a) re radiation- DGT has published data )ICCF-17) they obtain some gamma, of 30-150 keV
B) re Jones' statement > *Sterling Allan, whom you quote - is a tireless PR person and promoter in > the PT Barnum tradition - but not a scientist. Even Hadjichristos, listed > as CTO of Defkalion has given no indication of being literate in several > important scientific fields.* > Perhaps it would be better to focus on the relevant things and NOT to > confound the points of view. > Better see (wait for) the facts and not discuss about people. Sterling's interview is, IMHO, excellent, adequate questions and a good logical structure The answers of Alex show clearly what is the strategy of DGT, and it iis a very reasonable stratefy, I think. As regarding Yiannis he has told many times that he is a newcomer in the field, that he has learned from the LENR literature including what to NOT do It is possible he is not a guru in some scientific fields (?), however please do not forget that he is working for LENR+ enhanced excess energy not Pd D LENR. And he is very skilled in physics of interest for this problem, engineering, technology, materials science, understands complexity, non-linearity, multi-sequential phenomena.etc. He (DGT) is ready to collaborate with the best, open minded scientists of our community. DGT builds a technology, however they are very interested in a good, meta-theory of the field. Peter On Sat, Apr 6, 2013 at 9:43 PM, Eric Walker <eric.wal...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sat, Apr 6, 2013 at 6:36 AM, Jones Beene <jone...@pacbell.net> wrote: > > Where did you get the idea that soft x-rays were not harmful? In fact >> they are deadly, but not instantly deadly, if that makes them slightly less >> problematic. >> > > The thought did occur to me after I pressed "send" that given a sufficient > flux, you could end up cooking yourself before too long. > > My remarks about soft x-rays were ambiguous -- I could have meant that > they do not pose safety concerns when shielded by the kind of housing that > a reactor will typically have, or I could have meant that they are benign > in general. My actual meaning was to suggest that they might be benign in > general (without shielding). As someone who knows nothing about nuclear > physics, I feel at liberty to make one or two embarrassing comments. ;) > > >> Sterling Allan, whom you quote - is a tireless PR person and promoter in >> the PT Barnum tradition - but not a scientist. Even Hadjichristos, listed >> as CTO of Defkalion has given no indication of being literate in several >> important scientific fields. >> > > My apologies for the confusion -- I didn't intend to offer Allan or > Hadjichristos as authorities. The quote was meant to provide another data > point and does not give anything to base any conclusions on. But it is > interesting to note that if the quote is half accurate, Defkalion's > description of the reaction is still consistent (?) with there being > copious soft x-rays that are being blocked by the housing of the reactor. > > Eric > > -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
