The rules/policies are absolutely ok when applied by editors with
common sense or for non-controversial articles.
For articles on controversial topics a group of editors will feel that
they have to protect the article from evil POV pushers. They have a
mission: Wikipedia must not expound fringe
Not to diminish the work done by ARPA-E, take a look at this from DARPA:
http://www.darpa.mil/NewsEvents/Releases/2012/09/10.aspx
It really gives me the creeps.
T
Jouni Valkonen jounivalko...@gmail.com wrote:
Yes you did say. You said that hot fusion researchers are trying to
'suppress' it and indeed hot fusion research is operating with extremely
big money.
As noted that was Abd, not me. However, it is true that the plasma fusion
scientists played a
... brave new world, indeed ... and they chose not to show the version with
the ray gun (high powered semiconductor laser array) ...
-Original Message-
From: Terry Blanton
Not to diminish the work done by ARPA-E, take a look at this from DARPA:
Not exactly stealthy...
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 10:17 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:
... brave new world, indeed ... and they chose not to show the version with
the ray gun (high powered semiconductor laser array) ...
-Original Message-
From: Terry Blanton
Not to
Maybe they should just go back to horses mules .. much cheaper.
--On Tuesday, September 11, 2012 9:07 AM -0400 Terry Blanton
hohlr...@gmail.com wrote:
Not to diminish the work done by ARPA-E, take a look at this from DARPA:
http://www.darpa.mil/NewsEvents/Releases/2012/09/10.aspx
It
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 9:12 AM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
Jouni Valkonen jounivalko...@gmail.com wrote:
Yes you did say. You said that hot fusion researchers are trying to
'suppress' it and indeed hot fusion research is operating with extremely
big money.
...
I suppose
Von: Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com
An: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Gesendet: 16:12 Dienstag, 11.September 2012
Betreff: Re: [Vo]:Cold fusion has been suppressed -- no evidence for a
conspiracy
Jouni Valkonen jounivalko...@gmail.com wrote:
Yes you did say.
Guenter Wildgruber gwildgru...@ymail.com wrote:
not over here (Germany). As far as i know, the MPP, which is the
biggest May-Planck-Institute, tried to replicate F/P and failed. so the
issue was settled.
I do not know about this test, but it would be ridiculous to reject cold
fusion based
Von: Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com
An: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Gesendet: 20:23 Dienstag, 11.September 2012
Betreff: Re: [Vo]:Cold fusion has been suppressed -- no evidence for a
conspiracy
Guenter Wildgruber gwildgru...@ymail.com wrote:
not over here
Guenter Wildgruber gwildgru...@ymail.com wrote:
This is a completely different institute, and one probaly has to know the
intricacies of the Max-Planck organization.
The same or different, you would think that the Director's opinions might
have weight when it comes to accepting or rejecting
On Sun, Sep 9, 2012 at 12:48 AM, Jouni Valkonen jounivalko...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello,
there was some discussion about this alleged perpetual motion machine. It
was elegant, perhaps too elegant, and therefore it is probably a fake.
Evolution of perpetual motion
On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 11:48 AM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.comwrote:
No, I hope it withers away.
I appreciate the sentiment. But I'll place myself on record for thinking
that Wikipedia is incredible. It is one of the handiest things to come
about in the last ten or so years.
Obviously
Cavitation-Induced Fusion: Proof of Concept - Max I. Fomitchev-Zamilov
Cavitation-induced fusion (also known as bubble fusion or sonofusion) has
been a topic of much debate and controversy and is generally (albeit
incorrectly) perceived as unworkable. In this paper we present the
theoretical
For my own edification I continued to think about the issue of
potential energy gain and loss and I realise it depends on the
interatomic forces within the spring.
Cooling the compressed spring reduces the vibrations of the atoms in
the spring, and allows the interatomic forces to strengthen
Low Energy Neutron Reaactions (LENRs)
http://www.slideshare.net/lewisglarsen
-- or at --
http://www.slideshare.net/slideshow/embed_code/14256059?hostedIn=slidesharereferer=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.slideshare.net%2Flewisglarsen#
- proposes that high temp superconductivity may develop in surface
plasmons
Lasers not necessary? Hasn't Celani been reporting a negative temperature
coefficient of resistance that appears about the time his processed wires
begin producing heat? I might have this wrong ...
Jeff
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 9:59 PM, pagnu...@htdconnect.com wrote:
Low Energy Neutron
To answer my own question: yes, here
http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/CelaniFcunimnallo.pdf on page 3, in item (3)
of the numbered list.
Of course, it could be some unrelated effect; but decreasing electrical
resistance with increasing temperature is very odd, and it certainly is an
interesting
Doesn’t LeClair’s cavatation patent take the Quantum Potential Corporation
out of the fusion from cavitation business?
Cheers: Axil
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 10:46 PM, pagnu...@htdconnect.com wrote:
Cavitation-Induced Fusion: Proof of Concept - Max I. Fomitchev-Zamilov
Cavitation-induced
Jeff,
The reports cited in the presentation are of hi-temp superconductivity (I
believe), rather than just non-monotonic resistivity vs. temp phenomena.
It may be worth looking at the recently reported hi-temp superconductivity
seen in fractal materials - e.g.,
High-temperature
Axil,
Good question. Does anyone know the patent attorney, David French?
I believe he specializes in these issues.
-- LP
Axil wrote:
Doesnt LeClairs cavatation patent take the Quantum Potential Corporation
out of the fusion from cavitation business?
Cheers: Axil
On Tue, Sep 11, 2012
21 matches
Mail list logo