On May 2, 2013, at 9:54 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com wrote:
I think what people are saying: The concept of science works but the
application frequently sucks!
Well, also that the method is not perfect. It works sometimes but not other
Murray wrote: Maybe you and Lomax have already long reached an impasse,
talking right past each other?
You are right. We have hashed this over several times, and ceased to make
any progress a long time ago. After all, the discussion is about results
mostly a decade or more old. It was hashed out
LENR+ is so 2011. I think the future is in LENR++ or maybe objective LENR.
Nickel and light water are certainly easier to obtain than Pd and heavy
water, but you still have to mine nickel, and refine it. LENR++ uses
ordinary soil and tap water. Just mix the dirt with water 2:1 by mass in an
empty
On Sat, May 04, 2013 at 07:26:42PM -0400, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com wrote:
Consequently, I for one will not continue the discussion.
Me neither! I promise to shut up.
Have any of you personally been able to reproduce anomalous
heat generation in your own
Let me clarify my pithy and brief comment. Yes the scientific method
works fine when applied to studies that have no importance to anyone
other than the person doing the study. However, once the subject
becomes important to a larger group, such as global warming or cold
fusion, to give
On May 6, 2013, at 7:28 AM, Eugen Leitl wrote:
On Sat, May 04, 2013 at 07:26:42PM -0400, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com wrote:
Consequently, I for one will not continue the discussion.
Me neither! I promise to shut up.
Have any of you personally been able to
On Mon, May 06, 2013 at 08:04:57AM -0600, Edmund Storms wrote:
On May 6, 2013, at 7:28 AM, Eugen Leitl wrote:
On Sat, May 04, 2013 at 07:26:42PM -0400, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com wrote:
Consequently, I for one will not continue the discussion.
Me
Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com wrote:
However, once the subject becomes important to a larger group, such as
global warming or cold fusion, to give recent examples, the method is
distorted and does not work.
I would say it does not work as well. It works to some extent. After all,
cold
Eugen, here is a list of my publications. I wonder why you limit
youself to peer reviewed publications. I have been working in science
for 65 years and have never found a peer reviewed publication to be
more useful than other sources. A trained scientist should be able to
tell what is
On Mon, May 06, 2013 at 08:38:23AM -0600, Edmund Storms wrote:
Eugen, here is a list of my publications. I wonder why you limit
Thank you, I see I can get some of them online from LENR-CANR, which
is convenient.
youself to peer reviewed publications. I have been working in
In a field as
On May 6, 2013, at 3:49 AM, Joshua Cude wrote:
Murray wrote: Maybe you and Lomax have already long reached an
impasse, talking right past each other?
You are right. We have hashed this over several times, and ceased to
make any progress a long time ago. After all, the discussion is
No, Eric, this is not tiresome to us poor unwashed voorts. Except when it
occassionaly degenerates into a pissing contest, it is entirely interesting
to see ideas (many immediately shot down) spin out. It seems to me that
eventually some new useful insight, or synthesis might give either a
Well, thanks Joshua Cude -- maybe Lomax will provide a comparable review of
his heat-helium correlation claim -- together, the two contrasting reviews
might attract attention by experts -- historians of science will make
comparisons with similar conundrums, such as the actual identity of dark
Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.com wrote:
But if there was no clear excess heat, we have little reason to conclude
we have learned anything from the CR-39 experiments about the alpha
particle flux when there is excess heat.
I do not think they did calorimetry in most of these experiments. We
Eugen Leitl eu...@leitl.org wrote:
Were other investigators able to reproduce your results in
experimental setups of their own?
The best illustration of reproducibility between different labs is Fig. 3,
here:
http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/McKubreMCHcoldfusionb.pdf
- Jed
On Monday May 5 Joshua said [snip] LENR+ is so 2011. I think the future is in
LENR++ or maybe objective LENR. Nickel and light water are certainly easier to
obtain than Pd and heavy water, but you still have to mine nickel, and refine
it. LENR++ uses ordinary soil and tap water. Just mix the
Eric, ALL nuclear reactions generate heat. Alpha emission is a nuclear
reaction. Therefore, heat was generated. However, the rate of the
reaction was too small to make detectable heat from this reaction. The
only unknown is whether heat from a different reaction can occur.
We know that
Not if the active material is a few grams of highly enriched nickel-62 :-)
From: Roarty, Francis X
The funny thing about your comment is that
you just know 30 minutes after someone finally nails the working principle
behind these
Roarty, Francis X francis.x.roa...@lmco.com wrote:
The funny thing about your comment is that you just know
30 minutes after someone finally nails the working principle behind these
effects that they really will “Mcgiver” together a working example out of
off the shelf
Ed Storms states:
*“We know that when large amounts of heat are detected, alpha emission at a
comparable rate does not occur. Clearly, large heat production and alpha
emission are not related.”*
This could be a false assumption as follows:
When a thermalization mechanism that transfers nuclear
Of course, no statement can be made about any subject that does not
invite a counter argument. No idea about CF can be suggested that
cannot be shown to be false. Clearly, unless some triage is used to
sort through the arguments and some common sense is applied, the
effect will be
Joshua Cude states without any basis with or proof from experimentation:
“LENR+ is so 2011. I think the future is in LENR++ or maybe objective LENR.
Nickel and light water are certainly easier to obtain than Pd and heavy
water, but you still have to mine nickel, and refine it. LENR++ uses
what you say remind me what I've learned about markets, risk management.
most of the time financial models are right, but you lose all the cash gain
whan it worked when they get suddenly wrong.
one blackswan lost can kill all the benefit of the chicken farm.
2013/5/6 Edmund Storms
One of the advantages of Nanoplasmonics is that an experimental methodology
and associated tools have been developed that might impact on this sort of
experimental ambiguity.
This is why I recommend this science to you.
The recently referenced experiment on the acceleration of alpha decay shows
The alpha particles could be a precursor of the new fire.
Once the fire the starts less smoke is produced.
starting a fire with hand drill
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CF9GiK_T4PA
Or maybe alphas are like sparks for the starting the new fire
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_35kxuwjcTs
Harry
Ed Storms stated:
“ We need to consider ideas that are consistent with all that is known
about materials and about how CF behaves? Unless you can show some
consistency with what is known and observed, the ideas are a waste of time.
So, put your thinking cap back on.”
In the last few years,
Fran,
Have you considered using paragraphs as well as ellipses? It would make
you posts so much easier to read.
Ron
--On Monday, May 06, 2013 7:33 PM + Roarty, Francis X
francis.x.roa...@lmco.com wrote:
I guess my comment is biased heavily toward my pet theories regarding
geometry
I agree. In fact, I believe once gaps of a critical width can be made
on purpose in any material, CF will become totally reproducible.
Nevertheless, these gaps have to be made using the known laws even
though once created, a new phenomenon is initiated. This requirement
also applies to
The solution is to grow cracks in real time continuously. These renewable
cracks are defined by sub nanometer contact points in unlimited numbers in
the metal lattice. These drops are self-renewing and totally recyclable in
the same way that rain renews water in a puddle.
I believe this is what
OK Axil, this is not how I view the role of cracks. Presently these
gaps are produced by stress relief in the surface region of a
material. The stress can be caused by impurities, concentration
gradients, or temperature gradients. Regardless of the cause, the
process is totally
Axil,
Nice theory! Can you build on it or tie it back into your
plasmonics posit? I always liked wet cells from a neo Julian Schwinger
concept of sonoluminescence where the meniscus became the suppression plates
of a collapsing Casimir geometry such that trapped gasses were
I posted this video not long ago. The cracks are self assembling. watch
the video on how the nano-gaps form.
On Mon, May 6, 2013 at 6:41 PM, Roarty, Francis X francis.x.roa...@lmco.com
wrote:
Axil,
Nice theory! Can you build on it or tie it back into your
plasmonics
Sorry, here it is.
http://phys.org/news/2013-04-freedom-scientists-
nanoparticles-larger-real.html
Freedom of assembly: Scientists see nanoparticles form larger structures in
real time
The connection point between each of these nano-particles could be a NAE
site.
On Mon, May 6, 2013 at 7:07
On Monday 5/6/13 Ed said [snip] this is not how I view the role of cracks.
Presently these gaps are produced by stress relief in the surface region of a
material. The stress can be caused by impurities, concentration gradients, or
temperature gradients. The cracks are active at first while the
Stress generated cracks are important for the following reason. A NAE
can not exist in a normal chemical environment. Consequently a change
must take place. Any change requires energy because the chemical
environment is at its lowest energy. Stress supplies this energy.
When a crack
I believe that Fano resonance is what produces massive concentrations of
electric charge.
In the same way that gravity accumulates matter in an open ended and
unlimited extent so that the accumulation can destroys space/time in a
black hole; the same may be true for extreme concentrations of
http://www.flickr.com/photos/harvich/8707063671/
Pioneering the Applications of Interphasal Resonances
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/teslafy/
The application of heat in the Ni/H reactor is required to get the dipoles
moving.
If the LENR reaction was only due to Casimir force geometry, a cold Ni/H
reactor would produce power.
Heat must be applied to the Ni/H reactor to get the alternating current
going on the surface of the
http://www.flickr.com/photos/harvich/8716302328/
Pioneering the Applications of Interphasal Resonances
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/teslafy/
On Mon, May 6, 2013 at 10:34 AM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.comwrote:
Eric, ALL nuclear reactions generate heat. Alpha emission is a nuclear
reaction. Therefore, heat was generated.
Ha. Yes, I stand corrected. I think I had excess heat in mind. Also,
Jed brings up a good point about
Ed,
Could you find another name for hydroton that can be used with google?
That keyword is utterly swamped even if qualified by fusion.
-- Jim
On Mon, May 6, 2013 at 7:02 PM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com wrote:
Stress generated cracks are important for the following reason. A NAE can
On Mon, May 6, 2013 at 8:43 AM, ken deboer barlaz...@gmail.com wrote:
No, Eric, this is not tiresome to us poor unwashed voorts. Except when it
occassionaly degenerates into a pissing contest, it is entirely interesting
to see ideas (many immediately shot down) spin out.
I don't think the
I wrote:
Until I have convinced myself that this is correct on the basis of
something other than your assertion, I won't be able to follow you to your
conclusion of slow helium formation.
I should be more specific. What I'm hoping to do is come up with a
plausible case that we have not
I wrote:
1. The 4He evidence has been misinterpreted along the lines that
Hoffman suggests, and although there is a nuclear reaction of some kind, it
is not 4He but something else -- perhaps f/H in connection with tunneling.
2. The 4He evidence has been misinterpreted along the
On May 6, 2013, at 6:49 PM, Eric Walker wrote:
On Mon, May 6, 2013 at 10:34 AM, Edmund Storms
stor...@ix.netcom.com wrote:
Eric, ALL nuclear reactions generate heat. Alpha emission is a
nuclear reaction. Therefore, heat was generated.
Ha. Yes, I stand corrected. I think I had excess
I wrote:
Eric, you need to consider some basic requirements. If an energetic
particle is produced, such as an alpha, a second particle must be present
to carry away the momentum.
Yes -- we are in agreement here. There are various ways to accomplish this
apart from the Hydroton. There is an
From: Eric Walker
The 4He evidence has been misinterpreted along the lines that Hoffman suggests,
and although there is a nuclear reaction of some kind, it is not 4He but
something else -- perhaps f/H in connection with tunneling.
1. The 4He evidence has been misinterpreted along
Dear Vorticians,
In assessing the likelihood that Rossi's astounding success (claimed
success) with Ni-H heat is factual, his insistence that a single isotope is
responsible (to wit: nickel-62) is actually helpful to his cause. If true,
it would answer many questions about the lack of
On May 6, 2013, at 8:09 PM, Eric Walker wrote:
I wrote:
Eric, you need to consider some basic requirements. If an energetic
particle is produced, such as an alpha, a second particle must be
present to carry away the momentum.
Yes -- we are in agreement here. There are various ways to
49 matches
Mail list logo
