One of the amazing properties of the monopole field is that it makes the matter that it encompasses impervious to destruction. Hydrogen Rydberg Matter covered in a monopole EMF field would be impervious to a nuclear bomb blast. This can be understood in the experiments of LeClair, where he produces transuranic elements using a hot fusion supernova pressure that his water crystal exerts on matter.
Once formed in the E-Cat X and protected by an increasingly strong monopole field, the reactor could sustain any temperature even up to the temperature of the Sun. If the E-Cat X is producing light in the solar black body spectrum, the E-Cat X could be operating at temperatures in the solar range. The heat emitted by the E-Cat can be reduced if the temperature that the E-Cat operates at is increased Wien's Law https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=__x4IjPQnro If the E-cat can operate at very high temperatures, then visible light can drive the reaction instead of heat. The heat produced by the E-Cat can be minimized is the E-Cat can run at very high temperatures. Rossi may have invented a plasma based system confined by a very high melting point material. Eliminating the production of heat as Holmlid has done by using a green laser light implies that his reaction runs at a temperature that equals that of the Sun. Rossi may have invented a plasma based system confined by a very high melting point material. Might the E Cat X be using the same reaction that powers the SunCell except that solar level reaction is confined in a very high melting point material. On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 11:19 AM, Jones Beene <jone...@pacbell.net> wrote: > *From:* Eric Walker > > Ø To play devil's advocate, the hypothetical neutron flux could > have produced short-lived beta radioisotopes when they activated something > in or near the experiment. > > Eric, > > Even without activation - the neutron itself is a beta emitter. Free > neutrons have a half-life of about 10 min and are almost gone in 15. The > usual beta electron is .78 MeV and is charged so it will not look like a > gamma. And there is no evidence of an accelerated decay in a > well-investigate field. > > However, a fraction of free neutrons do produce a gamma ray on decay. This > gamma ray is sometimes called “internal bremsstrahlung” but is soft. See: > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bremsstrahlung#Inner_and_outer_bremsstrahlung > > If Bob’s procedure is to test the ongoing reaction with no shielding and > then with shielding, and compare the two - then many of these issues can > be resolved. If no shielding gives significantly more counts, then cosmic > rays can be blamed. However, my prediction is that no shielding will show > fewer, not more gammas. That is especially true if the reaction itself is > making muons (the Holmlid effect). > > IMO - the most important finding which could come out of this next test is > to see significantly more gammas in the cave than with no shielding - and > to see a variance from inverse square drop-off, when the cave is moved > back from the reactor. Lastly, the peaks can be matched with the > temperature differential. > > If a gamma burst is correlated with apparent endotherm, as happened in > the last test – then it would be a significant indication that Holmlid is > correct. > > Jones > >
