Re: [Vo]:The dark side of dense hydrogen

[David Roberson]

I have a question about a recent experiment that you might be able to shed 
light upon.  It was reported that gravity waves originating from a pair of 
black holes joining together were measured with a certain expected wavelength.  
If gravity traveled much faster than light, how could this experiment have 
worked as anticipated?  Also, it seems that the estimated distance to the 
source would be greatly in error.  What would you have expected to have 
occurred?

Dave

 

 

 

-Original Message-
From: Russ George <russ.geo...@gmail.com>
To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Sent: Fri, Jan 6, 2017 1:12 am
Subject: RE: [Vo]:The dark side of dense hydrogen



Gravity waves are indeed the means for SETI communication as they travel at e8 
times the speed of light as Tom van Flandern showed the speed was at least 
2xe10 c or more! While the usual suspects heaped dogmatic howls on Tom, his 
friend and mine J P Vigier was a staunch supporter of his conclusion as am I. 
Alas both Tom and Jean Pierre are passed but their ideas and wisdom have not.
 
From: Eric Walker [mailto:eric.wal...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, January 5, 2017 8:55 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:The dark side of dense hydrogen
 


On Thu, Jan 5, 2017 at 8:24 PM, Bob Higgins <rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com> wrote:

 


There is a more far fetched possibility - that of communications via 
gravitational waves.  There have been a number of papers talking about the 
conversion of EM waves into gravitational waves in certain types of 
superconductors.  If that ever proves to be possible, it would open a whole new 
spectrum - one that could harbor SETI communications.


 

Because gravity appears to have infinite range, assuming there are gravitons, 
they are expected to be massless.  This means they will travel at the speed of 
light.  From this PhysicsForums post [1], I infer that for masses under human 
control which would serve as the source of the gravitons, they will have very 
large wavelengths.  Is there a way to send lots of information over a signal 
with a very low frequency?

 

Gravitons aside, if the alien signal is spread across a spectrum, as you 
mention, I suppose it might be very difficult to detect.  If the transmitted 
signal further involves intentionally taking the background noise and making 
small adjustments to it, you would probably have to be looking for this kind of 
pattern specifically to determine that there was a signal at all.

 

Eric

 

 

[1] 
https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/graviton-energy-and-frequency-wavelength.242145/#post-1780881

 

RE: [Vo]:The dark side of dense hydrogen

[Russ George]

Gravity waves are indeed the means for SETI communication as they travel at e8 
times the speed of light as Tom van Flandern showed the speed was at least 
2xe10 c or more! While the usual suspects heaped dogmatic howls on Tom, his 
friend and mine J P Vigier was a staunch supporter of his conclusion as am I. 
Alas both Tom and Jean Pierre are passed but their ideas and wisdom have not.

 

From: Eric Walker [mailto:eric.wal...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, January 5, 2017 8:55 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:The dark side of dense hydrogen

 

On Thu, Jan 5, 2017 at 8:24 PM, Bob Higgins <rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com 
<mailto:rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com> > wrote:

 

There is a more far fetched possibility - that of communications via 
gravitational waves.  There have been a number of papers talking about the 
conversion of EM waves into gravitational waves in certain types of 
superconductors.  If that ever proves to be possible, it would open a whole new 
spectrum - one that could harbor SETI communications.

 

Because gravity appears to have infinite range, assuming there are gravitons, 
they are expected to be massless.  This means they will travel at the speed of 
light.  From this PhysicsForums post [1], I infer that for masses under human 
control which would serve as the source of the gravitons, they will have very 
large wavelengths.  Is there a way to send lots of information over a signal 
with a very low frequency?

 

Gravitons aside, if the alien signal is spread across a spectrum, as you 
mention, I suppose it might be very difficult to detect.  If the transmitted 
signal further involves intentionally taking the background noise and making 
small adjustments to it, you would probably have to be looking for this kind of 
pattern specifically to determine that there was a signal at all.

 

Eric

 

 

[1] 
https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/graviton-energy-and-frequency-wavelength.242145/#post-1780881

 

Re: [Vo]:The dark side of dense hydrogen

[Eric Walker]

On Thu, Jan 5, 2017 at 8:24 PM, Bob Higgins 
wrote:

There is a more far fetched possibility - that of communications via
> gravitational waves.  There have been a number of papers talking about the
> conversion of EM waves into gravitational waves in certain types of
> superconductors.  If that ever proves to be possible, it would open a whole
> new spectrum - one that could harbor SETI communications.
>

Because gravity appears to have infinite range, assuming there are
gravitons, they are expected to be massless.  This means they will travel
at the speed of light.  From this PhysicsForums post [1], I infer that for
masses under human control which would serve as the source of the
gravitons, they will have very large wavelengths.  Is there a way to send
lots of information over a signal with a very low frequency?

Gravitons aside, if the alien signal is spread across a spectrum, as you
mention, I suppose it might be very difficult to detect.  If the
transmitted signal further involves intentionally taking the background
noise and making small adjustments to it, you would probably have to be
looking for this kind of pattern specifically to determine that there was a
signal at all.

Eric


[1]
https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/graviton-energy-and-frequency-wavelength.242145/#post-1780881

Re: [Vo]:The dark side of dense hydrogen

[Jones Beene]

Our experience seems to marginalize the relevance of "noise" quip - at 
least in the case of SETI. It all goes back to the starting assumptions.


Of course SETI operates under the assumption that ET wants to contact 
us, as opposed to us wanting to eavesdrop on them. We can reasonably 
assume that some or most advanced civilizations would be in that 
category of directing a high power signal from time to time with the 
intention of eliciting a response.


SETI chose the most obvious radio frequency (hydrogen) to look for a 
directed signal and tuned in at 1420 MHz. In 1977 a 72 second nonrandom 
signal was heard - the only signal in all of these years that had a 
chance to be from another system - the so-called "wow" signal. Wiki has 
a nice entry. They are still trying for a sequel at OSU/SETI.


Of course, LENR when put into practice as a working technology would 
make it much easier to make contact via a directed high power signal. We 
could put a robotic beacon in orbit and let it transmit to thousands of 
selected candidates, sequentially for eons ... so we can probably assume 
that going to fiber optics or spread spectra etc is not really 
particularly relevant to explain the lack of contact... if ET wanted to 
make contact, they will initiate it.


Who knows - maybe the WOW beacon was on a 40 year cycle, scanning across 
the Universe and this year it will come back to focus on the 3rd rock?


... even if the builders of WOW and their enemies, somewhere out there 
in Sagittarius, have completely annihilated each other in the mean time 
with UDD bombs... since the beacon they put in orbit keeps a-tickin' 
thanks to LENR.




 Jed Rothwell wrote:
Bob Higgins > wrote:


Even more probable is the evolution to spread spectrum
techniques.  Look at what has happened to a lot of our emissions -
they have moved to spread spectrum.  This would no longer be
detectable as an emission type that is detectable by SETI technology.


That is a variation on what I had in mind with increased data 
compression. To paraphrase Clarke's third law:


Any sufficiently advanced communication is indistinguishable from noise.

(I actually said that to Clarke. I don't recall his response.)

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:The dark side of dense hydrogen

[Jed Rothwell]

Bob Higgins  wrote:

Even more probable is the evolution to spread spectrum techniques.  Look at
> what has happened to a lot of our emissions - they have moved to spread
> spectrum.  This would no longer be detectable as an emission type that is
> detectable by SETI technology.
>

That is a variation on what I had in mind with increased data compression.
To paraphrase Clarke's third law:

Any sufficiently advanced communication is indistinguishable from noise.

(I actually said that to Clarke. I don't recall his response.)

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:The dark side of dense hydrogen

[Jed Rothwell]

 wrote:


> There is another possibility, i.e. that the reason for the short window is
> not
> self destruction, but rather that they discover FTL communication
> techniques,
> and stop broadcasting using EMF.
>

Here are my hypotheses:

1. Data broadcast by people in RF and light fiber is getting faster all the
time, and denser. By that I mean the bits are closer together and images
are compressed. Over time, the data looks more and more like noise. We have
only been doing this for ~100 years but the bit rate has increased by
orders of magnitude. Furthermore the power has gone down in comparison to
the bit rate. Thousands of years from now, the transmissions may be so
rapid and so compressed they will look like noise.

2. RF doesn't work for interstellar communication. I read somewhere that
radio signals degrade so badly, a few light years from earth they are
probably indistinguishable from noise. So much for the movie "Contact."

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:The dark side of dense hydrogen

[Bob Higgins]

Even more probable is the evolution to spread spectrum techniques.  Look at
what has happened to a lot of our emissions - they have moved to spread
spectrum.  This would no longer be detectable as an emission type that is
detectable by SETI technology.  We may migrate largely to a communications
technology undetectable by SETI measurements less than 100 years after we
started using radio.  That is another window that has nothing to do with
extinction of our species.

There is a more far fetched possibility - that of communications via
gravitational waves.  There have been a number of papers talking about the
conversion of EM waves into gravitational waves in certain types of
superconductors.  If that ever proves to be possible, it would open a whole
new spectrum - one that could harbor SETI communications.

On Thu, Jan 5, 2017 at 6:38 PM,  wrote:

> In reply to  Jones Beene's message of Thu, 5 Jan 2017 08:16:05 -0800:
> Hi,
> [snip]
> >... estimate that there should be many advanced civilizations in the
> >Universe, a few of whom are close enough that we  should be able to
> >communicate with them or at least catch glimpses of their broadcast
> >signals. Except ... that is, for the last term in the Drake equation ( L
> >= The length of time such civilizations release detectable signals into
> >space). This is the troubling part. Maybe advancing science invariable
> >hits a plateau where it always... or almost always ... self-destructs.
> >Maybe every civilization that discovers LENR succumbs to the dark side.
>
> There is another possibility, i.e. that the reason for the short window is
> not
> self destruction, but rather that they discover FTL communication
> techniques,
> and stop broadcasting using EMF.
>
> Regards,
>
> Robin van Spaandonk
>
> http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
>
>

Re: [Vo]:The dark side of dense hydrogen

[mixent]

In reply to  Jones Beene's message of Thu, 5 Jan 2017 08:16:05 -0800:
Hi,
[snip]
>... estimate that there should be many advanced civilizations in the 
>Universe, a few of whom are close enough that we  should be able to 
>communicate with them or at least catch glimpses of their broadcast 
>signals. Except ... that is, for the last term in the Drake equation ( L 
>= The length of time such civilizations release detectable signals into 
>space). This is the troubling part. Maybe advancing science invariable 
>hits a plateau where it always... or almost always ... self-destructs. 
>Maybe every civilization that discovers LENR succumbs to the dark side.

There is another possibility, i.e. that the reason for the short window is not
self destruction, but rather that they discover FTL communication techniques,
and stop broadcasting using EMF.

Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html

Re: [Vo]:The dark side of dense hydrogen

[mixent]

In reply to  Jones Beene's message of Wed, 4 Jan 2017 13:14:21 -0800:
Hi,
[snip]
>Even if neutrons were required for the most energetic kind of 
>weaponization, dense hydrogen is similar enough to the neutron that it 
>could substitute -- and in the case of Holmlid - exceed by orders of 
>magnitude the gain from the nuclear fission chain reaction.
>
With dense H, you may need to take into account that tunneling takes time, and
usually quite a bit of time. By "taking time", I mean that frequently many
attempts are required before one is successful, so the time between successful
attempts can be long. This tends to work as a wet blanket for explosions.
Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html

Re: [Vo]:The dark side of dense hydrogen

[Jones Beene]

Well 

Given the new realities of 2017 - I suggest that you remove the free 
edition, but re-kindle it with info on Rossigate and the "dark side" 
thread, charge $9.99 and call it the *Special**Trump edition for a Brave 
New World.*




 Jed Rothwell wrote:

Jones Beene wrote:

First I will give Jed a plug. This download to Kindle could be the
best buck you spend this year, even if you do not appreciate my
contrarian response to it:

https://www.amazon.com/Cold-Fusion-Future-Jed-Rothwell-ebook/dp/B001RTSHZS/



That is out of date. Read the free version here:

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

I could convert it to Kindle format again, but no one has purchased it 
in years. Amazon has not paid me anything. This could be because the 
free sample text starts with the link to the free Acrobat version.


- Jed

Re: [Vo]:The dark side of dense hydrogen

[Jed Rothwell]

Jones Beene  wrote:

> First I will give Jed a plug. This download to Kindle could be the best
> buck you spend this year, even if you do not appreciate my contrarian
> response to it:
>
> https://www.amazon.com/Cold-Fusion-Future-Jed-Rothwell-
> ebook/dp/B001RTSHZS/
>
That is out of date. Read the free version here:

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

I could convert it to Kindle format again, but no one has purchased it in
years. Amazon has not paid me anything. This could be because the free
sample text starts with the link to the free Acrobat version.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:The dark side of dense hydrogen

[Jones Beene]

The Rothwellian theme (available on Kindle) which on closer examination 
perhaps is pre-Orwellian,  can be called "the democratization of energy" 
... but to the contrarian, it would explain an arcane detail which is 
troubling on several levels. ET can't call home.


First I will give Jed a plug. This download to Kindle could be the best 
buck you spend this year, even if you do not appreciate my contrarian 
response to it:


https://www.amazon.com/Cold-Fusion-Future-Jed-Rothwell-ebook/dp/B001RTSHZS/

OK. That arcane detail, which is explained by a contrarian take on 
free-energy advances, would be the present lack of communication with 
advanced civilizations on other planets - ala SETI and the Drake 
equation. ET is quiet. Most experts who use their best guesses to  fill 
in the blanks on the Drake equation...


http://www.space.com/25219-drake-equation.html

... estimate that there should be many advanced civilizations in the 
Universe, a few of whom are close enough that we  should be able to 
communicate with them or at least catch glimpses of their broadcast 
signals. Except ... that is, for the last term in the Drake equation ( L 
= The length of time such civilizations release detectable signals into 
space). This is the troubling part. Maybe advancing science invariable 
hits a plateau where it always... or almost always ... self-destructs. 
Maybe every civilization that discovers LENR succumbs to the dark side.


Which is to day: there is a fair chance that LENR, instead of being the 
savior of the planet - is instead, the kiss of death. One a civilization 
acquires LERN and massive power (of the kiloton variety) is put into the 
hands of every nut-case with a cause - civilization, as we know it 
collapses!


Let's face it, the average human is stupid and short sighted. IQ 100 is 
above ape level, but not far enough above. Religions can and do prey on 
that stupidity to convert an army of true believers into Martyrs for the 
cause. Give a potential martyr control of the equivalent of a kiloton of 
explosives and humanity is doomed. "Planet of the Apes" here we come. 
There is simply no way to control free-energy in the hands of fanatics.


OK - good time to announce that the bit of ultimate cynicism (expressed 
above) started out only as gallows humor of sorts - a counterpoint to 
the wild idealism which we see expressed in many advocates of LENR. Yet 
the more you think about it, the more you cannot write it off.


There is an arguable case for the proposition that "the democratization 
of energy" - putting real power into the hands of the average human - is 
actually the death knell of human progress.


Jed Rothwell wrote:


Eric Walker wrote:

In addition to the possibilities that have been mentioned, there
is another that comes to mind should at some point LENR be
harnessed as a practical source of energy. Consider small, quiet
drones the size of hummingbirds, which are able to linger in an
area for months on end.  With such devices a state player could
quietly assassinate anyone who was not deep in some bunker.


Yes. I described this in chapter 11 of my book. Along with several 
other nasty weapons. I heard about these things from people in the 
military such as Adm. Griffin. Military experts are well aware of how 
cold fusion might be used to enhance conventional weapons.


New energy sources have played a key role in military technology since 
1600, especially in naval warfare after 1800. Ironclad ships (and 
later steel ships) and big guns would not be possible without steam 
engines. Sailing ships would never be able to support them. Steam 
power had to come first.


- Jed

Re: [Vo]:The dark side of dense hydrogen

[Jed Rothwell]

Eric Walker  wrote:


> In addition to the possibilities that have been mentioned, there is
> another that comes to mind should at some point LENR be harnessed as a
> practical source of energy.  Consider small, quiet drones the size of
> hummingbirds, which are able to linger in an area for months on end.  With
> such devices a state player could quietly assassinate anyone who was not
> deep in some bunker.
>

Yes. I described this in chapter 11 of my book. Along with several other
nasty weapons. I heard about these things from people in the military such
as Adm. Griffin. Military experts are well aware of how cold fusion might
be used to enhance conventional weapons.

New energy sources have played a key role in military technology since
1600, especially in naval warfare after 1800. Ironclad ships (and later
steel ships) and big guns would not be possible without steam engines.
Sailing ships would never be able to support them. Steam power had to come
first.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:The dark side of dense hydrogen

[Eric Walker]

On Wed, Jan 4, 2017 at 12:40 PM, Bob Higgins 
wrote:

I think the real concern for weaponization is not the first thought
> everyone jumps to, which is explosive magnifier.
>

In addition to the possibilities that have been mentioned, there is another
that comes to mind should at some point LENR be harnessed as a practical
source of energy.  Consider small, quiet drones the size of hummingbirds,
which are able to linger in an area for months on end.  With such devices a
state player could quietly assassinate anyone who was not deep in some
bunker.  Before long this technology would be available not only to
militaries, but to organized crime and terrorism as well.  There might be
little that could be done to protect from such a threat.

Eric

Re: [Vo]:The dark side of dense hydrogen

[Axil Axil]

The detonation of a fission device includes the compression of the pit to
1/3 of its original  volume. This compression is done using systemic
explosives shockwaves. There is also neutron reflectors/amplifiers involved
to keep neutrons inside the pit.

In LENR, by their very nature, the lack of confinement of muons makes a
rapid chain reaction impossible because the speed of the chain reaction
cannot be confined and therefore be accelerated.

On Wed, Jan 4, 2017 at 5:31 PM, Jones Beene  wrote:

>  Russ George wrote:
>
> Whoa indeed, nanoseconds are way to slow for fission!
>
>
> So what? Who needs fission when you can achieve complete nuclear
> disintegration - as Holmlid claims to do with a small laser.
>
> With fission of U, the energy release per nucleon is in the range of
> 200MeV. With laser implosion of UDD, the energy available is 2 GeV. Given
> that the mass of the U is 120 times more to start with but the energy
> release of fission is 10 times less, there is a great advantage to the
> Holmlid effect. The energy density favors UDD by three orders of magnitude
> but it is not a direct competition. Muons are weakly interacting, but this
> is not important, since in the big picture - we already have overkill with
> our fission/fusion arsenal. That arsenal will not be replaced. It is a sunk
> cost.
>
> The use of LENR as a weapon will probably emerge in other novel ways which
> are not even considered now - on the small scale instead of the large. A
> laser pointer engineered to ignite a milligram of UDD - that is the nature
> of the new threat. It can be delivered by drone.
>

Re: [Vo]:The dark side of dense hydrogen

[Jones Beene]

 Russ George wrote:


Whoa indeed, nanoseconds are way to slow for fission!



So what? Who needs fission when you can achieve complete nuclear 
disintegration - as Holmlid claims to do with a small laser.


With fission of U, the energy release per nucleon is in the range of 
200MeV. With laser implosion of UDD, the energy available is 2 GeV. 
Given that the mass of the U is 120 times more to start with but the 
energy release of fission is 10 times less, there is a great advantage 
to the Holmlid effect. The energy density favors UDD by three orders of 
magnitude but it is not a direct competition. Muons are weakly 
interacting, but this is not important, since in the big picture - we 
already have overkill with our fission/fusion arsenal. That arsenal will 
not be replaced. It is a sunk cost.


The use of LENR as a weapon will probably emerge in other novel ways 
which are not even considered now - on the small scale instead of the 
large. A laser pointer engineered to ignite a milligram of UDD - that is 
the nature of the new threat. It can be delivered by drone.

RE: [Vo]:The dark side of dense hydrogen

[Russ George]

Cold fusion is a piss poor cousin in the enrichment game with fissionable 
species to paths with abundant neutrons.

 

From: Axil Axil [mailto:janap...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, January 4, 2017 1:55 PM
To: vortex-l
Subject: Re: [Vo]:The dark side of dense hydrogen

 

The real problem with LENR is the LENR reaction's preference for the even 
isotopes U238, U232 of the odd isotopes. That make LENR a transuranic element  
enrichment risk.

 

>From my reference:

 

" It was found that the activity of both U isotopes decreased with respect to 
that of Cs. However, the activity of the 238U isotope decreases to a greater 
extent. Thus, the ratio of 235U to 238U becomes bigger than unity. Prior to 
these experiments, we made sure that the specific activity of 137Cs does not 
change noticeably. The real situation is more complicated [3] but this is a 
topic of a separate report. For us, it is important that the transformation can 
also take place outside the plasma channel. This is a rather “unpleasant 
surprise,” because, probably, within several years, when the low-temperature 
transmutation will be studied in more detail, it would be rather easy to devise 
a facile and inexpensive process to enrich uranium. In view of the growth of 
terrorism all over the world, this outcome seems deplorable."

 

It seen that muon fission likes even isotopes more that odd ones.

 

On Wed, Jan 4, 2017 at 4:14 PM, Jones Beene <jone...@pacbell.net 
<mailto:jone...@pacbell.net> > wrote:



Whoa -  an observer must possess a great deal of blind hope to imagine that 
weaponization of LENR is impossible simply because neutrons are lacking. In 
fact, dense hydrogen is physically similar to the neutron.

Most importantly, the number of documented runaway LENR reactions makes the 
statement of "impossibility" almost silly, based on experience. It has 
happened. As for slow ramp up - Holmlid shows us the gain can happen in 
nanoseconds.

Let's back track a bit. Neutrons are required for one kind of chain reaction, 
but the modality is broader. A chain reaction is any self-expanding sequence of 
reactions where a reactive product (by-product or emission) causes additional 
reactions to take place. 

The prototypical chain reaction is actually combustion in an internal 
combustion engine, initiated by a spark or by compression. Fission is another 
but there are more including, of course, the domino effect. The key to all 
chain reactions is positive feedback. Positive feedback leads to a 
self-amplifying chain of events. in a number of physical systems including 
these:

1) Chemical reactions of many kinds, esp. combustion
2) The neutron chain reaction of nuclear physics
3) The avalanche cascade - breakdown in gases
4) The avalanche breakdown in semiconductors
5) Population inversion - lasing
6) QM entangled systems of many kinds 
7) Domino effect and meme effect
8) Audio feedback loop
9) Mossbauer effect

Even if neutrons were required for the most energetic kind of weaponization, 
dense hydrogen is similar enough to the neutron that it could substitute -- and 
in the case of Holmlid - exceed by orders of magnitude the gain from the 
nuclear fission chain reaction. 



 Jed Rothwell wrote:

 

Most researchers think that a runaway reaction or explosion is impossible for 
three reasons:

 

1. Cold fusion only works with an intact metal lattice.

2. It ramps up relatively slowly, so it would destroy the lattice before it 
could increase to high levels.

3. It is not a chain reaction. In a uranium fission chain reaction, one event 
directly triggers two or more others, and the reaction can increase 
exponentially over a very short time (80 generations in 1 microsecond).

 

I hope that is right.

 

- Jed

 

 

 

Re: [Vo]:The dark side of dense hydrogen

[Axil Axil]

The real problem with LENR is the LENR reaction's preference for the even
isotopes U238, U232 of the odd isotopes. That make LENR a transuranic
element  enrichment risk.

>From my reference:

" It was found that the activity of both U isotopes decreased with respect
to that of Cs. However, the activity of the 238U isotope decreases to a
greater extent. Thus, the ratio of 235U to 238U becomes bigger than unity.
Prior to these experiments, we made sure that the specific activity of
137Cs does not change noticeably. The real situation is more complicated
[3] but this is a topic of a separate report. For us, it is important that
the transformation can also take place outside the plasma channel. This is
a rather “unpleasant surprise,” because, probably, within several years,
when the low-temperature transmutation will be studied in more detail, it
would be rather easy to devise a facile and inexpensive process to enrich
uranium. In view of the growth of terrorism all over the world, this
outcome seems deplorable."

It seen that muon fission likes even isotopes more that odd ones.

On Wed, Jan 4, 2017 at 4:14 PM, Jones Beene  wrote:

>
>
> Whoa -  an observer must possess a great deal of blind hope to imagine
> that weaponization of LENR is impossible simply because neutrons are
> lacking. In fact, dense hydrogen is physically similar to the neutron.
>
> Most importantly, the number of documented runaway LENR reactions makes
> the statement of "impossibility" almost silly, based on experience. It
> has happened. As for slow ramp up - Holmlid shows us the gain can happen in
> nanoseconds.
>
> Let's back track a bit. Neutrons are required for one kind of chain
> reaction, but the modality is broader. A chain reaction is any
> self-expanding sequence of reactions where a reactive product (by-product
> or emission) causes additional reactions to take place.
>
> The prototypical chain reaction is actually combustion in an internal
> combustion engine, initiated by a spark or by compression. Fission is
> another but there are more including, of course, the domino effect. The key
> to all chain reactions is *positive feedback.* Positive feedback leads to
> a self-amplifying chain of events. in a number of physical systems
> including these:
>
> 1) Chemical reactions of many kinds, esp. combustion
> 2) The neutron chain reaction of nuclear physics
> 3) The avalanche cascade - breakdown in gases
> 4) The avalanche breakdown in semiconductors
> 5) Population inversion - lasing
> 6) QM entangled systems of many kinds
> 7) Domino effect and meme effect
> 8) Audio feedback loop
> 9) Mossbauer effect
>
> Even if neutrons were required for the most energetic kind of
> weaponization, dense hydrogen is similar enough to the neutron that it
> could substitute -- and in the case of Holmlid - exceed by orders of
> magnitude the gain from the nuclear fission chain reaction.
>
>
>  Jed Rothwell wrote:
>
> Most researchers think that a runaway reaction or explosion is impossible
> for three reasons:
>
> 1. Cold fusion only works with an intact metal lattice.
> 2. It ramps up relatively slowly, so it would destroy the lattice before
> it could increase to high levels.
> 3. It is not a chain reaction. In a uranium fission chain reaction, one
> event directly triggers two or more others, and the reaction can increase
> exponentially over a very short time (80 generations in 1 microsecond).
>
>
> I hope that is right.
>
> - Jed
>
>
>

RE: [Vo]:The dark side of dense hydrogen

[Russ George]

Whoa indeed, nanoseconds are way to slow for fission!

 

From: Jones Beene [mailto:jone...@pacbell.net] 
Sent: Wednesday, January 4, 2017 1:14 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:The dark side of dense hydrogen

 



Whoa -  an observer must possess a great deal of blind hope to imagine that 
weaponization of LENR is impossible simply because neutrons are lacking. In 
fact, dense hydrogen is physically similar to the neutron.

Most importantly, the number of documented runaway LENR reactions makes the 
statement of "impossibility" almost silly, based on experience. It has 
happened. As for slow ramp up - Holmlid shows us the gain can happen in 
nanoseconds.

Let's back track a bit. Neutrons are required for one kind of chain reaction, 
but the modality is broader. A chain reaction is any self-expanding sequence of 
reactions where a reactive product (by-product or emission) causes additional 
reactions to take place. 

The prototypical chain reaction is actually combustion in an internal 
combustion engine, initiated by a spark or by compression. Fission is another 
but there are more including, of course, the domino effect. The key to all 
chain reactions is positive feedback. Positive feedback leads to a 
self-amplifying chain of events. in a number of physical systems including 
these:

1) Chemical reactions of many kinds, esp. combustion
2) The neutron chain reaction of nuclear physics
3) The avalanche cascade - breakdown in gases
4) The avalanche breakdown in semiconductors
5) Population inversion - lasing
6) QM entangled systems of many kinds 
7) Domino effect and meme effect
8) Audio feedback loop
9) Mossbauer effect

Even if neutrons were required for the most energetic kind of weaponization, 
dense hydrogen is similar enough to the neutron that it could substitute -- and 
in the case of Holmlid - exceed by orders of magnitude the gain from the 
nuclear fission chain reaction. 



 Jed Rothwell wrote:

 

Most researchers think that a runaway reaction or explosion is impossible for 
three reasons:

 

1. Cold fusion only works with an intact metal lattice.

2. It ramps up relatively slowly, so it would destroy the lattice before it 
could increase to high levels.

3. It is not a chain reaction. In a uranium fission chain reaction, one event 
directly triggers two or more others, and the reaction can increase 
exponentially over a very short time (80 generations in 1 microsecond).

 

I hope that is right.

 

- Jed

 

 

Re: [Vo]:The dark side of dense hydrogen

[Jones Beene]

Whoa -  an observer must possess a great deal of blind hope to imagine 
that weaponization of LENR is impossible simply because neutrons are 
lacking. In fact, dense hydrogen is physically similar to the neutron.


Most importantly, the number of documented runaway LENR reactions makes 
the statement of "impossibility" almost silly, based on experience.It 
has happened. As for slow ramp up - Holmlid shows us the gain can happen 
in nanoseconds.


Let's back track a bit. Neutrons are required for one kind of chain 
reaction, but the modality is broader. A chain reaction is any 
self-expanding sequence of reactions where a reactive product 
(by-product or emission) causes additional reactions to take place.


The prototypical chain reaction is actually combustion in an internal 
combustion engine, initiated by a spark or by compression. Fission is 
another but there are more including, of course, the domino effect. The 
key to all chain reactions is *positive feedback.* Positive 
feedback**leads to a self-amplifying chain of events. in a number of 
physical systems including these:


1) Chemical reactions of many kinds, esp. combustion
2) The neutron chain reaction of nuclear physics
3) The avalanche cascade - breakdown in gases
4) The avalanche breakdown in semiconductors
5) Population inversion - lasing
6) QM entangled systems of many kinds
7) Domino effect and meme effect
8) Audio feedback loop
9) Mossbauer effect

Even if neutrons were required for the most energetic kind of 
weaponization, dense hydrogen is similar enough to the neutron that it 
could substitute -- and in the case of Holmlid - exceed by orders of 
magnitude the gain from the nuclear fission chain reaction.



 Jed Rothwell wrote:


Most researchers think that a runaway reaction or explosion is
impossible for three reasons:

1. Cold fusion only works with an intact metal lattice.
2. It ramps up relatively slowly, so it would destroy the lattice
before it could increase to high levels.
3. It is not a chain reaction. In a uranium fission chain
reaction, one event directly triggers two or more others, and the
reaction can increase exponentially over a very short time (80
generations in 1 microsecond).


I hope that is right.

- Jed

RE: [Vo]:The dark side of dense hydrogen

[bobcook39923]

Higgins—

If neutrons are involved in making fissile isotopes, I would imagine that it 
may be tough to keep the newly created fissile material from fissionning right 
after its creation. 

I can imagine metastable isomers having a role.

Bob

From: Bob Higgins
Sent: Wednesday, January 4, 2017 10:40 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:The dark side of dense hydrogen

I brought up the issue of weaponization of LENR in the panel session at 
ILENR-12.  The general consensus was, "the cat is out of the bag"; I.E. too 
late for that concern.
I think the real concern for weaponization is not the first thought everyone 
jumps to, which is explosive magnifier.  For this, the same thing that makes 
LENR desirable for power usage (no radioactive ash) is the same thing that 
limits its danger in explosives.  You can always make big explosions even 
without LENR.  Still, I have heard stories of military testing of LENR systems 
for explosive potential.
I think there are 2 bigger weapon dangers that LENR processes expose:  1) to 
transmute/isotopically shift non-fissionable materials into fissionable 
materials, and 2) to create metastable isomers (long regarded as a key to 4th 
generation nuclear weapons).  We could speculate that the military is already 
using LENR undercover for these purposes, or is doing LENR research with these 
intended outcomes.  If so, it would be natural for them to exercise government 
influence to slow down commercial development of LENR.  

On Wed, Jan 4, 2017 at 11:19 AM, Russ George <russ.geo...@gmail.com> wrote:
Conflating nuclear chain reaction energy release with cold fusion mechanisms is 
what leads to silly speculation, aka trolling, over weaponization of cold 
fusion. It is the far reaching neutron chain reaction process that is common to 
fission/fusion weapons that makes them so potent. In cold fusion this long 
range stimulated chain reaction mechanism does not exist! In fact cold fusion 
reactions are inherently clearly self-limited as when the reaction condition 
becomes more and more prevalent the heat released promptly destroys the NAE 
through rather mundane melting and vapourization of the active matrix and 
surroundings. The challenge in cold fusion is producing materials that contain 
NAE’s where those NAE’s are small enough to limit the number of adjacent cold 
fusion reactions so as to limit the amount of heating. Cold fusion heat is 
produced in incredibly fast nuclear time frames but as heat it only moves away 
from its’ birthplace at the speed of chemistry. There are only a few of we 
experimentalists who have had the good fortune to struggle with this heat 
transfer/melting problem. I believe most of us who remain active are making 
good progress in developing technological skills to manage it.  That there is a 
perfect linkage/control in effect due to the commonly known chemical/thermal 
properties of matter is very well established.  
 
From: Axil Axil [mailto:janap...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, January 4, 2017 8:44 AM
To: vortex-l
Subject: Re: [Vo]:The dark side of dense hydrogen
 
The explosive potential of the cold fusion reaction is centered on the 
percentage of energy that is produce by the LENR reaction in the various energy 
releases format. 
 
By energy formats I mean the place where the output energy goes such as sub 
atomic particle production, heat, light, and/or RF.
 
If a large percentage of the energy format goes toward muon production, then 
the muons might catalyze a large amount of fusion and fission. 
 
I have a fear that a runaway LENR reaction might generate a huge amount of 
muons where only a small fraction of the output energy goes toward the 
production of EMF such as heat and light.
 
On Wed, Jan 4, 2017 at 10:28 AM, Jones Beene <jone...@pacbell.net> wrote:
This is not a repeat of the suggestion that dense hydrogen is the same species 
as "dark matter" ... but there is a good case for that proposition.

It is about "dark" as in evil. If there is a foreseeable downside to LENR, it 
is the possibility of weaponization. Not just that - it is the easy 
weaponization of commonly available materials, which makes it much scarier than 
nukes.

In the past, observers of the LENR scene - who delve into almost every remote 
possibility for anomalous energy - have not wanted to talk about the 
possibility of a cold-fusion bomb. Even when P reported their amazing 
meltdown, the implications were minimized. It is an uncomfortable topic since 
for one thing, weaponization could provide Federal regulators with a ready made 
excuse, should they want to limit research into the field at the behest of the 
fossil fuel industry, for instance.

However, the reality of our technological world - which is fed by the WWW and 
knows no boundaries - is that there is no field of human endeavor which 
benefits from intentional neglect: the ostrich meme - buying one's head in the 
sand. The worst possible approa

Re: [Vo]:The dark side of dense hydrogen

[Jed Rothwell]

Russ George  wrote:

Conflating nuclear chain reaction energy release with cold fusion
> mechanisms is what leads to silly speculation, aka trolling, over
> weaponization of cold fusion. It is the far reaching neutron chain reaction
> process that is common to fission/fusion weapons that makes them so potent.
> In cold fusion this long range stimulated chain reaction mechanism does not
> exist! In fact cold fusion reactions are inherently clearly self-limited as
> when the reaction condition becomes more and more prevalent . . .
>

I agree. That's what I said in the book, where I summarized the majority
view:

Most researchers think that a runaway reaction or explosion is impossible
for three reasons:

1. Cold fusion only works with an intact metal lattice.
2. It ramps up relatively slowly, so it would destroy the lattice before it
could increase to high levels.
3. It is not a chain reaction. In a uranium fission chain reaction, one
event directly triggers two or more others, and the reaction can increase
exponentially over a very short time (80 generations in 1 microsecond).


I hope that is right.

- Jed

RE: [Vo]:The dark side of dense hydrogen

[bobcook39923]

I can guess a large coherent—QM  entangled—system could host a large reaction 
throughout that system, but not beyond it boundaries.  Beyond the initial 
coherent  system would have to be other coherent systems which would require 
resonant conditions, possibly provided by the thermal pulse or other energy 
output of the initial reaction, to LENR. 

However, it may be that each coherent system would have to have the same 
resonant parameters associated with its structure as the already reacted system 
to accomplish its LENR. 

I think that with the Ni-H system using nano particles is limited to single 
LENR’s at a time, since the particles are apparently not destroyed.  The self 
sustaining nature of the Ni-H system would seem to depend upon a relatively 
slow creation of resonant conditions in the various nano particles making up 
the reactor.  If the reactor gets to hot, the resonant conditions cease to 
happen very often  and LENR stops.  

The Pd-D system seems much closer to a system that has the potential for much 
larger number of reactions within a single large grain or crystal that 
constitutes a coherent system.  I have been of the opinion that a number of 
cells of the Pd crystal could be involved in a resonant condition that would 
result in the fusion of 2 D in each cell at the same time.  This is what would 
cause the melting of the PD crystal and destruction of the grain.  Helium was 
correlated with heat as would be expected with the D fusion.  I consider the 
P description of the reaction as cold fusion was accurate.  

Bob Cook






from: Russ George
Sent: Wednesday, January 4, 2017 10:19 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: RE: [Vo]:The dark side of dense hydrogen

Conflating nuclear chain reaction energy release with cold fusion mechanisms is 
what leads to silly speculation, aka trolling, over weaponization of cold 
fusion. It is the far reaching neutron chain reaction process that is common to 
fission/fusion weapons that makes them so potent. In cold fusion this long 
range stimulated chain reaction mechanism does not exist! In fact cold fusion 
reactions are inherently clearly self-limited as when the reaction condition 
becomes more and more prevalent the heat released promptly destroys the NAE 
through rather mundane melting and vapourization of the active matrix and 
surroundings. The challenge in cold fusion is producing materials that contain 
NAE’s where those NAE’s are small enough to limit the number of adjacent cold 
fusion reactions so as to limit the amount of heating. Cold fusion heat is 
produced in incredibly fast nuclear time frames but as heat it only moves away 
from its’ birthplace at the speed of chemistry. There are only a few of we 
experimentalists who have had the good fortune to struggle with this heat 
transfer/melting problem. I believe most of us who remain active are making 
good progress in developing technological skills to manage it.  That there is a 
perfect linkage/control in effect due to the commonly known chemical/thermal 
properties of matter is very well established.  

From: Axil Axil [mailto:janap...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, January 4, 2017 8:44 AM
To: vortex-l
Subject: Re: [Vo]:The dark side of dense hydrogen

The explosive potential of the cold fusion reaction is centered on the 
percentage of energy that is produce by the LENR reaction in the various energy 
releases format. 

By energy formats I mean the place where the output energy goes such as sub 
atomic particle production, heat, light, and/or RF.

If a large percentage of the energy format goes toward muon production, then 
the muons might catalyze a large amount of fusion and fission. 

I have a fear that a runaway LENR reaction might generate a huge amount of 
muons where only a small fraction of the output energy goes toward the 
production of EMF such as heat and light.

On Wed, Jan 4, 2017 at 10:28 AM, Jones Beene <jone...@pacbell.net> wrote:
This is not a repeat of the suggestion that dense hydrogen is the same species 
as "dark matter" ... but there is a good case for that proposition.

It is about "dark" as in evil. If there is a foreseeable downside to LENR, it 
is the possibility of weaponization. Not just that - it is the easy 
weaponization of commonly available materials, which makes it much scarier than 
nukes.

In the past, observers of the LENR scene - who delve into almost every remote 
possibility for anomalous energy - have not wanted to talk about the 
possibility of a cold-fusion bomb. Even when P reported their amazing 
meltdown, the implications were minimized. It is an uncomfortable topic since 
for one thing, weaponization could provide Federal regulators with a ready made 
excuse, should they want to limit research into the field at the behest of the 
fossil fuel industry, for instance.

However, the reality of our technological world - which is fed by the WWW and 
knows no boundaries - is that there is no field of human end

Re: [Vo]:The dark side of dense hydrogen

[Bob Higgins]

I brought up the issue of weaponization of LENR in the panel session at
ILENR-12.  The general consensus was, "the cat is out of the bag"; I.E. too
late for that concern.

I think the real concern for weaponization is not the first thought
everyone jumps to, which is explosive magnifier.  For this, the same thing
that makes LENR desirable for power usage (no radioactive ash) is the same
thing that limits its danger in explosives.  You can always make big
explosions even without LENR.  Still, I have heard stories of military
testing of LENR systems for explosive potential.

I think there are 2 bigger weapon dangers that LENR processes expose:  1)
to transmute/isotopically shift non-fissionable materials into fissionable
materials, and 2) to create metastable isomers (long regarded as a key to
4th generation nuclear weapons).  We could speculate that the military is
already using LENR undercover for these purposes, or is doing LENR research
with these intended outcomes.  If so, it would be natural for them to
exercise government influence to slow down commercial development of LENR.

On Wed, Jan 4, 2017 at 11:19 AM, Russ George <russ.geo...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Conflating nuclear chain reaction energy release with cold fusion
> mechanisms is what leads to silly speculation, aka trolling, over
> weaponization of cold fusion. It is the far reaching neutron chain reaction
> process that is common to fission/fusion weapons that makes them so potent.
> In cold fusion this long range stimulated chain reaction mechanism does not
> exist! In fact cold fusion reactions are inherently clearly self-limited as
> when the reaction condition becomes more and more prevalent the heat
> released promptly destroys the NAE through rather mundane melting and
> vapourization of the active matrix and surroundings. The challenge in cold
> fusion is producing materials that contain NAE’s where those NAE’s are
> small enough to limit the number of adjacent cold fusion reactions so as to
> limit the amount of heating. Cold fusion heat is produced in incredibly
> fast nuclear time frames but as heat it only moves away from its’
> birthplace at the speed of chemistry. There are only a few of we
> experimentalists who have had the good fortune to struggle with this heat
> transfer/melting problem. I believe most of us who remain active are making
> good progress in developing technological skills to manage it.  That there
> is a perfect linkage/control in effect due to the commonly known
> chemical/thermal properties of matter is very well established.
>
>
>
> *From:* Axil Axil [mailto:janap...@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Wednesday, January 4, 2017 8:44 AM
> *To:* vortex-l
> *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:The dark side of dense hydrogen
>
>
>
> The explosive potential of the cold fusion reaction is centered on the
> percentage of energy that is produce by the LENR reaction in the various
> energy releases format.
>
>
>
> By energy formats I mean the place where the output energy goes such as
> sub atomic particle production, heat, light, and/or RF.
>
>
>
> If a large percentage of the energy format goes toward muon production,
> then the muons might catalyze a large amount of fusion and fission.
>
>
>
> I have a fear that a runaway LENR reaction might generate a huge amount of
> muons where only a small fraction of the output energy goes toward the
> production of EMF such as heat and light.
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 4, 2017 at 10:28 AM, Jones Beene <jone...@pacbell.net> wrote:
>
> This is not a repeat of the suggestion that dense hydrogen is the same
> species as "dark matter" ... but there is a good case for that proposition.
>
> It is about "dark" as in evil. If there is a foreseeable downside to LENR,
> it is the possibility of weaponization. Not just that - it is the easy
> weaponization of commonly available materials, which makes it much scarier
> than nukes.
>
> In the past, observers of the LENR scene - who delve into almost every
> remote possibility for anomalous energy - have not wanted to talk about the
> possibility of a cold-fusion bomb. Even when P reported their amazing
> meltdown, the implications were minimized. It is an uncomfortable topic
> since for one thing, weaponization could provide Federal regulators with a
> ready made excuse, should they want to limit research into the field at the
> behest of the fossil fuel industry, for instance.
>
> However, the reality of our technological world - which is fed by the WWW
> and knows no boundaries - is that there is no field of human endeavor which
> benefits from intentional neglect: the ostrich meme - buying one's head in
> the sand. The worst possible approach for any Nation is to look the other
> way and ignore the dark sid

RE: [Vo]:The dark side of dense hydrogen

[Russ George]

Conflating nuclear chain reaction energy release with cold fusion mechanisms
is what leads to silly speculation, aka trolling, over weaponization of cold
fusion. It is the far reaching neutron chain reaction process that is common
to fission/fusion weapons that makes them so potent. In cold fusion this
long range stimulated chain reaction mechanism does not exist! In fact cold
fusion reactions are inherently clearly self-limited as when the reaction
condition becomes more and more prevalent the heat released promptly
destroys the NAE through rather mundane melting and vapourization of the
active matrix and surroundings. The challenge in cold fusion is producing
materials that contain NAE's where those NAE's are small enough to limit the
number of adjacent cold fusion reactions so as to limit the amount of
heating. Cold fusion heat is produced in incredibly fast nuclear time frames
but as heat it only moves away from its' birthplace at the speed of
chemistry. There are only a few of we experimentalists who have had the good
fortune to struggle with this heat transfer/melting problem. I believe most
of us who remain active are making good progress in developing technological
skills to manage it.  That there is a perfect linkage/control in effect due
to the commonly known chemical/thermal properties of matter is very well
established.  

 

From: Axil Axil [mailto:janap...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, January 4, 2017 8:44 AM
To: vortex-l
Subject: Re: [Vo]:The dark side of dense hydrogen

 

The explosive potential of the cold fusion reaction is centered on the
percentage of energy that is produce by the LENR reaction in the various
energy releases format. 

 

By energy formats I mean the place where the output energy goes such as sub
atomic particle production, heat, light, and/or RF.

 

If a large percentage of the energy format goes toward muon production, then
the muons might catalyze a large amount of fusion and fission. 

 

I have a fear that a runaway LENR reaction might generate a huge amount of
muons where only a small fraction of the output energy goes toward the
production of EMF such as heat and light.

 

On Wed, Jan 4, 2017 at 10:28 AM, Jones Beene <jone...@pacbell.net
<mailto:jone...@pacbell.net> > wrote:

This is not a repeat of the suggestion that dense hydrogen is the same
species as "dark matter" ... but there is a good case for that proposition.

It is about "dark" as in evil. If there is a foreseeable downside to LENR,
it is the possibility of weaponization. Not just that - it is the easy
weaponization of commonly available materials, which makes it much scarier
than nukes.

In the past, observers of the LENR scene - who delve into almost every
remote possibility for anomalous energy - have not wanted to talk about the
possibility of a cold-fusion bomb. Even when P reported their amazing
meltdown, the implications were minimized. It is an uncomfortable topic
since for one thing, weaponization could provide Federal regulators with a
ready made excuse, should they want to limit research into the field at the
behest of the fossil fuel industry, for instance.

However, the reality of our technological world - which is fed by the WWW
and knows no boundaries - is that there is no field of human endeavor which
benefits from intentional neglect: the ostrich meme - buying one's head in
the sand. The worst possible approach for any Nation is to look the other
way and ignore the dark side. If there is any likelihood that LENR can do
harm, it is better that we (e.g. the free world) discover it first - so as
to better prepare for the eventual situation where our enemies, or former
friends, will consider the NiH bomb to be a golden opportunity for their own
purposes.

If Holmlid is correct to the extent that irradiating the dense allotrope of
deuterium - UDD - using a small laser - can result in the "quark soup"
disintegration of the target particle into muons, in addition to nuclear
fusion, then the potential to do immense harm cannot be over-estimated. The
destructiveness of the small laser reaction increases by orders of magnitude
over the fissionable nukes - from MeV to GeV. The same situation exists if a
"critical mass" level exists.

Over the years, at least 6 more reports and likely more, have emerged of a
runaway reaction in LENR like the one P reported, or in one case even more
impressive. Any runaway reaction would point to the existence of a
critical-mass parameter.

The suitcase nuke, scary enough but achievable, then evolves into the
water-bottle size, or pen size (laser pointer size) - which is deliverable
by drone and feasible to the wealthy investor of almost any country.



 

Re: [Vo]:The dark side of dense hydrogen

[Axil Axil]

The explosive potential of the cold fusion reaction is centered on the
percentage of energy that is produce by the LENR reaction in the various
energy releases format.

By energy formats I mean the place where the output energy goes such as sub
atomic particle production, heat, light, and/or RF.

If a large percentage of the energy format goes toward muon production,
then the muons might catalyze a large amount of fusion and fission.

I have a fear that a runaway LENR reaction might generate a huge amount of
muons where only a small fraction of the output energy goes toward the
production of EMF such as heat and light.

On Wed, Jan 4, 2017 at 10:28 AM, Jones Beene  wrote:

> This is not a repeat of the suggestion that dense hydrogen is the same
> species as "dark matter" ... but there is a good case for that proposition.
>
> It is about "dark" as in evil. If there is a foreseeable downside to LENR,
> it is the possibility of weaponization. Not just that - it is the easy
> weaponization of commonly available materials, which makes it much scarier
> than nukes.
>
> In the past, observers of the LENR scene - who delve into almost every
> remote possibility for anomalous energy - have not wanted to talk about the
> possibility of a cold-fusion bomb. Even when P reported their amazing
> meltdown, the implications were minimized. It is an uncomfortable topic
> since for one thing, weaponization could provide Federal regulators with a
> ready made excuse, should they want to limit research into the field at the
> behest of the fossil fuel industry, for instance.
>
> However, the reality of our technological world - which is fed by the WWW
> and knows no boundaries - is that there is no field of human endeavor which
> benefits from intentional neglect: the ostrich meme - buying one's head in
> the sand. The worst possible approach for any Nation is to look the other
> way and ignore the dark side. If there is any likelihood that LENR can do
> harm, it is better that we (e.g. the free world) discover it first - so as
> to better prepare for the eventual situation where our enemies, or former
> friends, will consider the NiH bomb to be a golden opportunity for their
> own purposes.
>
> If Holmlid is correct to the extent that irradiating the dense allotrope
> of deuterium - UDD - using a small laser - can result in the "quark soup"
> disintegration of the target particle into muons, in addition to nuclear
> fusion, then the potential to do immense harm cannot be over-estimated. The
> destructiveness of the small laser reaction increases by orders of
> magnitude over the fissionable nukes - from MeV to GeV. The same situation
> exists if a "critical mass" level exists.
>
> Over the years, at least 6 more reports and likely more, have emerged of a
> runaway reaction in LENR like the one P reported, or in one case even
> more impressive. Any runaway reaction would point to the existence of a
> critical-mass parameter.
>
> The suitcase nuke, scary enough but achievable, then evolves into the
> water-bottle size, or pen size (laser pointer size) - which is deliverable
> by drone and feasible to the wealthy investor of almost any country.
>
>
>

RE: [Vo]:The dark side of dense hydrogen

[Chris Zell]

It is said he had a stroke and awoke in a hospital.

A nurse asked, “Are you the famous Dr.
Edward Teller?”

He said, “No…….I am the infamous Dr. Edward Teller”.

From: Jed Rothwell [mailto:jedrothw...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, January 04, 2017 11:01 AM
To: Vortex <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Subject: Re: [Vo]:The dark side of dense hydrogen

Edward Teller! For goodness sake.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:The dark side of dense hydrogen

[Jed Rothwell]

Edward Teller! For goodness sake.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:The dark side of dense hydrogen

[Jed Rothwell]

Jones Beene  wrote:


> In the past, observers of the LENR scene - who delve into almost every
> remote possibility for anomalous energy - have not wanted to talk about the
> possibility of a cold-fusion bomb.


People have talked about this from time to time, albeit reluctantly. Martin
Fleischmann wanted to keep cold fusion secret partly because he was afraid
of weapons applications. He said that Edmund Teller agreed with him that
might be a concern.

See chapter 12 of my book, p. 103:

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

- Jed

[Vo]:The dark side of dense hydrogen

[Jones Beene]

This is not a repeat of the suggestion that dense hydrogen is the same 
species as "dark matter" ... but there is a good case for that proposition.


It is about "dark" as in evil. If there is a foreseeable downside to 
LENR, it is the possibility of weaponization. Not just that - it is the 
easy weaponization of commonly available materials, which makes it much 
scarier than nukes.


In the past, observers of the LENR scene - who delve into almost every 
remote possibility for anomalous energy - have not wanted to talk about 
the possibility of a cold-fusion bomb. Even when P reported their 
amazing meltdown, the implications were minimized. It is an 
uncomfortable topic since for one thing, weaponization could provide 
Federal regulators with a ready made excuse, should they want to limit 
research into the field at the behest of the fossil fuel industry, for 
instance.


However, the reality of our technological world - which is fed by the 
WWW and knows no boundaries - is that there is no field of human 
endeavor which benefits from intentional neglect: the ostrich meme - 
buying one's head in the sand. The worst possible approach for any 
Nation is to look the other way and ignore the dark side. If there is 
any likelihood that LENR can do harm, it is better that we (e.g. the 
free world) discover it first - so as to better prepare for the eventual 
situation where our enemies, or former friends, will consider the NiH 
bomb to be a golden opportunity for their own purposes.


If Holmlid is correct to the extent that irradiating the dense allotrope 
of deuterium - UDD - using a small laser - can result in the "quark 
soup" disintegration of the target particle into muons, in addition to 
nuclear fusion, then the potential to do immense harm cannot be 
over-estimated. The destructiveness of the small laser reaction 
increases by orders of magnitude over the fissionable nukes - from MeV 
to GeV. The same situation exists if a "critical mass" level exists.


Over the years, at least 6 more reports and likely more, have emerged of 
a runaway reaction in LENR like the one P reported, or in one case 
even more impressive. Any runaway reaction would point to the existence 
of a critical-mass parameter.


The suitcase nuke, scary enough but achievable, then evolves into the 
water-bottle size, or pen size (laser pointer size) - which is 
deliverable by drone and feasible to the wealthy investor of almost any 
country.