The bits of the results that I think are true are that he has managed to get fairly spectacular damage using cavitation bubbles and that there was something more interesting going on than just bubble collapse. The answer to why comes from having spent something like four hours with Mark during which we had extensive and often completely surreal discussions, and also from knowing someone else who appears in part to have managed to repeat the results.

On 09/11/2013 14:54, Mark Gibbs wrote:
Which aspects of the 'results' do you think are true and why?


On Saturday, November 9, 2013, Nigel Dyer wrote:

    I am not sure that a translation would be of much help.   With
    LeClair I think you need to try and separate out the hypothesies
    as to the mechanism from the observations of what happened.  Too
    often LeClair confuses the two.  There is a lot to be said for the
    'Method/Results/Discussion' format of presenting information.
    If we are convinced that at least some aspects of the 'results'
    are real (I am), I tend to feel you need to start again from first
    principles on the 'discussion' section.

    On 08/11/2013 23:13, Axil Axil wrote:

    LeClair said as follows:

    “The experiment gave off powerful crested cnoid de Broglie Matter
    wave soliton wave packages that were doubly periodic and followed
    the Jacobi Elliptic functions exactly, mostly in the form of
    large doubly-periodic vortices. Hundreds of wave trains and
    vortices appeared everywhere and are permanently burned into
    walls, objects and trees surrounding the lab”.

    What could it all mean - a translation.


    IMHO, this is a misspelling of Conoid

    In geometry <>, a *conoid*
    is a Catalan surface
    <>all of whose
    rulings intersect a fixed line
    <>, called the
    /axis/ of the conoid. If all its rulings are perpendicular to its
    axis, then the conoid is called a right conoid

Reply via email to