serious.

Re: [Vo]:LENR - dark mater - DDL connection--

On Sun, Aug 31, 2014 at 2:17 PM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:

The best explanation for lack of gammas – the only explanation needed – is
 lack of fusion.


I'm sooo tempted to collect statements from you along these lines for
future gloating.  ;)

Eric

RE: [Vo]: The Absurdity of Darwinian Evolution.

2014-08-31 Thread Orionworks - Steven Vincent Johnson

Greetings Jojo, my ancient respected nemesis from the past.

 

I do not believe my previous comments implied that I am rejecting God and
Heaven. The conflict, if there really exists one between us, seems to be
that we may have slightly different intellectual perspectives as to what God
and the Kingdom of Heaven might consist of. IMHO, both reside within us.

 

http://biblehub.com/luke/17-21.htm

 

In terms that I hope may establish a way for you and I to find some common
ground in which to stand on I would submit that God and the Kingdom of
Heaven is an eternal dance of Unity. To my way of thinking and feeling, that
eternal dance includes sexuality. I include the expression of sexuality
because, in my view, it is one of the most obvious, primal forces of Cosmic
Creation that conscious sentient beings can experience. The ultimate
expression of sexuality is Unity. When it comes to expressing Unity, I
suspect God is not a prude, nor do I suspect has the Kingdom of Heaven
banned Dirty Dancing. It seems to me that only humans have learned how to
behave prudishly when it comes to the infinite creativity sexuality bestows
upon sentient creatures like us. Fortunately, I suspect God is very patient
about such foibles.

 

I don't know if my comments about sexuality have possibly offended you or
not. Be that as it may, in the end I think we must remain True to Our Own
School. That means we must live our Own School as best we can. We must be
responsible for expressing our own POVs as clearly as we can so that others
can evaluate them at their own pace and level of comprehension. That is the
only way I know how common ground can be found amongst each other. Likewise,
it is not our responsibility nor sacred duty to attempt to manipulate,
coerce, or force our POVs, or Our Own School onto others. Again, it would
appear that only sentient creatures, like us, seemed to have learned how to
do that. 

 

Regards,

Steven Vincent Johnson

svjart.orionworks.com

zazzle.com/orionworks

 

 

From: Jojo 

 

My friend, if this is the only reason why you reject God and heaven, you are
missing out on a lot of things.

 

We vorticians enjoy intellectual stimulation.  We debate arcane subject
matters like number of angels on the head of a pin. because we enjoy
thinking, analysing, deep analysis and other mental and intellectual
exercises.  And I think you do to.

 

The Bible talks of the unsearchable riches of Christ.  So, imagine an
existence where you can indulge in this exercise of seaching the
unsearchable riches of Christ for eternity.  You will never finish searching
everything there is to know.  To me, that would be an enjoyable existence.
One will not have time to dance, nor would one want to.  So, dancing would
be the last thing you would want to. Although there is a form of dancing
associated with praise and singing to worship God.  I am not referring to
that; I am referring to carnal sexual dancing we indulge in.

Re: [Vo]:SunCell - Initial Replication Attempt

2014-08-31 Thread Jack Cole

Hi Bob,

Unfortunately, I do not get infinite resistance.  On the plugin ground pin,
I get 1 ohm on the bottom electrode bar and the top bar I get different
behavior.  Specifically, when the top and bottom electrodes are close
together, but not touching, I get infinite resistance between the top bar
and ground pin.  When the top bar is pulled up higher away from the bottom
bar, I get resistance.  Is this a safety mechanism perhaps?  I get infinite
resistance between the other connectors on the plugin and the bars.




On Sun, Aug 31, 2014 at 1:56 PM, Bob Higgins rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com
wrote:

 Hi Jack,

 I have created some diagrams to help communicate the setups that I am
 going to describe.  It on my Google drive at:


 https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B5Pc25a4cOM2MTlIX1pwMC1PdHc/edit?usp=sharing


 These setups presume that when you measure between the high current bars
 and the pins of the 120VAC input plug, that in all cases you measure an
 OPEN circuit (infinite resistance).  If this is not the case, then we need
 to re-think the setups ... but it should be the case.

 Referring to the set of diagrams in the file above, the setups are
 described as follows:

 Setup 1:  This is to measure the peak voltage out of the welder during a
 spot weld.  Do this with a voltmeter and the circuit shown.  The voltage
 you measure will be the AC peak voltage.  The actual voltage that is
 present will be about +/- (the measured voltage + about 1V).  This
 measurement will be done without the oscilloscope so as to see what voltage
 is coming out of the welder to insure that your oscilloscope can handle the
 voltage range.

 Setup 2:  Measure the resistance of the welding bar as a current shunt.
  Even though the actual current will be AC, the resistance for a current
 shunt can be measured with DC.  The actual current that is required in the
 measurement is not critical as long as the value supplied (I_BC) is known.
  The current should be the max. the source can provide to get best
 accuracy.  So, put your supply into current limit mode and crank up the
 current limit until the max for the supply is reached.  Measure the voltage
 (V_BA) across the points B-A.  The resistance will be R=V_BA  /I_BC .  This
 is your current shunt resistance.

 Setup 3:  Measure the spot welding waveforms.  Use a heavy wire to connect
 from point B to the oscilloscope ground terminal.  No current should be
 flowing in this conductor, but you want its resistance to be lower than the
 resistance from the probes shields to that ground point.  That way if you
 get an anomalous ground current, it won't flow through the probes.  In
 fact, I would begin this test with no ground connections for the probes.
  In fact, once you get a handle on the voltages, you will probably not want
 to use 10x probes, you will want a straight through connection.  The
 voltage sources you are measuring are extremely low impedance and can
 easily drive the low impedance of the oscilloscope without the 10x probe.
  You will get cleaner signals without the 10x probes, but I would measure
 with the probe first.  The voltage you measure in channel 1 as shown will
 be the voltage as a function of time.  I would trigger on this voltage's
 rising edge.  The voltage on channel 2 is the NEGATIVE of the voltage
 across the shunt resistor.  When calculating power, you will need to
 multiply this trace by -R to get the current vs. time.  This was done to
 avoid the need for signal subtraction in only a 2-channel scope.

 It may be necessary, as I mentioned in a previous post to create a
 compensating loop to subtract out current induced error voltages in these
 measurements. Think of that as a possible future improvement in accuracy of
 what you are measuring.

 Bob

 On Sun, Aug 31, 2014 at 6:57 AM, Jack Cole jcol...@gmail.com wrote:

 Bob,

 I'm getting ready to work on implementing what you suggested.

 Could you take a look at this sketch to see if this is what you are
 suggesting for hooking up the oscilloscope?


 http://www.lenr-coldfusion.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/power-measurement.png

 I won't be able to do 10 amps for calibration, but I can do anything up
 to 5 amps with my lab power supply.

 Best regards,
 Jack

Re: [Vo]:LENR - dark mater - DDL connection--

Magnetic action upon the nucleus is responsible for LENR. A MNR inactive
nucleus (a zero nuclear spin) is required to optimize the effect of the
magnetic field on the nucleus. There, no magnetic energy is wasted.  A NMR
active nucleus (a non zero nuclear spin) will dissipate the energy of the
magnetic field by converting magnetic energy into  RF energy thereby
weakening the effect of the magnetic field.


On Sun, Aug 31, 2014 at 4:18 PM, Alain Sepeda alain.sep...@gmail.com
wrote:

 the book of Ed Storms beside his theory put the finger on key weirness of
 LENr evidence.

 one is that Iwamura experiments shows a fusion of heavy nucleus with an
 even number of deuterons, precisely one that lead to a stable result...
 finding an explation for those two weirness is a key.
 the even number is explained by the hydroton, but the stable nucleus, as
 far as i understood does not.

 tritium is a key too...
 hydrogen fusion results is not known, and Ed propose some successive
 fusion to deuterium, tritium, helium, and why not more...(it is not clear
 for me)
 not far from the ladder of Brillouin.

 maybe Ni62/64/60/61 specificities in E-cat will lead to some new key facts
 to sort out the theories...

 many keys, but many more doors.



 2014-08-31 20:51 GMT+02:00 Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.com:

 On Sun, Aug 31, 2014 at 10:06 AM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote:

 Hydrogen will most likely will preferably assume a metastable state in
 which  a one dimensional crystalline form of Rydberg matter is surrounded
  by a cloud of many electrons in orbit around a long string like core of
 many protons.


 Sounds vaguely like a hydroton.  ;)

 Eric

Re: [Vo]:LENR - dark mater - DDL connection--

Lack of gamma is a result of superabsorbsion in a  coherent system of SPPs.


On Sun, Aug 31, 2014 at 5:41 PM, Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.com wrote:

 On Sun, Aug 31, 2014 at 2:17 PM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:

 The best explanation for lack of gammas – the only explanation needed – is
 lack of fusion.


 I'm sooo tempted to collect statements from you along these lines for
 future gloating.  ;)

 Eric

RE: [Vo]:LENR - dark mater - DDL connection--

Eric,

 

These statements are in the archive so there is no need to collect them. There 
are many of them over the years, so there will be plenty to gloat over - if 
gammaless fusion is proved. 

 

My only excuse will be to say that if nuclear fusion - at low input energy, 
without gammas - is proved then it will consist of two simultaneous miracles. 
These are actually two completely separated miracles –not one which includes a 
subset.

 

The first is the fusion itself, which is a strong miracle if the probability is 
high - and the second is a previously unknown channel for shedding the immense 
energy of fusion events. That second one is actually a stronger miracle then 
the first one. Nuclear tunneling via QM is known to happen at low probability 
but it always involves a gamma channel.

 

Actually – it would be fabulous to be wrong on this point, but I am not worried 
in the least about that happening. Yet in November, if Mizuno backtracks and 
sez… oops... we had a bad meter earlier - and there really was helium, then mea 
culpa.

 

From: Eric Walker 

 

Jones Beene wrote:

 

The best explanation for lack of gammas – the only explanation needed – is lack 
of fusion.


I'm sooo tempted to collect statements from you along these lines for future 
gloating.  ;)

 

Eric

Re: [Vo]:LENR - dark mater - DDL connection--

Nanoplasmonic experiments can be performed that evoke nuclear reactions
through the use of laser irradiation of metallic nanoparticles. The
nanoparticles amplify, concentrate, focus and convert the photons from the
lasers into magnetic energy as described in my previous posts, for example
see this experiment:

http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1306/1306.0830.pdf

Laser-induced synthesis and decay of Tritium under exposure of solid
targets in heavy water.

In this nanoplasmonic experiment, tritium can be increased or reduced or
both simultaneously based on the parameters manipulated by the experimenter.

The metal used is sensitive to the degree of reflection of the laser light.
More reflection produces more reactivity.

The duration of the laser pulse also is a factor. I believe that tritium
production in Deuterium systems is a matter of timing related to an
incomplete reaction cycle.

In a system that flickers magnetically, and/or does not sustain a state of
Bose Einstein condensation will produce nuclear products. A good example of
this is the cavitation system that Mark LeClair has developed.

The experimenter in the referenced paper remarks as follows:

“The efficiency of nuclear processes occurring during the course of heavy
water electrolysis can depend on the character of roughness of the
electrode surfaces on a nanometer scale, the “spikiness” parameters [17,
18] in particular. Indeed, it is precisely in the regions of the sharpest
surface relief alterations that high electric field strengths making for
the acceleration of electrons and high mechanical stresses depressing the
activation barriers for electrochemical processes can both get realized.
This parameter is out of control in most experiments with electrolysis of
heavy water. On the contrary, laser ablation of metallic targets by
sub-nanosecond laser pulses leads to formation of self-organized
nanostructures (NS) on the target. The average size and density of NS
depends on laser fluence on the target and target material. Typical view of
such NS on Ti and Au target ablated in water with 10 ps laser pulses are
presented in Fig. 1.”


The paper is reflecting the rationale I gave for the formation of static
and dynamic nuclear active environments.

Clearly, uncontrolled creation of NAE is consistent with what happens in
many uncontrolled LENR systems using electrolysis. By the way to avoid
chance in NAE formation, in recent Misuno reactor experiments, Mizuno
preconditions his electrodes to form metal spikes to enable the static NAE
in the nanoplasmonic LENR process.

The authors of this paper has their own theory of what is going on, my
agreement will the author will vary on certain issues.

At the end of the day, uncontrolled random effects can increase and/or
decrease the creation and/or destruction of tritium. Tritium is not an
indicator of a hot fusion like reaction but instead shows that a marginal
system is flickering in terms of sustaining a nanoplasmonic LENR reaction.


On Sun, Aug 31, 2014 at 6:01 PM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:

  Eric,



 These statements are in the archive so there is no need to collect them.
 There are many of them over the years, so there will be plenty to gloat
 over - if gammaless fusion is proved.



 My only excuse will be to say that if nuclear fusion - at low input
 energy, without gammas - is proved then it will consist of two simultaneous
 miracles. These are actually two completely separated miracles –not one
 which includes a subset.



 The first is the fusion itself, which is a strong miracle if the
 probability is high - and the second is a previously unknown channel for
 shedding the immense energy of fusion events. That second one is actually a
 stronger miracle then the first one. Nuclear tunneling via QM is known to
 happen at low probability but it always involves a gamma channel.



 Actually – it would be fabulous to be wrong on this point, but I am not
 worried in the least about that happening. Yet in November, if Mizuno
 backtracks and sez… oops... we had a bad meter earlier - and there really
 was helium, then mea culpa.



 *From:* Eric Walker



 Jones Beene wrote:



 The best explanation for lack of gammas – the only explanation needed – is
 lack of fusion.


 I'm sooo tempted to collect statements from you along these lines for
 future gloating.  ;)



 Eric

Re: [Vo]:LENR - dark mater - DDL connection--

On Sun, Aug 31, 2014 at 3:01 PM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:

My only excuse will be to say that if nuclear fusion ... is proved then it
 will consist of two simultaneous miracles.


Yes -- agreed.


 Yet in November, if Mizuno backtracks and sez… oops... we had a bad meter
 earlier - and there really was helium, then mea culpa.


I don't think we need to detect helium to have fusion (in a manner of
speaking) -- we could have a nucleon capture of some kind as well, leading
to spallation and so on.  Helium is relevant to PdD systems (and possibly
NiD systems, I suppose).

Eric

[Vo]:A parabola will focuses the beam

[quote=Asterix][quote=JoeP]If not nuclear, it probably will not
revolutionize anything, but it certainly is a little bit irresponsible to
not fully investigate.

These experiments are pretty cheap and are tabletop, so, so what? I like
what the Martin Fleischmann Memorial Project is doing. You guys and
gals(?) go! And if you happen to find the last apple within arm's reach,
we all benefit hugely![/quote]

To be blunt, after 25 years of someone trying to show that it's real, I
wonder if we don't have more of a case of digging through a manure pile
trying to find a pony, than picking an apple.

I tend to look at what MFMP are doing as more of an indictment of Celani's
suspect work than proof of LENR. He gave them the magic wires, vetted
their reactor design and they got nothing. So now it's on to powder...

As to the conspiracy theorists, I'm not on some anti-LENR payroll--I have
nothing to gain by LENR acceptance or repudiation. In the beginning, I was
willing to entertain the idea that Rossi or Defkalion might actually have
something worth looking into, but that's increasingly less likely as time
goes by.[/quote]

Workable engineering concepts are required to make a LENR system work. The
KEY engineering concept is the production of nano-spicks on the surface of
5 micron microparticles.

The spikes should be as sharp as possible to concentrate the projection of
the magnetic fields produced by SPPs formed by these sharp nanostructures.
These nanostructures should be in the form of a parabola for the proper
projection and focusing of the magnetic field in a tight beam.

see

Surface plasmon polariton beam focusing with parabolic nanoparticle chains

http://www.opticsinfobase.org/view_article.cfm?gotourl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Eopticsinfobase%2Eorg%2FDirectPDFAccess%2FC327714B%2DDEF1%2D76CB%2D49D0E086EF9282B0%5F134709%2Foe%2D15%2D11%2D6576%2Epdf%3Fda%3D1%26id%3D134709%26seq%3D0%26mobile%3Dnoorg=

[quote]Summarizing, we have realized the efficient SPP focusing with
parabolic chains of gold nanoparticles. The influence of excitation
wavelength and geometrical system parameters has been investigated with the
help of LRM imaging, demonstrating good stability and robustness of the
focusing effect. Numerical simulations based on the Green’s tensor
formalism have shown very good agreement with the experimental results,
suggesting the usage of elliptical corrections for parabolic structures to
improve their focusing of slightly divergent SPP beams.

The SPP splitting effect observed with narrow parabolic structures might
also be found useful
in SPP micro-optics.[/quote]

RE: [Vo]:LENR - dark mater - DDL connection--

From: Eric Walker 

Jones Beene wrote:

My only excuse will be to say that if nuclear fusion ... is
proved then it will consist of two simultaneous miracles.

Yes -- agreed.
Yet in November, if Mizuno backtracks and sez… oops... we
had a bad meter earlier - and there really was helium, then mea culpa.
I don't think we need to detect helium to have fusion (in
a manner of speaking) -- we could have a nucleon capture of some kind as
well, leading to spallation and so on.  

Spallation events would have been detectable before now, if they were
happening. The major “blind spot” in prior radiation testing has been the
x-ray range below 10 keV. Spallation and the O-P effect involve much higher
energy than the blind spot.

Helium is relevant to PdD systems (and possibly NiD systems,
I suppose).

Curiously, helium can technically result from a non-fusion event in either
system.

Alpha decay is the best example of that. Therefore helium alone does not
signal fusion. If we were to find that LENR involves a new form of alpha
decay from an element like nickel, not known to be in that category, then
that is NOT gammaless fusion.  

As an example - it has been mentioned before that iron has two stable
isotopes that are exactly an alpha particle of mass-energy removed from two
corresponding nickel isotopes. How this could be accomplished is anyone’s
guess, but it is a physical certainty that it would not be fusion; and…
cough, cough … there is the claim of finding iron in the ash of the Rossi
reactor.

Jones


attachment: winmail.dat

[Vo]:SMP - surface magnon-polariton

SMP - surface magnon-polariton

http://umexpert.um.edu.my/file/publication/00011262_88557.pdf

Surface polaritons with arbitrary magnetic and dielectric materials: new
regimes, effects of negative index, and superconductors.

A surface magnon-polariton can be excited by both p- and s-polarized light
if at least one of the layers is a magnetic material. We present general
expressions of the tangential wave vectors of s- and p-polarized light at
an interface of two media. Analysis reveals additional new regimes of
surface polariton resonances with magnetic materials for s- and p-polarized
light. The tangential wave vectors are found to be equal in magnitude to
the normal wave vectors at surface polariton resonances. The spatial
distributions of the fields at resonant enhancement and the spectra of the
tangential wave vectors are studied for different dielectric permittivities
and magnetic permeabilities of the two media. If one of the media has
dispersive dielectric function and permeability function, additional
surface polariton resonance peaks appear for both s- and p polarizations.
For a medium with a superconductor, the tangential component increases
asymptotically at lower frequencies, providing subwavelength capability at
the terahertz regime.


Nickel is a magnetic material on the nanoscale even when the temperature of
the system is above its curie point. The magnetic properties of nickel are
required to induce the proper kind of polaritons. Dipole motion is a more
effective method of polariton excitation and pumping. Pressurized hydrogen
serves as the dielectric.

Re: [Vo]:how to filter out users in Gmail

2014-08-31 Thread Lennart Thornros

You are right. Whoever wrote Live by your believes and let others live by
theirs is a far wiser guy than those who need others to support their
beliefs or they get worried. Do not be so worried.

Best Regards ,
Lennart Thornros

www.StrategicLeadershipSac.com
lenn...@thornros.com
+1 916 436 1899
202 Granite Park Court, Lincoln CA 95648

“Productivity is never an accident. It is always the result of a commitment
to excellence, intelligent planning, and focused effort.” PJM


On Sun, Aug 31, 2014 at 1:23 AM, Kevin O'Malley kevmol...@gmail.com wrote:



 On Sat, Aug 30, 2014 at 10:39 PM, Lennart Thornros lenn...@thornros.com
 wrote:
 Yes, Kevin we all have our beliefs.
 ***To quote someone on another thread whom I am sure you would consider
 wise, Live by your believes and let others live by theirs.  My beliefs
 tell me to spread the good news of Christ to others.  Thank you for the
 endorsement of my course of action, which is, after all, simply following
 what God told us to do.


 Have you ever heard about throwing stone sitting in a glasshouse.
 ***Have you ever once considered thinking something through rather than
 quoting some cliche?  Or is that a selection of your supposed strategic
 leadership?

Re: [Vo]:LENR - dark mater - DDL connection--

Lack of fusion cannot be claimed over all of the LENR experiments.  He,
Tritium, gamma, and transmutation have all been reliably reported.  You
cannot simply brush away these good, and in many cases replicated,
experiments simply because you find the Mizuno results personally
satisfying.

I find the Mizuno results to be compelling in the case of excess heat.  The
Ni-D system is also where Dennis Cravens is reporting excess heat, and with
a similar COP.  The Mizuno gas composition data is refutable (by similarity
to control) and has not been replicated.

It is interesting to speculate that DDL and fusion may both contribute heat
in more or less proportion depending on the conditions.  We know that early
on Rossi had problems with gamma emission in his Ni-H (D?) system.  Later
it seemed that gammas showed up only in the startup and shutdown of his
reactor.  Could it be that the gamma was present when the conditions were
right for fusion and the excess heat during the main output was simply from
sending H/D into the DDL state?  It is an interesting, ironic conjecture.
 If such is the case, then H should work as well as D, because it is
unlikely that the extra neutron in the D will have much affect on the DDL
states or the ability of the electron to transition into them.

To relegate Storms' theory to being brain-dead is the pot calling the
kettle black.  You have not proposed anything that suggests how energy that
is coupled out of an atom to take it into a DDL state is dissipated.  There
is so much energy in sending the H/D atom into a DDL state [if not, then
you have no argument that the excess heat is from DDL]  that it must
somehow be split among many atoms all at once or taken out serially by some
mechanism.  Those that are close to the DDL solution math insist that
photons cannot be used to transition in the DDL states (inadequate angular
momentum in DDL electrons - Meulenberg).  I think Ed Storms provides a
mechanism for serially removing the energy from the atom that is a match
made in heaven.  The hydroton is a multi-atom coupled resonant system -
just the kind of evanescent coupling needed to move H atoms into DDL
states.  Even if fusion is rare, the hydroton may be the mechanism for
shrinking the H/D into the deep DDL state.  If hydroton DDL shrinkage is
happening, then it is likely that the hydroton is going to shrink multiple
atoms in unison, making the pico-molecules of Meulenberg a highly likely
result, and fusion likely to occur.

Why invent a fusion pathway when you do not need one to show gain? Going to
the DDL is sufficient to explain thermal gain.


Heat / mole of He produced suggests much greater heat per event than DDL
can explain by itself, so DDL is not sufficient to explain the thermal
gain. The heat-He correlates to nearly the 24MeV of a D-D fusion event in a
Pd-D system.  Even if the 24MeV per event were off by an order of
magnitude, it would still be 3 times what is achievable via DDL.  So we
know that DDL cannot be responsible for the Pd-D data.  It doesn't mean
that DDL is not a part of the puzzle, just not the whole puzzle.  Maybe it
is a bigger part of the puzzle in Ni-H(D).

Jones, you are standing on a stool with only 1 leg - you have more juggling
to do to substantiate your position.

Bob Higgins

On Sun, Aug 31, 2014 at 3:17 PM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:

   *From:* Bob Higgins



 One more facet of the DDL connection is that chemically bound DDL
 molecules are entirely possible - such as D^D and D^D^.  Meulenberg
 proposes that these pico-molecules will fuse in 10s of picoseconds.



 The problem with this hypothesis is simple. Mizuno presented the most
 robust experiment in the history of LENR – a full 600% more gain than the
 next best experiment (Roulette/Pons) and guess what – no sign of fusion. No
 mass-4. No gammas. But plenty of excess heat.



 If there was a route to fusion via DDDL - then it should have shown up in
 the thirty days of the Mizuno experiment. Since there was no evidence of
 fusion in the most important experiment since 1989, it is fair to say that
 we should focus elsewhere.



 Why invent a fusion pathway when you do not need one to show gain? Going
 to the DDL is sufficient to explain thermal gain. If we stop there, then we
 do not need Storm’s brain-dead explanation for lack of gammas.



 The best explanation for lack of gammas – the only explanation needed – is
 lack of fusion.



 Jones

Re: [Vo]:SunCell - Initial Replication Attempt

Hi Jack,

That is unfortunate.  We need to find a schematic for this spot welder or
open it up and create one.  It could be the secondary is just grounded to
the ground pin.  If so, we need to know how it is grounded.  Ground loops,
when such high currents are involved, can ruin your test equipment that is
also grounded in the worst case.  Strictly speaking there should be no
ground current.  However, I have seen equipment being damaged by ground
loops when the setup was simply connected to the right connections, but in
the wrong order of connection.

Better we step back and do a little more research on the circuit for the
welder you have.  I will look to see if I can find anything online.

Bob

On Sun, Aug 31, 2014 at 3:53 PM, Jack Cole jcol...@gmail.com wrote:

 Hi Bob,

 Unfortunately, I do not get infinite resistance.  On the plugin ground
 pin, I get 1 ohm on the bottom electrode bar and the top bar I get
 different behavior.  Specifically, when the top and bottom electrodes are
 close together, but not touching, I get infinite resistance between the top
 bar and ground pin.  When the top bar is pulled up higher away from the
 bottom bar, I get resistance.  Is this a safety mechanism perhaps?  I get
 infinite resistance between the other connectors on the plugin and the bars.

[Vo]:OT: Oscilloscope art by Jerobeam Fenderson

2014-08-31 Thread H Veeder

Art created with an oscilloscope

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YqSvkNjWnnQ

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l8m5L2gqHPw

Harry

RE: [Vo]:OT: Oscilloscope art by Jerobeam Fenderson

2014-08-31 Thread Orionworks - Steven Vincent Johnson

Wow!

Outstanding!

Thanks Harry.

Steve

-
From: H Veeder

Art created with an oscilloscope 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YqSvkNjWnnQ

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l8m5L2gqHPw

Harry

RE: [Vo]:LENR - dark mater - DDL connection--