Re: [Vo]:Let's continue to think about passive vs active approach to LENR 's existentil problems

Nothing I have seen reported, has *proven* Rossi has no technology now and never had any. Maybe it is not as good as Rossi claims. Maybe even Rossi is deceiving himself. Maybe Rossi has "guilded the lilly" - has deceptively over reported his results. I don't believe Focardi was deceived - I

Re: [Vo]:Cheap Solar Power (harvard.edu)

The problem with the strategy presented by Smith/Edison is that the big electric power utility companies have *already made the big investment in distribution*. Smith describes a new installation. The technology for the power management he describes is available today - you can go out and buy it

Re: [Vo]:Re: Cheap Solar Power (harvard.edu)

Incentives and net metering were great... I say were. They are now largely a thing of the past. When I lived in S. FL, I installed a grid-tie system (5.4 kW rated) and was able to net 0 kWH for about 6 months out of the year (3500 sq ft home with two high efficiency A/C units). I got incentives

Re: [Vo]:Cheap Solar Power (harvard.edu)

You say the solution is obvious, but that is far from the case. If the power companies charged everyone a flat fee for their share of the grid maintenance and repayment of capital, I guarantee you that the bills of the apartment dwellers would go way up. The power company makes money on each kWH

Re: [Vo]:Cheap Solar Power (harvard.edu)

of increased utility prices. Yay for rich people and their solar > installations though, I guess. > > On Wed, May 4, 2016 at 4:17 PM, Bob Higgins <rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> There is a residential solar power war going on now (see Scientific >> American iss

Re: [Vo]:Cheap Solar Power (harvard.edu)

There is a residential solar power war going on now (see Scientific American issue 11/2014) between homeowners having rooftop solar panels and the power companies. The power companies believe they have a right to supply all of your power and are charging additional fees if you have panels on your

Re: [Vo]:Is the proton friable?

After having read Dufour's paper, it appears that it is complete hypothesis on the basis of the fact that the other forces seem to converge in magnitude at a sub-nuclear scale - so why shouldn't gravitation? He presents no apparent data that his hypothesis has any basis. Gravitation would have

Re: [Vo]:LENR INFO- a smaller, bitter issue

Russ, have you estimated the number of people that would have standing in such a case against the USPTO? I think, to have standing, an inventor would have had to make a LENR patent application that was rejected. They may be later found to have been rejected for reasons other than LENR, but

Re: [Vo]:Is the proton friable?

rent would have to be flowing as a tube in the direction of the axis of the pore - in which case, what is the current flowing from and to? Any thoughts on these? On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 11:05 AM, Jones Beene <jone...@pacbell.net> wrote: > *From:* Bob Higgins > > Ø What

Re: [Vo]:Is the proton friable?

Hi Jones, What you describe is certainly an interesting and scary proposition - that protons could be sheared or broken apart. However, it is hard to imagine a number of thing in this hypothesis and that of Olafssen/Holmlid. First of all, where did the potential energy come from to put two

Re: [Vo]:LIVE ON YOUTUBE: Martin Fleischmann Memorial Project: *GlowStick* 5.3 - Ready to power climb

Another possibility is the conduction of alumina. Alan has measured the electrical conductivity of alumina to increase rapidly above 900C. The heater coils are wound directly on the mullite reactor tube and they are covered with thick alumina tubes. When the outer cover alumina tube is over

Re: [Vo]: MFMP GS5.3 - a replication

. > > Dave > > > -Original Message- > From: Eric Walker <eric.wal...@gmail.com> > To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com> > Sent: Tue, Apr 12, 2016 12:12 am > Subject: Re: [Vo]: MFMP GS5.3 - a replication > > On Mon, Apr 11, 2016 at 1:35 PM, Bob Hig

[Vo]: MFMP GS5.3 - a replication

h an experiment over so long a period. Jones, can you elaborate on Holmlid's call for replication? On Mon, Apr 11, 2016 at 12:09 PM, Jones Beene <jone...@pacbell.net> wrote: > *From:* Bob Higgins > > Since the Rossi/IH announcements, Vortex-L has been deluged with useless > and bor

[Vo]: A plea for patience

Since the Rossi/IH announcements, Vortex-L has been deluged with useless and boring posturing and insulting angry remarks. In a month we will all wonder why we wasted so much of our collective time - like waving fans in the vacuum of space to improve the convective cooling. Soon data will emerge

Re: [Vo]:Next Big Future - goes out on a limb

ossi’s (and all > pioneers of cold fusion) history has demonstrated is required and all their > grousing about and poking at Rossi to reveal all is science at its worst > but also sadly normal condition. > > > > *From:* Bob Higgins [mailto:rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com] > *Sen

Re: [Vo]:Next Big Future - goes out on a limb

It is amazing that there are so many lofty positions being taken on the basis of little-to-no released data. If IH and Rossi each believe their positions, then I say, "PUBLICLY RELEASE THE RAW DATA ALONG WITH OBSERVER COMMENTS". Play chicken. See who objects to release of the data. Let the

Re: [Vo]:Press Release - Cold Fusion (LENR) Verified - Inventor SuesIndustrial Heat, LLC.

e...@pacbell.net> wrote: > *From:* Bob Higgins > > Don't get me wrong, Tom Clarke did good forensic research and wrote a good > paper. In Clarke's comment about the translucency, he states: > > "This error is impossible to quantify because it depends on the heater &

Re: [Vo]:Press Release - Cold Fusion (LENR) Verified - Inventor SuesIndustrial Heat, LLC.

gt; alumina emissivity. Thus the argument for high differential COP used by the > Report as additional evidence falls and both the COP and differential COP > are as expected for a system with no excess heat. > > > > *From:* Bob Higgins > > > > As I have previously point

Re: [Vo]:Press Release - Cold Fusion (LENR) Verified - Inventor SuesIndustrial Heat, LLC.

Jones, As I have previously pointed out, Clarke's analysis is flawed in terms of COP analysis - perhaps as badly as the analysis by the Lugano researchers. Failure to recognize and account for the transmitted radiation through the outer envelope is a BIG error. Insufficient data was taken and/or

Re: [Vo]:Rossi's customer

It is interesting to note that address is right next door to a Pepsi beverage plant. On Wed, Apr 6, 2016 at 8:32 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > One of the legal documents lists Rossi's customer: > > >

Re: [Vo]: Lets work out some useful definitions

Jones, It sounds like my understanding of IRH is wrong and I need to find the source of the description. Can you point to a particular paper, where IRH is described? Perhaps by Lawandy or Miley? From what you described, it doesn't sound like IRH is a plausible state of condensed matter. In

Re: [Vo]: Lets work out some useful definitions

See below... On Tue, Apr 5, 2016 at 4:29 PM, Bob Cook <frobertc...@hotmail.com> wrote: > Bob Higgins etal. > > I agree that the definitions are confusing. I have understood that > Rydberg matter refers to an ionic state of an element where there are no > associate

[Vo]: Lets work out some useful definitions

e can spontaneously form from the RM state because we are talking about condensed matter changing state all at once, and the resulting state, while being highly dense, is also HIGH energy. Bob Higgins On Tue, Apr 5, 2016 at 8:58 AM, Jones Beene <jone...@pacbell.net> wrote: > Bob, >

Re: [Vo]:has this document been saved to the LENR library?

Jones, isn't there a distinction between [UDH and UDD] and the [IRH and DDL]? As I understood it [IRH and DDL] are references to sub-ground states for an individual hydrogen atom. OTOH, [UDH and UDD] are condensed matter states of multiple atoms. Did I get this wrong? On Tue, Apr 5, 2016 at

Re: [Vo]:1MW plant test - best outcome

We should forget about the patho-skeptics (Cude, Yugo), as their tripe is not worth the time spent reading. I don't know why such people exist in the forums unless they are getting paid to help slow development of LENR. I can't imaging that they get much enjoyment from the time they spend

Re: [Vo]:Re: Kamacite and natural fractionation of heavy nickel

igrams of zinc is sufficient and > the two together are synergetic since zinc operates in the lowest Rydberg > regime whereas either lithium or potassium operate at the 3x multiple of > 81.6 eV which is significantly more difficult to access, even at 1200 C. > > > > In s

Re: [Vo]:Re: Kamacite and natural fractionation of heavy nickel

See below ... On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 9:49 PM, Eric Walker <eric.wal...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 5:07 PM, Bob Higgins <rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > First of all, it is reasonable to presume that any Zn contamination would >>

Re: [Vo]:Re: Kamacite and natural fractionation of heavy nickel

Jones, While all of this Zn speculation is an interesting theory/hypothesis, it stemmed from a completely improbable hypothesis - that the 4.4% of measured 64Ni was due to contamination by Zn in Parkhomov's Sochi analyses. First of all, it is reasonable to presume that any Zn contamination would

Re: [Vo]:Re: Kamacite and natural fractionation of heavy nickel

Don't know if this will come through, but it is small... Here is the image of the label unwrapped from the jar: ​ On Sun, Mar 27, 2016 at 2:06 PM, Terry Blanton wrote: > Okay, without the noise: > > http://oi66.tinypic.com/b7bc5k.jpg > > On Sun, Mar 27, 2016 at 4:01 PM,

Re: [Vo]:Kamacite and natural fractionation of heavy nickel

This is an interesting prospect. 64Ni and 64Zn are not separable by even high resolution ICP-MS. HR-ICP-MS can have resolving powers up to about 10k, but separating 64Ni and 64Zn would require a resolving power of about 55k. It is also relatively difficult to separate Ni and Zn chemically.

[Vo]:Re: E-Cat progress

element should sum to 100%. It is likely that the graph on the the left did not come from ICP-MS, but rather from SIMS analysis. Bob Higgins On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 2:43 PM, Bob Cook <frobertc...@hotmail.com> wrote: > The AP test results at slide 14 did not make sense to me. In par

Re: [Vo]: E-Cat progress

ce > of BS out the window into the garden where it might do some good. > > > > The isotope in question was 62Ni. It was reported by two third-party > groups who did the assays. It's obviously not bogus. The question is how > it got there. There is no need to presume that t

Re: [Vo]:Re: Parhomov paper

We could ask Parkhomov through Bob Greenyer if the Ni powder he used was enriched in 64Ni. However, as far as we know, and in particular during these reported runs, Parkhomov was on a shoestring budget that would have precluded buying isotopically enriched Ni. As far as we know all of his

Re: [Vo]: EM Drive(s)

ition inside the EM Drive might be made, a simple small amount of > crystalline Li2D2 could well provide more available reactant than what the > ordinary copper which always has some tramp H2 the EM Drive is made of > holds. > > > > *From:* Bob Higgins [mailto:rj.bob.higg...@gmai

Re: [Vo]: EM Drive(s)

I have not analyzed Shawyer's cavity design to understand what resonant mode is responsible for his thrust, and what other resonant cavity modes are supported by the cavity. The microwave oven magnetron can be pulled in frequency somewhat by a highly coupled resonant mode. You want to make sure

Re: [Vo]: EM Drive(s)

You can get about a 6% improvement in Q of the resonator by plating several skin depths of Ag on top of the Cu. This is frequently done to reduce filter loss where the loss is dominated by metal losses. It is possible to choose resonant cavity modes that have higher Q due to less coupling to the

Re: [Vo]:Re: Parhomov paper

be a significant observation. I wonder if Ni-64 is significantly > less stable than the rest of the Ni isotopes and has a long half life that > we do not know about. It may like cold neutrons. It would transmute to > Ni-65 which decays with a beta to Cu-65 which is stable. I do not know

Re: [Vo]: EM Drive(s)

have done. It is a marvelous mystery and perhaps someday I will participate. For now, I am trying to stay focused on LENR. Bob On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 7:21 PM, Eric Walker <eric.wal...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 11:47 AM, Bob Higgins <rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com>

Re: [Vo]:Re: Parhomov paper

undertaking. Properly funded, it could be built in 1-2 months, but it may take another 2 months of test runs to produce an accurate thermal model for it (that is the hardest part). On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 3:08 PM, Jones Beene <jone...@pacbell.net> wrote: > *From:* Bob Higgins > > Ø > &

[Vo]: EM Drive(s)

My understanding, and I could be wrong, is that the thrust Shawyer calculates and measures from his devices is several orders of magnitude higher than what could be obtained from photon radiation recoil - even if all of the generated RF were radiated unidirectionally. A small leak of RF would

Re: [Vo]: Bremsstrahlung experimental note

Muons with less than about 4MeV are not going to escape the reactor. Cosmic muons are average 2GeV. No magnetic field that I could generate is going to significantly deflect either of these. On Sun, Mar 13, 2016 at 11:39 AM, Axil Axil wrote: > @Bob > > Use a magnetic shield

Re: [Vo]: Bremsstrahlung experimental note

gt; > If the counts are higher inside the lead cave, compared to outside (bare), > it is very likely that the source is muonic from the reactor, not cosmic - > and the target is lead. > > > > *From:* Bob Higgins > > > > I don't know if other Vorts thought of this already

[Vo]: Bremsstrahlung experimental note

the bremsstrahlung. Bob Higgins

Re: [Vo]: Radon not a likely explanation for GS5.2

Eric, I know the 610 keV peak is right where it should be. The scaling was done as a single multiplicative scale based on the 2.2 MeV peak in the source graph (I.E. 2-point scaling was not done). Once it was scaled, since the 610 keV peak was in the correct place, I presumed the others had been

[Vo]: Radon not a likely explanation for GS5.2

Based on comments from Jones and others, I have done some analysis to determine if the GS5.2 signal in Spectrum-07 could have come from gamma produced from radon gas decay progeny. First, Alan Goldwater produced a map showing the areas where radon levels were high in his area. In the area of his

Re: [Vo]:Jeff Morriss detects radiation in Celani type experiment

n isotopes have gamma decay channels in addition to alpha. > The signatures are well known (around 6 MeV). > > > > Radon detection is a cottage industry in silicon valley > > > > > > *From:* Bob Higgins > > > > Jeff's setup may be more sensitive to radon

Re: [Vo]:Jeff Morriss detects radiation in Celani type experiment

Jeff's setup may be more sensitive to radon than Alan's. The NaI detector that Alan used is only sensitive to gamma, and not beta. Radon decay chains are primarily alpha and beta emissions. With the foil wrapped around Jeff's GM detector, he probably does not have much alpha sensitivity, but he

Re: [Vo]:Is Rossi sick?

I think at least an equal concern to radiation exposure is the incidental exposure to vented nickel tetracarbonyl vapor. I believe this can cause pulmonary distress at quite low concentrations. The tolerance for nickel tetracarbonyl may be quite low. The nickel tetracarbonyl can come from

[Vo]: Thermometry could be harder than thought

One of the characteristics of at least Ni-H LENR is the likelihood that the energy from the NAE is transported away from the reaction site via low energy radiation. This creates the possibility that, like seen in a microwave oven, the surrounding apparatus may become hotter than the source. Rossi

Re: [Vo]:Events at the end of Jiang's run #2, Fig. 3

The events leading up to the excess heat are also significant. Apparently in the heat treatment phase the H2 pressure was topped up with a tank to 500kPa and it stayed there a while. Then the pressure began to fall gradually to 300kPa where, at about 14:15, the pressure was topped up again to

[Vo]:New paper from Jiang in Chinese

=0B5Pc25a4cOM2X1F6TjJ1RkI5eGc Bob Higgins

Re: [Vo]:New paper from Jiang in Chinese

T3 is not connected. On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 4:10 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > Jack Cole wrote: > > T1 is in an air gap apparently. Possibly that could make more sense. >> > > Let's see . . . You mean it is installed in the middle of the "T-Bone" >

Re: [Vo]:New paper from Jiang in Chinese

- and in fact, there were some gems hidden in there. For your reading pleasure ... on my Google Drive https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B5Pc25a4cOM2bV9DLUp1MTkwU1U Bob Higgins

Re: [Vo]:Bremsstrahlung radiation

orber, and then the aluminum absorbs the 6 keV from the Fe, but gives off 1.5 keV Al characteristic x-ray in small amount. On Sun, Feb 28, 2016 at 7:58 PM, Jones Beene <jone...@pacbell.net> wrote: > *From:* Bob Higgins > > Ø Jones, the moral of the story is that the large amount of lead >

Re: [Vo]:Bremsstrahlung radiation

Jones, the moral of the story is that the large amount of lead (and it probably took a whole lot for the HPGe detector) converted some of the cosmic rays into a small *neutron* flux. MFMP did not measure neutrons. The Lugano evaluation only made intermittent spot checks for neutrons - they found

Re: [Vo]:Bremsstrahlung radiation

Well, this is partly true. Only charged particles will come to rest quickly and generate Bremsstrahlung. Protons, because they are so heavy compared to an electron, must be 1800x the energy of the electron to have the same initial velocity. Then the heavier proton will basically decelerate 1800

Re: [Vo]:Bremsstrahlung radiation

The sensors were placed relatively far away, and the total "dose" was low. For the electronic rate meters, they did not report what they detected, simply that it was below the alarm level that they had set (set where?). There was no spectrometry. On Sun, Feb 28, 2016 at 4:12 PM, H LV

Re: [Vo]:Bremsstrahlung radiation

OR, the materials in the stack of his flat plate reactor include a thermal resistance material. It doesn't have to be an air gap to provide the thermal resistance that would allow the fuel to be at a different temperature than the molten lead. On Sun, Feb 28, 2016 at 1:09 PM, David Roberson

Re: [Vo]:Heating of iron rod at proximity of spinning magnet

Magnetic materials have hysteresis in the B-H curve that causes work to be done when the magnetic field changes. On Sun, Feb 28, 2016 at 11:34 AM, H Ucar wrote: > I observed dramatic heating of iron/steel rods of 2-4 mm diameter at 5 to > 10 mm distance to spinning Nd magnet

Re: [Vo]:Implied personal radiation dose ?

I looked at the math again. The 5 uS was for the full 4pi steradians. It would be more like 0.4 uS for 1 steradian. A person would have to be really chubby or really close to subtend 1 steradian. On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 4:42 PM, Bob Higgins <rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com> wrote: > From t

Re: [Vo]:Implied personal radiation dose ?

>From the signal pulse, I estimate about 5 micro-Sieverts (uS) per steradian. So, it depends on how close you were. On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 3:13 PM, Russ George wrote: > If the radiation signal in the recent MFMP experiment holds up what does > this infer as a dose for

Re: [Vo]:Big surprise or big dud ?

16 at 8:39 AM, Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com> wrote: > Bob Higgins <rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com> wrote: > > >> OTOH, radiation measurements are an excellent metric. >> > > I do not think so. There are many reports of experiments that produced > massive e

Re: [Vo]:Big surprise or big dud ?

You on touching on one of the fundamental issues with experimental LENR - what do you use for a metric? If you want to progress from no results or poor results in your experiment, you need to have a way to measure whether you are getting better or worse as you introduce changes - you need a

Re: [Vo]:Electron plasma frequency

Like local DC magnetic fields, evanescent fields quickly decay to 0. These are non-propagating local fields. These are the fields responsible for inductance and capacitance. It is the opposite of a radiating field. On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 6:03 AM, Stephen Cooke

Re: [Vo]:Stimulated Beta decay of resonant nuclei?

You can get high electric fields at small scale, but that is not the same as having a total electric potential of 500kV. In a vacuum, a 500kV potential can generate 500keV electrons. It is interesting to think about in light of our recent measurement of high energy emissions from the Ni-H

Re: [Vo]:Big surprise or big dud ?

This is conceptually what we are thinking the distribution probably looks like, but I will have to see it in log scale. I will check. The peak would have to be below the 30keV cutoff seen in the GS5.2 spectrum. In the region of the GS5.2 spectrum just above 30keV, the slope just above 30keV has

Re: [Vo]:Big surprise or big dud ?

As I said in the article, the deepest DDL level (see JofCMNS vol-18 Paillet and Meulenberg) is about 509keV. That is energy TAKEN from the atom to shrink it into that deepest state. Suppose that all of that energy catalyzed out by evanescent means was suddenly released applied to a photon or a

Re: [Vo]:Big surprise or big dud ?

the Fusor > > > > > http://www.fusor.net/board/download/file.php?id=3829=a1b499f80621282e42d797de7b48729a > > > > There are several related threads on Fusor.net > > > > *From:* Bob Higgins > > > > I have never seen a properly taken gamma spectrum from the FF, have you? > > >

Re: [Vo]:Big surprise or big dud ?

That's an interesting question. The problem is that the FF is a known producer of neutrons, so you would need to measure the gamma spectrum on the far side of a neutron absorber. I have never seen a properly taken gamma spectrum from the FF, have you? On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 10:25 AM, Russ

Re: [Vo]:Stimulated Beta decay of resonant nuclei?

Santilli has also published a number of papers documenting massive (pun) transmutations. See: ADDITIONAL CONFIRMATION OF "INTERMEDIATE CONTROLLED NUCLEAR FUSION" WITHOUT HARMFUL RADIATIONS OR WASTE Ruggero Maria Santilli On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 9:07 AM, Stephen Cooke

Re: [Vo]:Big surprise or big dud ?

as a line in the gamma spectrum. That would nicely localize the source of the high energy. On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 8:33 AM, Eric Walker <eric.wal...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 9:11 AM, Bob Higgins <rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > Also, the

Re: [Vo]:Big surprise or big dud ?

il.com> wrote: > On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 11:12 AM, Bob Higgins <rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > There is presently no description in a hydroton theory for MeV+ electron >> emission. >> > > Although I do not find Ed Storms's theory persuasive, I suspect I kn

Re: [Vo]:Big surprise or big dud ?

I agree, this paper is a nice find. It used high end equipment - 4" NaI sensors and HPGe detector. It is presently beyond the scope of MFMP (at the moment). The advantage of the HPGe detector over the NaI is that it has a narrow detection bandwidth. The NaI detector has a 6.5% FWHM while the

Re: [Vo]:Big surprise or big dud ?

Alan has a full set of gamma check sources. Initial calibration was done with 137Cs. The energy scale drifted over time with heating from the reactor. The background always showed the 78keV x-ray and 1461 40K background peaks. I re-calibrated the energy scale on every file, resampled each to

Re: [Vo]:Big surprise or big dud ?

billion K and other parts are at 100 million K? The temperatures are just absurd. Can you check my calculations? On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 3:07 PM, Daniel Rocha <danieldi...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Bob Higgins, >> > > It could really be a black body radiation. Cons

Re: [Vo]:Big surprise or big dud ?

urface lower temperature. Most people decided this was a > consequence of their camera's settings. Did the Lugano team say this > was reason? > > Harry > > On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 2:54 PM, Bob Higgins <rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > I don't think that is the

Re: [Vo]:Big surprise or big dud ?

peaks which is the opposite of a > > blackbody distribution. > > > > Harry > > > > On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 12:45 PM, Bob Higgins <rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> One of the researchers that I discussed this with suggested that the > >&

Re: [Vo]:Big surprise or big dud ?

This is akin to ascribing a temperature to an electron ensemble having a certain distribution of kinetic energy. It is valid to consider it that way, but it is still the electron energy distribution that is determining the "characteristic temperature". May turn out to have some meaning if looked

Re: [Vo]:Big surprise or big dud ?

I would have to investigate this further, but this distribution as an E^2 in the denominator and the measured spectrum is approx. 1/E^2 . On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 11:05 AM, Daniel Rocha <danieldi...@gmail.com> wrote: > Bob Higgins, what about a > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relati

Re: [Vo]:Big surprise or big dud ?

all or due to radon variation. On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 10:57 AM, Jones Beene <jone...@pacbell.net> wrote: > *From:* Bob Higgins > > > > Ø > > Ø Where is your analysis that this spectrum could have come from a puff > of radon gas? > > > > Bob, Santa Cruz CA i

Re: [Vo]:Big surprise or big dud ?

10x more than that of you provided... > > Bob Higgins, in my work with Akito, I proposed that in cold fusion you > have, unlike the conventional fusion, the fusion of more than 2 nuclei. > There are not experiments with more than 2 nuclei fusioning (C12 is formed > by B8, which is

Re: [Vo]:Big surprise or big dud ?

Jones, Where is your analysis that this spectrum could have come from a puff of radon gas? There were longer background measurements that were entirely constant in photometric reduction. The indications of radon come primarily from the characteristic x-ray peak at 78keV (due to lead and bismuth

Re: [Vo]:Big surprise or big dud ?

d will become an important probe into the science behind the curtain. It will lead to replication and then to engineering. Bob Higgins On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 8:47 AM, Jones Beene <jone...@pacbell.net> wrote: > Well - OK... there is a tiny signal - but let's look at the counts per > min

Re: [Vo]:Re: the expected LENR Surprise Rossi's long time test over!

to handling the nickel tetracarbonyl. The MFMP plan is to run with about a 4x enrichment over natural Ni - not pure 62Ni. On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 6:58 PM, Jones Beene <jone...@pacbell.net> wrote: > *From:* Bob Higgins > > MFMP intends to find out by purchasing some 96% enriched 62Ni to run i

Re: [Vo]:Re: the expected LENR Surprise Rossi's long time test over!

The Lugano report states that the ~1g of fuel was poured into the reactor. However, I am told that when the researchers were retrieving a sample of ash, it was firmly attached to the tube walls. The reactor had to be broken open (maybe Rossi did this for them) and the ash sample was scraped off

Re: [Vo]:the expected LENR Surprise Rossi's long time test over!

While I have plenty of reasons to criticize the means of analysis of the Lugano experiment, the time it took to release the report is not something I would criticize. The analysis of the ash could only be conducted after the experiment was completed. After termination of the experiment,

Re: [Vo]: Orbo power packs

m less skeptical than > before that there is a real energy anomaly here. This does not mean that > Steorn is capable of harnessing it, since they have demonstrated no level > of high skill or acumen (other than in fundraising) so the door is still > open for others with the proper skills. >

[Vo]: Orbo power packs

It appears from the Steorn video description pointed to by Jones below that the the "power packs" behave as an unusual capacitor. The device appears to have separate charge and discharge modes. In charge mode the capacitor-like "power-packs" are "charged" from a high voltage source (2x9V battery

Re: [Vo]:SAWS Patent Program- Cold Fusion-Antigravity Device Prohibition

The USPTO was created by congress under authority to do so granted by the Constitution of the USA. They are responsible to the US congress. The mission granted to congress is: "To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the

[Vo]: BLP demo video

When Mills described his latest device, it wasn't clear to me how he was delivering the water along with his molten silver droplets. In the previous incarnation of his machine, he has porous solid pellets that were delivered into the discharge with water in the porosity. Now he has switched to

Re: [Vo]: BLP demo video

Sorry, I mis-counted my divisions ... the supercaps would expire after 16.7 MINUTES - they are only rated for 1M discharges, so at 1000/sec, you get 1000sec or 16.7 minutes. On Sun, Feb 7, 2016 at 8:45 AM, Bob Higgins <rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com> wrote: > One of the things I noticed

[Vo]: BLP demo video

One of the things I noticed in Mills' apparatus is his use of supercaps - in this case Maxwell P285 supercaps. Supercaps sound great until you dig into the details. Supercaps are somewhere between a battery and a capacitor in specifications. One of the core specifications that is a problem for

Re: [Vo]: BLP demo video

neering. > > Would you like to add to my speculations? > > Dave > > > > -Original Message- > From: Bob Higgins <rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com> > To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com> > Sent: Sun, Feb 7, 2016 11:11 am > Subject: Re: [Vo]: BLP demo video > >

Re: [Vo]: BLP demo video

idal silver internally. > > > > I am ever more convinced that what is being produced is ‘cooled fusion’ > perhaps hydrino cooled fusion. > http://atom-ecology.russgeorge.net/2016/02/04/cooled-fusion/ > > > > *From:* Bob Higgins [mailto:rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com] >

Re: [Vo]: BLP demo video

s of water it takes to get a MW-H? Only a very small amount is turning into hydrinos that cannot be recovered. On Sun, Feb 7, 2016 at 3:18 PM, Eric Walker <eric.wal...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sun, Feb 7, 2016 at 2:56 PM, Bob Higgins <rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > Ho

Re: [Vo]:BLP demo video

Dave, I am not sure what you say is entirely true. The 10V source can provide direct heating to a certain temperature, and can create a plasma from electron impact. A plasma is comprised of ionized gas. However, the ions don't need to be bare nuclei, and typically are not for anything but a

Re: [Vo]:BLP demo video

In the presentation, Mills showed the spectrum from Ag plasma. It included a soft x-ray band of lines and a UV band of lines. The spectrum did not look blackbody. If there was any evidence that Mills was producing something other than resistive plasma heating, *perhaps* the spectrum was some

Re: [Vo]:BLP demo video

Thank you, Axil, for this link. It is slide 49, in particular to which I am making reference. In this slide you can see the soft x-ray set of lines around 20-60nm, and another set of deep UV lines from 120-300nm. What I was saying is that the band from 120-300nm is explain-able from the 10V

Re: [Vo]:Re: BLP demo video

long at that temperature? Maybe it is a > metal hydrino compound [image: Smile] > > Bob Cook > > *From:* Bob Higgins <rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com> > *Sent:* Friday, February 05, 2016 8:03 AM > *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com > *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:BLP demo video > >

Re: [Vo]:BLP demo video

Mills talked about the source voltage being "only 10V", but 10V has at least the potential to deliver 10eV of energy. 10eV of energy is the energy of a photon at 124nm in the extreme UV. His "only 10V" statement was meant to dissuade the listener that high energy photons were not possible

<    1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   >