Re: [Vo]:Picking up the pieces

2017-07-08 Thread Che 
On Thu, Jul 6, 2017 at 9:01 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:
>
> What the Rossi experiments has shown over many years is that LENR in a
lattice is not workable because the reaction cannot be controlled. This
lack of control makes the E-Cat technology untenable. Rossi has realized
this and Rossi is will to let this knowhow fadeaway. The LENR reaction
wants to operate at the boiling point of the metal lattice (nickel) which
is 3000K. LENR is based on activation of nanoparticles in a dusty plasma.
Rossi has struggled to control the LENR reaction at low temperatures but he
always fails because LENR would invariably get to 3000K and meltdown his
reactor. So Rossi finally decided to use reactor structural material that
doesn't melt at 3000K. This material must be an insulator that does not
melt at 3000K. Mills has stumbled on the same reaction and his SunCell runs
at the vapor point of silver at only 2200C. Mills has solved the meltdown
problem is another way, he justs runs everything as a liquid without any
containment. Holmlid is on to the same LENR mechanism. There is nothing
unusual with metalized hydrogen. In the LENR reaction, metalized hydrogen
acts like any other metallic nanoparticle.
>
>
> Using a lattice for LENR is a losing proposition. The dusty plasma
approach to the LENR reaction is the only way to go. I beleive that Rossi
has settled on a high temperature  tube material that works: boron nitride,
a transparent isolator whose melting point is 3000C.



First I've read this (because I barely follow this e-List). Let us hope the
issue is exactly this. But it begs another one: we don't KNOW these things
for sure, *because some/most/all of the actors involved ARE HIDING THESE
FACTS FROM THE PUBLIC*. Because: possibility of huge financial pay-off at
the end of all this Sturm-und-drang for *some* people (them). Also because,
alongside the loot, comes eternal glory for one or a small number of
self-interested individuals...


Point being: this is not Science. This is 'corporate research' : AFAIC the
very bane of Science and the scientific method.
Not to mention being entirely egotistical and anti-democratic.

Re: [Vo]:Picking up the pieces

2017-07-08 Thread Che 
On Fri, Jul 7, 2017 at 7:12 PM, Kevin O'Malley  wrote:
>
> There is one conclusion that can be drawn.  Rossi submitted all kinds of
information to the court docket, under oath.   The claim against him was
fraud.
>
> The legal burden of proof in a civil case is "preponderance of the
evidence".   IH obviously couldn't even meet that level of proof.
>
> The legal burden of proof in a criminal case is much higher, "beyond a
reasonable doubt".   So if IH couldn't meet the lower standard there is no
chance Rossi is going to be prosecuted for fraud with all that juicy
evidence.  In effect, it is legal proof that Rossi is not a criminal fraud.


That's about the most cogent thing I've read on this e-List in a long time.

Re: [Vo]:Picking up the pieces

2017-07-08 Thread Axil Axil 
Looks like Rossi has gotten over the trial quickly.


   1. JPR
   July 8, 2017 at 7:00 AM
   

   Update?
   2. Andrea Rossi
   July 8, 2017 at 2:55 PM
   

   JPR:
   After the tests of today with my QuarkX I was probably the happiest man
   in the world.
   Warm Regards,
   A.R.


On Thu, Jul 6, 2017 at 2:19 PM, Jones Beene  wrote:

> According to Abd... "All claims dropped on both sides. It is as if the
> suit was never filed. All parties bear their own costs. The action of the
> Agreement was the consent of counsel to settlement without any court order
> other than dismissal, which is final."
>
> No agreements were included... so unless they present something otherwise
> in a joint statement, IH retains the original E-Cat License. No money
> changes hands.
>
> As for the future of the litigants, it looks like IH paid about $11
> million ++ for a License which according to them is worthless insofar as it
> was never shown to produce excess heat. Add to that the attorney fees and
> we see why many observers consider IH to be the big loser in this.
>
> That assumes the IP is really worthless, but it may have value in a
> surprising way, even if Rossi could never make it work. Here is the granted
> patent, and there are a number of applications not granted.
>
> https://www.google.com/patents/US9115913
>
> Darden raised much more than his losses on the Rossi fiasco and there is a
> small chance that he could make lemonade out of the Rossi lemons, using
> some of it. An interesting development in all of this will be the course
> that IH takes from here on with the remaining money. They are known to have
> been funding others in LENR all along.
>
> Of course IH could abandon the field altogether, but maybe they have a
> vision which transcends Rossigate. Possibly the best thing that could
> happen is for Randell Mills to demonstrate strong gain in that SunCell
> device. If it turns out that Mills device is arguably nuclear - it will not
> be covered by the hydrino IP. There have already been "inside" rumors that
> recent delays in the "Mills' Roadshow" are due to radioactivity showing up.
> This is expected in LENR but not in hydrino-tech and it could change the IP
> landscape.
>
> Footnote. Rossi's IP covers "Group 10 catalysts" which are nickel,
> palladium and platinum. It does not cover silver, which is being used by
> Mills and is Group 11. Silver is easily activated and perhaps it is
> activated by dense hydrogen. Mills' IP would not cover nuclear reactions.
> This puts him in a bind. If silver is required, but becomes activated, then
> there is an IP storm brewing.
>
> If I were advising Darden, it would be to look at quickly expanding the IP
> to fill the gap which exists when Mills can no longer hide the
> radioactivity of the SunCell.
>
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Picking up the pieces

2017-07-08 Thread Axil Axil 
surface plasmon polaritons are balls of light that form on the surface of
all types of metal nanowires. In order for these polaritons to form, the
nanowires must be insulated with an electrically insulating gas like
hydrogen,  polaritons are like ball lightning. When exposed to an intense
electrical field they become activated. The magnetic components of the
light that is contained by these polaritons are converted by this
activation into focused magnetic field lines.

On Sat, Jul 8, 2017 at 2:29 AM, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote:

> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_binding_energy
>
> *Nuclear binding energy* is the energy
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy> that would be required to
> disassemble the nucleus <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atomic_nucleus> of
> an atom <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atom> into its component parts.
> These component parts are neutrons <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutron>
>  and protons <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proton>, which are
> collectively called nucleons <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nucleon>. The 
> binding
> energy <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binding_energy> of nuclei is due to
> the attractive forces that hold these nucleons together, and it is always a
> positive number, since all nuclei would require the expenditure of energy
> to separate them into individual protons and neutrons. The mass
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass> of an atomic nucleus is less than
> the sum of the individual masses of the free constituent
> <https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/constituent> protons and neutrons
> (according to Einstein's equation E=mc2) and this 'missing mass' is known
> as the mass defect
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_binding_energy#Mass_defect>, and
> represents the energy that was released when the nucleus was formed.
>
> The energy produced by fusion and fission is excess exergy that comes from
> the reconfiguration of one type of element into another through the
> rearrangement of their nucleons.
>
> On Sat, Jul 8, 2017 at 2:17 AM, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> A proton or a neutron is made up of energy as per E=MC2. If a proton or a
>> neutron decays back into energy about 1 giga electron volts of pure energy
>> is produced. In the process of proton decay, Mesons are first produced,
>> they will decay into pions and then muons and finally electrons but along
>> the way of this chain of decays much energy is released as each type of
>> subatomic particle decays into other types.
>>
>> See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proton_decay
>>
>> Holmlid has discovered experimentally that protons will decay no matter
>> what science thinks now.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Jul 8, 2017 at 1:59 AM, bobcook39...@hotmail.com <
>> bobcook39...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Sent from Mail <https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> for
>>> Windows 10
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *From: *Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com>
>>> *Sent: *Friday, July 7, 2017 11:24 AM
>>> *To: *vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
>>> *Subject: *Re: [Vo]:Picking up the pieces
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Axil—
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Most of your answers I do not understand because of the use of non
>>> meaningful terms IMHO, for example, proton neutron decay, activated surface
>>> plasmon polaritons, magnetic power, insulating bosonic gas, muon catalyzed
>>> fission, nuclear binding energy is stored, condensation of this energy, etc.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Bob Cook
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I agree with much of your assessment of the Rossi effect, what you call
>>> the Rossi reactor.  I   agree that there is a history of high
>>> temperature reactions, but many of these have been associated with the Pd-D
>>> system, which I consider entails a different physical mechanism for the
>>> conversion of potential energy to kinetic energy.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> LENR gets its energy from proton and neutron decay caused by intense
>>> nano magnetism. The  physical mechanism involves the generation of
>>> ACTIVATED Surface Plasmon Polaritons that produce intense magnetism which
>>> gain sufficient magnetic power from the formation of a superradiant
>>> superconductive Bose condinsate of SPPs on various types of nanostructures
>>

Re: [Vo]:Picking up the pieces

2017-07-08 Thread Axil Axil 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_binding_energy

*Nuclear binding energy* is the energy
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy> that would be required to
disassemble the nucleus <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atomic_nucleus> of
an atom <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atom> into its component parts.
These component parts are neutrons <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutron>
 and protons <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proton>, which are collectively
called nucleons <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nucleon>. The binding energy
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binding_energy> of nuclei is due to the
attractive forces that hold these nucleons together, and it is always a
positive number, since all nuclei would require the expenditure of energy
to separate them into individual protons and neutrons. The mass
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass> of an atomic nucleus is less than the
sum of the individual masses of the free constituent
<https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/constituent> protons and neutrons
(according to Einstein's equation E=mc2) and this 'missing mass' is known
as the mass defect
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_binding_energy#Mass_defect>, and
represents the energy that was released when the nucleus was formed.

The energy produced by fusion and fission is excess exergy that comes from
the reconfiguration of one type of element into another through the
rearrangement of their nucleons.

On Sat, Jul 8, 2017 at 2:17 AM, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote:

> A proton or a neutron is made up of energy as per E=MC2. If a proton or a
> neutron decays back into energy about 1 giga electron volts of pure energy
> is produced. In the process of proton decay, Mesons are first produced,
> they will decay into pions and then muons and finally electrons but along
> the way of this chain of decays much energy is released as each type of
> subatomic particle decays into other types.
>
> See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proton_decay
>
> Holmlid has discovered experimentally that protons will decay no matter
> what science thinks now.
>
>
>
> On Sat, Jul 8, 2017 at 1:59 AM, bobcook39...@hotmail.com <
> bobcook39...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Sent from Mail <https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> for
>> Windows 10
>>
>>
>>
>> *From: *Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com>
>> *Sent: *Friday, July 7, 2017 11:24 AM
>> *To: *vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
>> *Subject: *Re: [Vo]:Picking up the pieces
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Axil—
>>
>>
>>
>> Most of your answers I do not understand because of the use of non
>> meaningful terms IMHO, for example, proton neutron decay, activated surface
>> plasmon polaritons, magnetic power, insulating bosonic gas, muon catalyzed
>> fission, nuclear binding energy is stored, condensation of this energy, etc.
>>
>>
>>
>> Bob Cook
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> I agree with much of your assessment of the Rossi effect, what you call
>> the Rossi reactor.  I   agree that there is a history of high
>> temperature reactions, but many of these have been associated with the Pd-D
>> system, which I consider entails a different physical mechanism for the
>> conversion of potential energy to kinetic energy.
>>
>>
>>
>> LENR gets its energy from proton and neutron decay caused by intense nano
>> magnetism. The  physical mechanism involves the generation of
>> ACTIVATED Surface Plasmon Polaritons that produce intense magnetism which
>> gain sufficient magnetic power from the formation of a superradiant
>> superconductive Bose condinsate of SPPs on various types of nanostructures
>> which include cracks, pits, bumps, nanoparticles, cavitation bubbles, and
>> in general any nanostructure that can confine electrons for long enough to
>> become entangled with photons to form polaritons. Most metals will support
>> this function. An insulating gas is required to produce polaritons on the
>> surface of these various metals. The insulating gas might need to be
>> bosonic. Nitrogen will not work and neither will a mixture of protium and
>> deuterium. Hydrogen in the metallic state produces nanoparticles and is
>> therefore LENR active.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Rossi has developed a reactor (an engineered system which includes a
>> control system for the important physical parameters—dynamic magnetic and
>> electric field intensity, and temperature of the nickel nano-
>> structures—and heat transfer devices/agents) that works to limit the
>> prod

Re: [Vo]:Picking up the pieces

2017-07-08 Thread Axil Axil 
A proton or a neutron is made up of energy as per E=MC2. If a proton or a
neutron decays back into energy about 1 giga electron volts of pure energy
is produced. In the process of proton decay, Mesons are first produced,
they will decay into pions and then muons and finally electrons but along
the way of this chain of decays much energy is released as each type of
subatomic particle decays into other types.

See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proton_decay

Holmlid has discovered experimentally that protons will decay no matter
what science thinks now.



On Sat, Jul 8, 2017 at 1:59 AM, bobcook39...@hotmail.com <
bobcook39...@hotmail.com> wrote:

>
>
>
>
> Sent from Mail <https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> for
> Windows 10
>
>
>
> *From: *Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com>
> *Sent: *Friday, July 7, 2017 11:24 AM
> *To: *vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
> *Subject: *Re: [Vo]:Picking up the pieces
>
>
>
>
>
> Axil—
>
>
>
> Most of your answers I do not understand because of the use of non
> meaningful terms IMHO, for example, proton neutron decay, activated surface
> plasmon polaritons, magnetic power, insulating bosonic gas, muon catalyzed
> fission, nuclear binding energy is stored, condensation of this energy, etc.
>
>
>
> Bob Cook
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> I agree with much of your assessment of the Rossi effect, what you call
> the Rossi reactor.  I   agree that there is a history of high
> temperature reactions, but many of these have been associated with the Pd-D
> system, which I consider entails a different physical mechanism for the
> conversion of potential energy to kinetic energy.
>
>
>
> LENR gets its energy from proton and neutron decay caused by intense nano
> magnetism. The  physical mechanism involves the generation of
> ACTIVATED Surface Plasmon Polaritons that produce intense magnetism which
> gain sufficient magnetic power from the formation of a superradiant
> superconductive Bose condinsate of SPPs on various types of nanostructures
> which include cracks, pits, bumps, nanoparticles, cavitation bubbles, and
> in general any nanostructure that can confine electrons for long enough to
> become entangled with photons to form polaritons. Most metals will support
> this function. An insulating gas is required to produce polaritons on the
> surface of these various metals. The insulating gas might need to be
> bosonic. Nitrogen will not work and neither will a mixture of protium and
> deuterium. Hydrogen in the metallic state produces nanoparticles and is
> therefore LENR active.
>
>
>
>
>
> Rossi has developed a reactor (an engineered system which includes a
> control system for the important physical parameters—dynamic magnetic and
> electric field intensity, and temperature of the nickel nano-
> structures—and heat transfer devices/agents) that works to limit the
> production of energetic particles associated with normal fission or hot
> fusion reactors and the unstable isotopes such reactions are notorious for.
>
>
>
> Fusion and fission are produced in LENR as a SECONDARY reaction from muon
> catalysis at a distance from the primary nucleon decay reaction site.
> These muons may be entangled with the SPP BEC that produced them and the
> energy from the fusion and fission is captured at a distance by the SPP BEC
> where the nuclear binding energy is stored. This energy will form more
> mesons through particle production. Excess electrons are also produced from
> a condinsation of this energy.
>
>
>
> The BEC radiates both thermal energy (*Hawkins radiation*) and light
> energy (red through XUV) as a side channel reaction.
>
>
>
>
>
> One of the keys to the success of the Rossi reactor R IMHO has been the
> development of  a Ni based nano-particle—a quantum mechanical coherent
> system—which is cooled by Li vapor—to avoid a run-away reaction which you,
> Axil, correctly associate with temperatures around 3000 C.
>
>
>
> In the low temperature LENR reaction, lithium helps in the production of
> metallic hydrogen and lithium nanoparticles.  In the high temperature
> reaction, nickel vapor condinsation produces the nanoparticle. The QuarkX
> just involves nickel and hydrogen.
>
>
>
> The small size of the nano-particles provides a limit to the effects of a
> run-away release of potential energy and  destruction of the reactor or
> more than one nano-particle.  (And no muons or other sub atomic particles
> are produced by the relatively low kinetic energy associated with 3000 C. )
>
>
>
> Muons are always produced in LENR even when the reaction is produced by a
> anisotropic magnet like SnCo5 as in Cravens golden b

RE: [Vo]:Picking up the pieces

2017-07-08 Thread bobcook39...@hotmail.com 


Sent from Mail<https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> for Windows 10

From: Axil Axil<mailto:janap...@gmail.com>
Sent: Friday, July 7, 2017 11:24 AM
To: vortex-l<mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Picking up the pieces


Axil—

Most of your answers I do not understand because of the use of non meaningful 
terms IMHO, for example, proton neutron decay, activated surface plasmon 
polaritons, magnetic power, insulating bosonic gas, muon catalyzed fission, 
nuclear binding energy is stored, condensation of this energy, etc.

Bob Cook




I agree with much of your assessment of the Rossi effect, what you call the 
Rossi reactor.  I   agree that there is a history of high 
temperature reactions, but many of these have been associated with the Pd-D 
system, which I consider entails a different physical mechanism for the 
conversion of potential energy to kinetic energy.

LENR gets its energy from proton and neutron decay caused by intense nano 
magnetism. The  physical mechanism involves the generation of ACTIVATED Surface 
Plasmon Polaritons that produce intense magnetism which gain sufficient 
magnetic power from the formation of a superradiant superconductive Bose 
condinsate of SPPs on various types of nanostructures which include cracks, 
pits, bumps, nanoparticles, cavitation bubbles, and in general any 
nanostructure that can confine electrons for long enough to become entangled 
with photons to form polaritons. Most metals will support this function. An 
insulating gas is required to produce polaritons on the surface of these 
various metals. The insulating gas might need to be bosonic. Nitrogen will not 
work and neither will a mixture of protium and deuterium. Hydrogen in the 
metallic state produces nanoparticles and is therefore LENR active.


Rossi has developed a reactor (an engineered system which includes a control 
system for the important physical parameters—dynamic magnetic and electric 
field intensity, and temperature of the nickel nano- structures—and heat 
transfer devices/agents) that works to limit the production of energetic 
particles associated with normal fission or hot fusion reactors and the 
unstable isotopes such reactions are notorious for.

Fusion and fission are produced in LENR as a SECONDARY reaction from muon 
catalysis at a distance from the primary nucleon decay reaction site.  These 
muons may be entangled with the SPP BEC that produced them and the energy from 
the fusion and fission is captured at a distance by the SPP BEC where the 
nuclear binding energy is stored. This energy will form more mesons through 
particle production. Excess electrons are also produced from a condinsation of 
this energy.

The BEC radiates both thermal energy (Hawkins radiation) and light energy (red 
through XUV) as a side channel reaction.


One of the keys to the success of the Rossi reactor R IMHO has been the 
development of  a Ni based nano-particle—a quantum mechanical coherent 
system—which is cooled by Li vapor—to avoid a run-away reaction which you, 
Axil, correctly associate with temperatures around 3000 C.

In the low temperature LENR reaction, lithium helps in the production of 
metallic hydrogen and lithium nanoparticles.  In the high temperature reaction, 
nickel vapor condinsation produces the nanoparticle. The QuarkX just involves 
nickel and hydrogen.

The small size of the nano-particles provides a limit to the effects of a 
run-away release of potential energy and  destruction of the reactor or more 
than one nano-particle.  (And no muons or other sub atomic particles are 
produced by the relatively low kinetic energy associated with 3000 C. )

Muons are always produced in LENR even when the reaction is produced by a 
anisotropic magnet like SnCo5 as in Cravens golden balls at 80C.  The muon 
production rate is proportional to the power output of the reaction. Most of 
the energy produced by LENR comes in the form of muons and electrons from 
particle creation.

There are many commercial devices that create temperatures above 3000C, for 
example electric arc welders which I have used many times.  They do not produce 
the energetic particles or photons you, Axil. are concerned about with respect 
to the “Rossi reactor” IHMO.

Muons are hard to detect. Nitrogen is a LENR poison which may dampen the LENR 
reaction, however.  IMHO, Ken Shoulders has produced SPPs via nanoparticle 
generation via spark discharge. Shoulders thought these solitons (EVO) where 
electron vortexes but they are really polariton vortices.




From: Axil Axil<mailto:janap...@gmail.com>
Sent: Friday, July 7, 2017 8:06 AM
To: vortex-l<mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Picking up the pieces

There are multiple third party validations. Rossi's methods and approach have 
been verified in part by his many replicators. This is not to say that Rossi's 
reactor or any LENR reactor for that matter  can be commercialized due to heavy

Re: [Vo]:Picking up the pieces

2017-07-07 Thread Axil Axil 
What about the $10 million payment, what about the Lugano test and the IH
patent that IH produced using Lugano as proof of function.

https://patentscope.wipo.int/search/en/detail.jsf?docId=WO2015127263=1==PCTDescription

Inventors are listed as Andrea Rossi and Thomas Barker Dameron.

On Fri, Jul 7, 2017 at 2:56 PM, Jed Rothwell  wrote:

> Axil Axil  wrote:
>
> There are multiple third party validations.
>>
>
> No, there are not. Every one of them that I know about in detail was a
> failure. There were a few initial claims of replications but they were
> either retracted or proven wrong. The most recent one was the MFMP attempt
> to confirm heat from the Me356 reactor. This was a complete failure. Me356
> has not said anything since, so I assume he has no positive results.
>
> Parkhamov is also a complete failure as far as I know.
>
> I appreciate the efforts made by the MFMP and others to replicate. I don't
> appreciate it when Axil claims these efforts were positive when they were
> negative. That doesn't help. Why pretend things work when they do not?
>
> In any case, even if other experiments similar to Rossi's end up producing
> excess heat someday, that will be a coincidence. Rossi's own test was pure
> fraud. Anyone can see that in the Penon report. Or if you cannot see it,
> you are either blinded by wishful thinking or you are technically
> illiterate:
>
> http://coldfusioncommunity.net/wp-content/uploads/2017/
> 01/0197.03_Exhibit_3.pdf
>
> It is as bad as Gamberale's report, which proved that Defkalion's claims
> were outrageous, in-your-face fraud:
>
> http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/GamberaleLfinaltechn.pdf
>
> The only positive indication of Rossi's claims is the first Levi report,
> and the second Levi report (Lugano) was so bad I think it wiped out any
> credibility. The first report is here:
>
> http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/LeviGindication.pdf
>
> - Jed
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Picking up the pieces

2017-07-07 Thread Jones Beene 

Axil Axil wrote:

I consider transmutation as a LENR success. Excess heat is a low order 
effect.


No problem with that and certainly no problem with Kevin's advocacy for 
looking primarily for radiation effects.  In fact, radiation without 
large transmutation is the best of all worlds, so long as the radiation 
is strong but not too strong.


If you find soft x-rays, for instance, then almost certainly there will 
be excess heat somewhere in the system - and with proper instruments 
radiation "should be" easier to detect since much of the excess heat 
could actually escape (if we believe Holmlid's muons).


This is why I have been bringing up the old research from around 1991 
and 1992 using x-ray film.


Nowadays, there are meters to detect soft x-rays but these instruments 
were not available up until about 2012 when they were developed to see 
"dark matter".

Re: [Vo]:Picking up the pieces

2017-07-07 Thread Che 
> The Swedes have arguably lost as much as Rossi in having ruined careers
> over their mistakes at Lugano. Yet, even now they have the incentive, skill
> and the resources to replicate, but have failed to do so.
>

How is it that scientists should ruin entire careers, simply over having
been wrong about facts..? But this is NOT really just or all about Science
now, is it? It's about MONEY (and all the bourgeois ego life that goes
along with the chasing after of that). Only one's position in
'Establishment Science' would be ruined, in this scenario: and
'Establishment Science' is exactly the dog-in-the-manger, as regards cold
fusion (and a lot else).

So on the one hand, 'Heterodox Science' rails against Establishment Science
blocking cold fusion research... but on the other hand -- it appears to be
more-or-less accepting of the modus operandi of Establishment Science, as
regards the policing of scientists. And of Science.

Seems to be a contradiction here.

Re: [Vo]:Picking up the pieces

2017-07-07 Thread Kevin O'Malley 
There is one conclusion that can be drawn.  Rossi submitted all kinds of
information to the court docket, under oath.   The claim against him was
fraud.

The legal burden of proof in a civil case is "preponderance of the
evidence".   IH obviously couldn't even meet that level of proof.

The legal burden of proof in a criminal case is much higher, "beyond a
reasonable doubt".   So if IH couldn't meet the lower standard there is no
chance Rossi is going to be prosecuted for fraud with all that juicy
evidence.  In effect, it is legal proof that Rossi is not a criminal fraud.


On Fri, Jul 7, 2017 at 2:11 AM, Alain Sepeda  wrote:

> from recent data, taking any conclusion on Rossi's claims is at best
> risky, and to be honest, baseless.
>
> 2017-07-07 3:01 GMT+02:00 Axil Axil :
>
>> What the Rossi experiments has shown over many years is that LENR in a
>> lattice is not workable because the reaction cannot be controlled. This
>> lack of control makes the E-Cat technology untenable. Rossi has
>> realized this and Rossi is will to let this knowhow fadeaway. The LENR
>> reaction wants to operate at the boiling point of the metal lattice
>> (nickel) which is 3000K. LENR is based on activation of nanoparticles in a
>> dusty plasma. Rossi has struggled to control the LENR reaction at low
>> temperatures but he always fails because LENR would invariably get to 3000K
>> and meltdown his reactor. So Rossi finally decided to use reactor
>> structural material that doesn't melt at 3000K. This material must be an
>> insulator that does not melt at 3000K. Mills has stumbled on the same
>> reaction and his SunCell runs at the vapor point of silver at only 2200C.
>> Mills has solved the meltdown problem is another way, he justs runs
>> everything as a liquid without any containment. Holmlid is on to the same
>> LENR mechanism. There is nothing unusual with metalized hydrogen. In the
>> LENR reaction, metalized hydrogen acts like any
>> other metallic nanoparticle.
>>
>>
>> Using a lattice for LENR is a losing proposition. The dusty plasma
>> approach to the LENR reaction is the only way to go. I beleive that Rossi
>> has settled on a high temperature  tube material that works: boron nitride,
>> a transparent isolator whose melting point is 3000C.
>>
>>
>> Alan Smith wrote:
>> 
>>
>> *I do remember. BTW, eye witness accounts claim that the tube itself is
>> transparent, and the electrodes bright silver colour. nothing is visible in
>> the gap. I have no idea about sealing or anything else - except that the
>> plasma can apparently be made 'any colour you like'. The example shown was
>> glowing **yellow** when energised for short periods. That's all the info
>> I have.*
>>
>>
>> Unlike most other observers of Rossi, I know that the QuarkX works
>> because its reported behavior fits in with my understanding of how LENR
>> works.
>>
>>
>> For example:
>>
>>
>> New research into polariton condensates has revealed a side emission
>> channel that produces light whose frequency is proportional to the density
>> of the polariton aggregation...for example, the dense polariton condinsate
>> produces a higher frequency light (blue) and a less dense condinsate will
>> produce red light. Rossi must have a way to control the density of the
>> polariton population.
>>
>>
>> See
>>
>>
>> https://phys.org/news/2016-06-…einstein-condensates.html
>> 
>>
>>
>> They tackled this problem by highly exciting exciton-polaritons, which
>> are particle-like excitations in a semiconductor systems and formed by
>> strong coupling between electron-hole pairs and photons. *They observed
>> high-energy side-peak emission *that cannot be explained by two
>> mechanisms known to date: Bose-Einstein condensation of exciton-polaritons,
>> nor conventional semiconductor lasing driven by the optical gain from
>> unbound electron hole plasma.
>>
>>
>>
>> The details on this side channel are here
>>
>>
>> https://www.nature.com/articles/srep25655
>> High-energy side-peak emission of exciton-polariton condensates in high
>> density regime
>>
>> In summary, eyewitness reports of QuarkX operating characteristics fit my
>> technical expectations perfectly in very many ways.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Jul 6, 2017 at 2:19 PM, Jones Beene  wrote:
>>
>>> According to Abd... "All claims dropped on both sides. It is as if the
>>> suit was never filed. All parties bear their own costs. The action of the
>>> Agreement was the consent of counsel to settlement without any court order
>>> other than dismissal, which is final."
>>>
>>> No agreements were included... so unless they present something
>>> otherwise in a joint statement, IH retains the original E-Cat License. No
>>> money changes hands.
>>>
>>> As for the future of the

Re: [Vo]:Picking up the pieces

2017-07-07 Thread Axil Axil 
I consider transmutation as a LENR success. Excess heat is a low order
effect. Even Ken Shoulders got transmutation results using EVO interactions
with hydrogen loaded palladium. Most of the energy produced in LENR goes
into the production of subatomic particles.

On Fri, Jul 7, 2017 at 6:18 PM, Jones Beene  wrote:

> Jed Rothwell wrote
>
> Axil: There are multiple third party validations
>>
>
> No, there are not. Every one of them that I know about in detail was a
> failure. There were a few initial claims of replications but they were
> either retracted or proven wrong. The most recent one was the MFMP attempt
> to confirm heat from the Me356 reactor. This was a complete failure.
>
>
> Indeed, the record shows that there are no valid 3rd party validations of
> Rossi even though some could have slight gain - but even more damning is
> this detail, which is by implication.
>
> If Rossi truly had a high COP working reactor, there is absolutely nothing
> that would have prevented him from having it tested independently anytime
> before the trial. He had already dissolved his relationship with IH. His
> lawyer would not have really objected strongly, so long as the results was
> positive. AR could have arranged with Levi to do this in Italy "for the
> purposes of science". The reason that a demo was not done is that Rossi has
> no reactor then or now which will produce large gain on demand.
>
> However, I am convinced that Rossi has shown modest gain on occasion, but
> even that was unpredictable and because of the contract terms for large
> COP, Rossi would actually rather show no positive experiment at all than to
> show only modest gain.
>
> Not only that, but the Swedes - who at one time had respectable Academic
> reputations, but were badly embarrassed by the Lugano fiasco- and
> furthermore, who promised to do their own replication, also failed to show
> anything positive.
>
> The Swedes have arguably lost as much as Rossi in having ruined careers
> over their mistakes at Lugano. Yet, even now they have the incentive, skill
> and the resources to replicate, but have failed to do so. Many who saw
> Rossi's witness list (Bo Hoistadt) were sure his ace-in-the-hole was a
> positive test report by Hoistadt which had not yet been made public. That
> is the kind of legal chicanery which would have made it into a Grisham
> movie, but Nada.
>
> How stupid can Rossi's disciples be -- to think that he would have kept a
> working reactor hidden away from view if there was one - when even a short
> demo even done by Levi in Bologna would have guaranteed him instant
> millions ?
>
> It would not have mattered how loudly they objected on Darden's team. If
> there was a reactor which worked for large gain even for a day - Rossi
> would have gone to the bank with a judgement. As it stands, his  Lawyers
> may have pushed him close to bankruptcy with a claimed fee of $7.5 million.
> In fact, Rossi's legal team may be in a position to obtain his remaining
> assets.
>
>
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Picking up the pieces

2017-07-07 Thread Jones Beene 

Jed Rothwell wrote


Axil: There are multiple third party validations


No, there are not. Every one of them that I know about in detail was a 
failure. There were a few initial claims of replications but they were 
either retracted or proven wrong. The most recent one was the MFMP 
attempt to confirm heat from the Me356 reactor. This was a complete 
failure.


Indeed, the record shows that there are no valid 3rd party validations 
of Rossi even though some could have slight gain - but even more damning 
is this detail, which is by implication.


If Rossi truly had a high COP working reactor, there is absolutely 
nothing that would have prevented him from having it tested 
independently anytime before the trial. He had already dissolved his 
relationship with IH. His lawyer would not have really objected 
strongly, so long as the results was positive. AR could have arranged 
with Levi to do this in Italy "for the purposes of science". The reason 
that a demo was not done is that Rossi has no reactor then or now which 
will produce large gain on demand.


However, I am convinced that Rossi has shown modest gain on occasion, 
but even that was unpredictable and because of the contract terms for 
large COP, Rossi would actually rather show no positive experiment at 
all than to show only modest gain.


Not only that, but the Swedes - who at one time had respectable Academic 
reputations, but were badly embarrassed by the Lugano fiasco- and 
furthermore, who promised to do their own replication, also failed to 
show anything positive.


The Swedes have arguably lost as much as Rossi in having ruined careers 
over their mistakes at Lugano. Yet, even now they have the incentive, 
skill and the resources to replicate, but have failed to do so. Many who 
saw Rossi's witness list (Bo Hoistadt) were sure his ace-in-the-hole was 
a positive test report by Hoistadt which had not yet been made public. 
That is the kind of legal chicanery which would have made it into a 
Grisham movie, but Nada.


How stupid can Rossi's disciples be -- to think that he would have kept 
a working reactor hidden away from view if there was one - when even a 
short demo even done by Levi in Bologna would have guaranteed him 
instant millions ?/


/It would not have mattered how loudly they objected on Darden's team. 
If there was a reactor which worked for large gain even for a day - 
Rossi would have gone to the bank with a judgement. As it stands, his  
Lawyers may have pushed him close to bankruptcy with a claimed fee of 
$7.5 million. In fact, Rossi's legal team may be in a position to obtain 
his remaining assets.

/
/

Re: [Vo]:Picking up the pieces

2017-07-07 Thread Che 
On Thu, Jul 6, 2017 at 7:30 PM, Adrian Ashfield 
wrote:

>
> According to Abd... "All claims dropped on both sides. It is as if the
> suit was never filed.
>
> The IP and license are not mentioned. As Rossi was apparently pleased I
> deduce something has changed in the ownership of the IP or the multi
> country license.
> As IH claimed the above were valueless it would be hard for them to object
> to them reverting to Rossi.  It was rumored that Rossi actually offered to
> buy them back earlier.
> If either the E-Cat or QuarkX work, this would be worth more than the $89
> million.
>
> I know you and others have made up your minds that Rossi never had
> anything that worked, but I find that conclusion premature.  If either work
> he may get the last laugh.
>


This myopic, narrow obsession with 'Intellectual Property' is the WHOLE
reason why this entire process has failed -- assuming cold fusion is a
material reality, in its own right. But that is at _least_ as much Andrea
Rossi's egotistical, money-grubbing fault, as anyone's.

Re: [Vo]:Picking up the pieces

2017-07-07 Thread Jed Rothwell 
Axil Axil  wrote:

There are multiple third party validations.
>

No, there are not. Every one of them that I know about in detail was a
failure. There were a few initial claims of replications but they were
either retracted or proven wrong. The most recent one was the MFMP attempt
to confirm heat from the Me356 reactor. This was a complete failure. Me356
has not said anything since, so I assume he has no positive results.

Parkhamov is also a complete failure as far as I know.

I appreciate the efforts made by the MFMP and others to replicate. I don't
appreciate it when Axil claims these efforts were positive when they were
negative. That doesn't help. Why pretend things work when they do not?

In any case, even if other experiments similar to Rossi's end up producing
excess heat someday, that will be a coincidence. Rossi's own test was pure
fraud. Anyone can see that in the Penon report. Or if you cannot see it,
you are either blinded by wishful thinking or you are technically
illiterate:

http://coldfusioncommunity.net/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/0197.03_Exhibit_3.pdf

It is as bad as Gamberale's report, which proved that Defkalion's claims
were outrageous, in-your-face fraud:

http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/GamberaleLfinaltechn.pdf

The only positive indication of Rossi's claims is the first Levi report,
and the second Levi report (Lugano) was so bad I think it wiped out any
credibility. The first report is here:

http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/LeviGindication.pdf

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Picking up the pieces

2017-07-07 Thread Daniel Rocha 
Look at the bright side people. Now that the trial is over, the Rossi will
come with his new products with full force!!! IH will also push people into
the show with full force!!!

I think that both IH and Rossi are staging a circus and dragging people
into the show and taking money from investors.

Re: [Vo]:Picking up the pieces

2017-07-07 Thread Axil Axil 
>
> I agree with much of your assessment of the Rossi effect, what you call
> the Rossi reactor.  I   agree that there is a history of high
> temperature reactions, but many of these have been associated with the Pd-D
> system, which I consider entails a different physical mechanism for the
> conversion of potential energy to kinetic energy.
>

LENR gets its energy from proton and neutron decay caused by intense nano
magnetism. The  physical mechanism involves the generation of
ACTIVATED Surface Plasmon Polaritons that produce intense magnetism which
gain sufficient magnetic power from the formation of a superradiant
superconductive Bose condinsate of SPPs on various types of nanostructures
which include cracks, pits, bumps, nanoparticles, cavitation bubbles, and
in general any nanostructure that can confine electrons for long enough to
become entangled with photons to form polaritons. Most metals will support
this function. An insulating gas is required to produce polaritons on the
surface of these various metals. The insulating gas might need to be
bosonic. Nitrogen will not work and neither will a mixture of protium and
deuterium. Hydrogen in the metallic state produces nanoparticles and is
therefore LENR active.


>
>
> Rossi has developed a reactor (an engineered system which includes a
> control system for the important physical parameters—dynamic magnetic and
> electric field intensity, and temperature of the nickel nano-
> structures—and heat transfer devices/agents) that works to limit the
> production of energetic particles associated with normal fission or hot
> fusion reactors and the unstable isotopes such reactions are notorious for.
>

Fusion and fission are produced in LENR as a SECONDARY reaction from muon
catalysis at a distance from the primary nucleon decay reaction site.
These muons may be entangled with the SPP BEC that produced them and the
energy from the fusion and fission is captured at a distance by the SPP BEC
where the nuclear binding energy is stored. This energy will form more
mesons through particle production. Excess electrons are also produced from
a condinsation of this energy.

The BEC radiates both thermal energy (Hawkins radiation) and light energy
(red through XUV) as a side channel reaction.


>
> One of the keys to the success of the Rossi reactor R IMHO has been the
> development of  a Ni based nano-particle—a quantum mechanical coherent
> system—which is cooled by Li vapor—to avoid a run-away reaction which you,
> Axil, correctly associate with temperatures around 3000 C.
>

In the low temperature LENR reaction, lithium helps in the production of
metallic hydrogen and lithium nanoparticles.  In the high temperature
reaction, nickel vapor condinsation produces the nanoparticle. The QuarkX
just involves nickel and hydrogen.

>
>
> The small size of the nano-particles provides a limit to the effects of a
> run-away release of potential energy and  destruction of the reactor or
> more than one nano-particle.  (And no muons or other sub atomic particles
> are produced by the relatively low kinetic energy associated with 3000 C. )
>

Muons are always produced in LENR even when the reaction is produced by a
anisotropic magnet like SnCo5 as in Cravens golden balls at 80C.  The muon
production rate is proportional to the power output of the reaction. Most
of the energy produced by LENR comes in the form of muons and electrons
from particle creation.

>
>
> There are many commercial devices that create temperatures above 3000C,
> for example electric arc welders which I have used many times.  They do not
> produce the energetic particles or photons you, Axil. are concerned about
> with respect to the “Rossi reactor” IHMO.
>

Muons are hard to detect. Nitrogen is a LENR poison which may dampen the
LENR reaction, however.  IMHO, Ken Shoulders has produced SPPs via
nanoparticle generation via spark discharge. Shoulders thought these
solitons (EVO) where electron vortexes but they are really polariton
vortices.





> *From: *Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com>
> *Sent: *Friday, July 7, 2017 8:06 AM
> *To: *vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
> *Subject: *Re: [Vo]:Picking up the pieces
>
>
>
> There are multiple third party validations. Rossi's methods and approach
> have been verified in part by his many replicators. This is not to say that
> Rossi's reactor or any LENR reactor for that matter  can be commercialized
> due to heavy subatomic particle emissions. This includes R. Mills and the
> SunCell.
>
>
>
> On Fri, Jul 7, 2017 at 5:11 AM, Alain Sepeda <alain.sep...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> from recent data, taking any conclusion on Rossi's claims is at best
> risky, and to be honest, baseless.
>
>
>
> 2017-07-07 3:01 GMT+02:00 Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com>:
>
>

RE: [Vo]:Picking up the pieces

2017-07-07 Thread bobcook39...@hotmail.com 
Axil—

I agree with much of your assessment of the Rossi effect, what you call the 
Rossi reactor.  I   agree that there is a history of high 
temperature reactions, but many of these have been associated with the Pd-D 
system, which I consider entails a different physical mechanism for the 
conversion of potential energy to kinetic energy.

Rossi has developed a reactor (an engineered system which includes a control 
system for the important physical parameters—dynamic magnetic and electric 
field intensity, and temperature of the nickel nano- structures—and heat 
transfer devices/agents) that works to limit the production of energetic 
particles associated with normal fission or hot fusion reactors and the 
unstable isotopes such reactions are notorious for.

One of the keys to the success of the Rossi reactor R IMHO has been the 
development of  a Ni based nano-particle—a quantum mechanical coherent 
system—which is cooled by Li vapor—to avoid a run-away reaction which you, 
Axil, correctly associate with temperatures around 3000 C.

The small size of the nano-particles provides a limit to the effects of a 
run-away release of potential energy and  destruction of the reactor or more 
than one nano-particle.  (And no muons or other sub atomic particles are 
produced by the relatively low kinetic energy associated with 3000 C. )

There are many commercial devices that create temperatures above 3000C, for 
example electric arc welders which I have used many times.  They do not produce 
the energetic particles or photons you, Axil. are concerned about with respect 
to the “Rossi reactor” IHMO.

Bob Cookhere are many common commercial reactions that occu



From: Axil Axil<mailto:janap...@gmail.com>
Sent: Friday, July 7, 2017 8:06 AM
To: vortex-l<mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Picking up the pieces

There are multiple third party validations. Rossi's methods and approach have 
been verified in part by his many replicators. This is not to say that Rossi's 
reactor or any LENR reactor for that matter  can be commercialized due to heavy 
subatomic particle emissions. This includes R. Mills and the SunCell.

On Fri, Jul 7, 2017 at 5:11 AM, Alain Sepeda 
<alain.sep...@gmail.com<mailto:alain.sep...@gmail.com>> wrote:
from recent data, taking any conclusion on Rossi's claims is at best risky, and 
to be honest, baseless.

2017-07-07 3:01 GMT+02:00 Axil Axil 
<janap...@gmail.com<mailto:janap...@gmail.com>>:

What the Rossi experiments has shown over many years is that LENR in a lattice 
is not workable because the reaction cannot be controlled. This lack of control 
makes the E-Cat technology untenable. Rossi has realized this and Rossi is will 
to let this knowhow fadeaway. The LENR reaction wants to operate at the boiling 
point of the metal lattice (nickel) which is 3000K. LENR is based on activation 
of nanoparticles in a dusty plasma. Rossi has struggled to control the LENR 
reaction at low temperatures but he always fails because LENR would invariably 
get to 3000K and meltdown his reactor. So Rossi finally decided to use reactor 
structural material that doesn't melt at 3000K. This material must be an 
insulator that does not melt at 3000K. Mills has stumbled on the same reaction 
and his SunCell runs at the vapor point of silver at only 2200C. Mills has 
solved the meltdown problem is another way, he justs runs everything as a 
liquid without any containment. Holmlid is on to the same LENR mechanism. There 
is nothing unusual with metalized hydrogen. In the LENR reaction, metalized 
hydrogen acts like any other metallic nanoparticle.



Using a lattice for LENR is a losing proposition. The dusty plasma approach to 
the LENR reaction is the only way to go. I beleive that Rossi has settled on a 
high temperature  tube material that works: boron nitride, a transparent 
isolator whose melting point is 3000C.


Alan Smith 
wrote:<https://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/thread/4645-rossi-blog-comment-discussion/?postID=62235#post62235>

I do remember. BTW, eye witness accounts claim that the tube itself is 
transparent, and the electrodes bright silver colour. nothing is visible in the 
gap. I have no idea about sealing or anything else - except that the plasma can 
apparently be made 'any colour you like'. The example shown was glowing yellow 
when energised for short periods. That's all the info I have.



Unlike most other observers of Rossi, I know that the QuarkX works because its 
reported behavior fits in with my understanding of how LENR works.



For example:



New research into polariton condensates has revealed a side emission channel 
that produces light whose frequency is proportional to the density of the 
polariton aggregation...for example, the dense polariton condinsate produces a 
higher frequency light (blue) and a less dense condinsate will produce red 
light. Rossi must have a way to control the density of the polariton populatio

Re: [Vo]:Picking up the pieces

2017-07-07 Thread Axil Axil 
There are multiple third party validations. Rossi's methods and approach
have been verified in part by his many replicators. This is not to say that
Rossi's reactor or any LENR reactor for that matter  can be commercialized
due to heavy subatomic particle emissions. This includes R. Mills and the
SunCell.

On Fri, Jul 7, 2017 at 5:11 AM, Alain Sepeda  wrote:

> from recent data, taking any conclusion on Rossi's claims is at best
> risky, and to be honest, baseless.
>
> 2017-07-07 3:01 GMT+02:00 Axil Axil :
>
>> What the Rossi experiments has shown over many years is that LENR in a
>> lattice is not workable because the reaction cannot be controlled. This
>> lack of control makes the E-Cat technology untenable. Rossi has
>> realized this and Rossi is will to let this knowhow fadeaway. The LENR
>> reaction wants to operate at the boiling point of the metal lattice
>> (nickel) which is 3000K. LENR is based on activation of nanoparticles in a
>> dusty plasma. Rossi has struggled to control the LENR reaction at low
>> temperatures but he always fails because LENR would invariably get to 3000K
>> and meltdown his reactor. So Rossi finally decided to use reactor
>> structural material that doesn't melt at 3000K. This material must be an
>> insulator that does not melt at 3000K. Mills has stumbled on the same
>> reaction and his SunCell runs at the vapor point of silver at only 2200C.
>> Mills has solved the meltdown problem is another way, he justs runs
>> everything as a liquid without any containment. Holmlid is on to the same
>> LENR mechanism. There is nothing unusual with metalized hydrogen. In the
>> LENR reaction, metalized hydrogen acts like any
>> other metallic nanoparticle.
>>
>>
>> Using a lattice for LENR is a losing proposition. The dusty plasma
>> approach to the LENR reaction is the only way to go. I beleive that Rossi
>> has settled on a high temperature  tube material that works: boron nitride,
>> a transparent isolator whose melting point is 3000C.
>>
>>
>> Alan Smith wrote:
>> 
>>
>> *I do remember. BTW, eye witness accounts claim that the tube itself is
>> transparent, and the electrodes bright silver colour. nothing is visible in
>> the gap. I have no idea about sealing or anything else - except that the
>> plasma can apparently be made 'any colour you like'. The example shown was
>> glowing **yellow** when energised for short periods. That's all the info
>> I have.*
>>
>>
>> Unlike most other observers of Rossi, I know that the QuarkX works
>> because its reported behavior fits in with my understanding of how LENR
>> works.
>>
>>
>> For example:
>>
>>
>> New research into polariton condensates has revealed a side emission
>> channel that produces light whose frequency is proportional to the density
>> of the polariton aggregation...for example, the dense polariton condinsate
>> produces a higher frequency light (blue) and a less dense condinsate will
>> produce red light. Rossi must have a way to control the density of the
>> polariton population.
>>
>>
>> See
>>
>>
>> https://phys.org/news/2016-06-…einstein-condensates.html
>> 
>>
>>
>> They tackled this problem by highly exciting exciton-polaritons, which
>> are particle-like excitations in a semiconductor systems and formed by
>> strong coupling between electron-hole pairs and photons. *They observed
>> high-energy side-peak emission *that cannot be explained by two
>> mechanisms known to date: Bose-Einstein condensation of exciton-polaritons,
>> nor conventional semiconductor lasing driven by the optical gain from
>> unbound electron hole plasma.
>>
>>
>>
>> The details on this side channel are here
>>
>>
>> https://www.nature.com/articles/srep25655
>> High-energy side-peak emission of exciton-polariton condensates in high
>> density regime
>>
>> In summary, eyewitness reports of QuarkX operating characteristics fit my
>> technical expectations perfectly in very many ways.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Jul 6, 2017 at 2:19 PM, Jones Beene  wrote:
>>
>>> According to Abd... "All claims dropped on both sides. It is as if the
>>> suit was never filed. All parties bear their own costs. The action of the
>>> Agreement was the consent of counsel to settlement without any court order
>>> other than dismissal, which is final."
>>>
>>> No agreements were included... so unless they present something
>>> otherwise in a joint statement, IH retains the original E-Cat License. No
>>> money changes hands.
>>>
>>> As for the future of the litigants, it looks like IH paid about $11
>>> million ++ for a License which according to them is worthless insofar as it
>>> was never shown to produce excess heat. Add to that the attorney fees and
>>> we see why many observers consider IH to be the big loser in this.
>>>
>>>

Re: [Vo]:Picking up the pieces

2017-07-07 Thread Alain Sepeda 
from recent data, taking any conclusion on Rossi's claims is at best risky,
and to be honest, baseless.

2017-07-07 3:01 GMT+02:00 Axil Axil :

> What the Rossi experiments has shown over many years is that LENR in a
> lattice is not workable because the reaction cannot be controlled. This
> lack of control makes the E-Cat technology untenable. Rossi has
> realized this and Rossi is will to let this knowhow fadeaway. The LENR
> reaction wants to operate at the boiling point of the metal lattice
> (nickel) which is 3000K. LENR is based on activation of nanoparticles in a
> dusty plasma. Rossi has struggled to control the LENR reaction at low
> temperatures but he always fails because LENR would invariably get to 3000K
> and meltdown his reactor. So Rossi finally decided to use reactor
> structural material that doesn't melt at 3000K. This material must be an
> insulator that does not melt at 3000K. Mills has stumbled on the same
> reaction and his SunCell runs at the vapor point of silver at only 2200C.
> Mills has solved the meltdown problem is another way, he justs runs
> everything as a liquid without any containment. Holmlid is on to the same
> LENR mechanism. There is nothing unusual with metalized hydrogen. In the
> LENR reaction, metalized hydrogen acts like any
> other metallic nanoparticle.
>
>
> Using a lattice for LENR is a losing proposition. The dusty plasma
> approach to the LENR reaction is the only way to go. I beleive that Rossi
> has settled on a high temperature  tube material that works: boron nitride,
> a transparent isolator whose melting point is 3000C.
>
>
> Alan Smith wrote:
> 
>
> *I do remember. BTW, eye witness accounts claim that the tube itself is
> transparent, and the electrodes bright silver colour. nothing is visible in
> the gap. I have no idea about sealing or anything else - except that the
> plasma can apparently be made 'any colour you like'. The example shown was
> glowing **yellow** when energised for short periods. That's all the info
> I have.*
>
>
> Unlike most other observers of Rossi, I know that the QuarkX works because
> its reported behavior fits in with my understanding of how LENR works.
>
>
> For example:
>
>
> New research into polariton condensates has revealed a side emission
> channel that produces light whose frequency is proportional to the density
> of the polariton aggregation...for example, the dense polariton condinsate
> produces a higher frequency light (blue) and a less dense condinsate will
> produce red light. Rossi must have a way to control the density of the
> polariton population.
>
>
> See
>
>
> https://phys.org/news/2016-06-…einstein-condensates.html
> 
>
>
> They tackled this problem by highly exciting exciton-polaritons, which are
> particle-like excitations in a semiconductor systems and formed by strong
> coupling between electron-hole pairs and photons. *They observed
> high-energy side-peak emission *that cannot be explained by two
> mechanisms known to date: Bose-Einstein condensation of exciton-polaritons,
> nor conventional semiconductor lasing driven by the optical gain from
> unbound electron hole plasma.
>
>
>
> The details on this side channel are here
>
>
> https://www.nature.com/articles/srep25655
> High-energy side-peak emission of exciton-polariton condensates in high
> density regime
>
> In summary, eyewitness reports of QuarkX operating characteristics fit my
> technical expectations perfectly in very many ways.
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jul 6, 2017 at 2:19 PM, Jones Beene  wrote:
>
>> According to Abd... "All claims dropped on both sides. It is as if the
>> suit was never filed. All parties bear their own costs. The action of the
>> Agreement was the consent of counsel to settlement without any court order
>> other than dismissal, which is final."
>>
>> No agreements were included... so unless they present something otherwise
>> in a joint statement, IH retains the original E-Cat License. No money
>> changes hands.
>>
>> As for the future of the litigants, it looks like IH paid about $11
>> million ++ for a License which according to them is worthless insofar as it
>> was never shown to produce excess heat. Add to that the attorney fees and
>> we see why many observers consider IH to be the big loser in this.
>>
>> That assumes the IP is really worthless, but it may have value in a
>> surprising way, even if Rossi could never make it work. Here is the granted
>> patent, and there are a number of applications not granted.
>>
>> https://www.google.com/patents/US9115913
>>
>> Darden raised much more than his losses on the Rossi fiasco and there is
>> a small chance that he could make lemonade out of the Rossi lemons, using
>> some of it. An interesting development in all of this will be the course
>>

Re: [Vo]:Picking up the pieces

2017-07-06 Thread Axil Axil 
What the Rossi experiments has shown over many years is that LENR in a
lattice is not workable because the reaction cannot be controlled. This
lack of control makes the E-Cat technology untenable. Rossi has
realized this and Rossi is will to let this knowhow fadeaway. The LENR
reaction wants to operate at the boiling point of the metal lattice
(nickel) which is 3000K. LENR is based on activation of nanoparticles in a
dusty plasma. Rossi has struggled to control the LENR reaction at low
temperatures but he always fails because LENR would invariably get to 3000K
and meltdown his reactor. So Rossi finally decided to use reactor
structural material that doesn't melt at 3000K. This material must be an
insulator that does not melt at 3000K. Mills has stumbled on the same
reaction and his SunCell runs at the vapor point of silver at only 2200C.
Mills has solved the meltdown problem is another way, he justs runs
everything as a liquid without any containment. Holmlid is on to the same
LENR mechanism. There is nothing unusual with metalized hydrogen. In the
LENR reaction, metalized hydrogen acts like any
other metallic nanoparticle.


Using a lattice for LENR is a losing proposition. The dusty plasma approach
to the LENR reaction is the only way to go. I beleive that Rossi has
settled on a high temperature  tube material that works: boron nitride, a
transparent isolator whose melting point is 3000C.


Alan Smith wrote:


*I do remember. BTW, eye witness accounts claim that the tube itself is
transparent, and the electrodes bright silver colour. nothing is visible in
the gap. I have no idea about sealing or anything else - except that the
plasma can apparently be made 'any colour you like'. The example shown was
glowing **yellow** when energised for short periods. That's all the info I
have.*


Unlike most other observers of Rossi, I know that the QuarkX works because
its reported behavior fits in with my understanding of how LENR works.


For example:


New research into polariton condensates has revealed a side emission
channel that produces light whose frequency is proportional to the density
of the polariton aggregation...for example, the dense polariton condinsate
produces a higher frequency light (blue) and a less dense condinsate will
produce red light. Rossi must have a way to control the density of the
polariton population.


See


https://phys.org/news/2016-06-…einstein-condensates.html



They tackled this problem by highly exciting exciton-polaritons, which are
particle-like excitations in a semiconductor systems and formed by strong
coupling between electron-hole pairs and photons. *They observed
high-energy side-peak emission *that cannot be explained by two mechanisms
known to date: Bose-Einstein condensation of exciton-polaritons, nor
conventional semiconductor lasing driven by the optical gain from unbound
electron hole plasma.



The details on this side channel are here


https://www.nature.com/articles/srep25655
High-energy side-peak emission of exciton-polariton condensates in high
density regime

In summary, eyewitness reports of QuarkX operating characteristics fit my
technical expectations perfectly in very many ways.




On Thu, Jul 6, 2017 at 2:19 PM, Jones Beene  wrote:

> According to Abd... "All claims dropped on both sides. It is as if the
> suit was never filed. All parties bear their own costs. The action of the
> Agreement was the consent of counsel to settlement without any court order
> other than dismissal, which is final."
>
> No agreements were included... so unless they present something otherwise
> in a joint statement, IH retains the original E-Cat License. No money
> changes hands.
>
> As for the future of the litigants, it looks like IH paid about $11
> million ++ for a License which according to them is worthless insofar as it
> was never shown to produce excess heat. Add to that the attorney fees and
> we see why many observers consider IH to be the big loser in this.
>
> That assumes the IP is really worthless, but it may have value in a
> surprising way, even if Rossi could never make it work. Here is the granted
> patent, and there are a number of applications not granted.
>
> https://www.google.com/patents/US9115913
>
> Darden raised much more than his losses on the Rossi fiasco and there is a
> small chance that he could make lemonade out of the Rossi lemons, using
> some of it. An interesting development in all of this will be the course
> that IH takes from here on with the remaining money. They are known to have
> been funding others in LENR all along.
>
> Of course IH could abandon the field altogether, but maybe they have a
> vision which transcends Rossigate. Possibly the best thing that could
> happen is for Randell Mills to demonstrate strong gain in that

Re: [Vo]:Picking up the pieces

2017-07-06 Thread Kevin O'Malley 
Abd was speculating just like the rest of us.  The most probable outcome
was Status Quo Ante Bellum, but Rossi was focused on getting his IP back.
So he probably did so, since IH supposedly considered it worthless.

That's kind of weird how one side considers something worthless while the
other side considers something worthwhile but the side that thinks it's
worthless spends 5-10X in lawyer fees to keep the worthless thing.Just
one of the things that didn't jibe in this case.

On Thu, Jul 6, 2017 at 11:19 AM, Jones Beene  wrote:

> According to Abd... "All claims dropped on both sides. It is as if the
> suit was never filed. All parties bear their own costs. The action of the
> Agreement was the consent of counsel to settlement without any court order
> other than dismissal, which is final."
>
> No agreements were included... so unless they present something otherwise
> in a joint statement, IH retains the original E-Cat License. No money
> changes hands.
>
> As for the future of the litigants, it looks like IH paid about $11
> million ++ for a License which according to them is worthless insofar as it
> was never shown to produce excess heat. Add to that the attorney fees and
> we see why many observers consider IH to be the big loser in this.
>
> That assumes the IP is really worthless, but it may have value in a
> surprising way, even if Rossi could never make it work. Here is the granted
> patent, and there are a number of applications not granted.
>
> https://www.google.com/patents/US9115913
>
> Darden raised much more than his losses on the Rossi fiasco and there is a
> small chance that he could make lemonade out of the Rossi lemons, using
> some of it. An interesting development in all of this will be the course
> that IH takes from here on with the remaining money. They are known to have
> been funding others in LENR all along.
>
> Of course IH could abandon the field altogether, but maybe they have a
> vision which transcends Rossigate. Possibly the best thing that could
> happen is for Randell Mills to demonstrate strong gain in that SunCell
> device. If it turns out that Mills device is arguably nuclear - it will not
> be covered by the hydrino IP. There have already been "inside" rumors that
> recent delays in the "Mills' Roadshow" are due to radioactivity showing up.
> This is expected in LENR but not in hydrino-tech and it could change the IP
> landscape.
>
> Footnote. Rossi's IP covers "Group 10 catalysts" which are nickel,
> palladium and platinum. It does not cover silver, which is being used by
> Mills and is Group 11. Silver is easily activated and perhaps it is
> activated by dense hydrogen. Mills' IP would not cover nuclear reactions.
> This puts him in a bind. If silver is required, but becomes activated, then
> there is an IP storm brewing.
>
> If I were advising Darden, it would be to look at quickly expanding the IP
> to fill the gap which exists when Mills can no longer hide the
> radioactivity of the SunCell.
>
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Picking up the pieces

2017-07-06 Thread Adrian Ashfield 

 


According to Abd... "All claims dropped on both sides. It is as if the 
suit was never filed.

 The IP and license are not mentioned. As Rossi was apparently pleased I deduce 
something has changed in the ownership of the IP or the multi country license.
As IH claimed the above were valueless it would be hard for them to object to 
them reverting to Rossi.  It was rumored that Rossi actually offered to buy 
them back earlier.
If either the E-Cat or QuarkX work, this would be worth more than the $89 
million.

I know you and others have made up your minds that Rossi never had anything 
that worked, but I find that conclusion premature.  If either work he may get 
the last laugh.

[Vo]:Picking up the pieces

2017-07-06 Thread Jones Beene 
According to Abd... "All claims dropped on both sides. It is as if the 
suit was never filed. All parties bear their own costs. The action of 
the Agreement was the consent of counsel to settlement without any court 
order other than dismissal, which is final."


No agreements were included... so unless they present something 
otherwise in a joint statement, IH retains the original E-Cat License. 
No money changes hands.


As for the future of the litigants, it looks like IH paid about $11 
million ++ for a License which according to them is worthless insofar as 
it was never shown to produce excess heat. Add to that the attorney fees 
and we see why many observers consider IH to be the big loser in this.


That assumes the IP is really worthless, but it may have value in a 
surprising way, even if Rossi could never make it work. Here is the 
granted patent, and there are a number of applications not granted.


https://www.google.com/patents/US9115913

Darden raised much more than his losses on the Rossi fiasco and there is 
a small chance that he could make lemonade out of the Rossi lemons, 
using some of it. An interesting development in all of this will be the 
course that IH takes from here on with the remaining money. They are 
known to have been funding others in LENR all along.


Of course IH could abandon the field altogether, but maybe they have a 
vision which transcends Rossigate. Possibly the best thing that could 
happen is for Randell Mills to demonstrate strong gain in that SunCell 
device. If it turns out that Mills device is arguably nuclear - it will 
not be covered by the hydrino IP. There have already been "inside" 
rumors that recent delays in the "Mills' Roadshow" are due to 
radioactivity showing up. This is expected in LENR but not in 
hydrino-tech and it could change the IP landscape.


Footnote. Rossi's IP covers "Group 10 catalysts" which are nickel, 
palladium and platinum. It does not cover silver, which is being used by 
Mills and is Group 11. Silver is easily activated and perhaps it is 
activated by dense hydrogen. Mills' IP would not cover nuclear 
reactions. This puts him in a bind. If silver is required, but becomes 
activated, then there is an IP storm brewing.


If I were advising Darden, it would be to look at quickly expanding the 
IP to fill the gap which exists when Mills can no longer hide the 
radioactivity of the SunCell.