[Vo]:Fwd: An Incoherent Explanation of LENR
E-mail from Stephen Lawrence, edited letter from Lomax and correction posted last night to NET blog comments: http://newenergytimes.com/v2/blog/?p=113#comments
Re: [Vo]:Low-Energy Nuclear Reactions Sourcebook
At 06:27 AM 2/19/2010, you wrote: You can see a list of papers and download the Sourcebook EndNote records for Vol. 1 here: http://pubs.acs.org/isbn/9780841269668 It looks like you can get the full papers if you have sponsored access. I do not know what that is. That means ACS is giving those papers away for free.
RE: [Vo]:Joint General Colloquium at Purdue
At 08:35 AM 2/19/2010, you wrote: Ya gotta like this guy Kims open-minded thought process. And to think he is at Purdue and has not been silenced ? I notice that he and Rusi were both hired on at the same time in 2003. Go figure. Maybe Kim is next in line to get the axe from those geniuses. It's pretty hard to get axed (apologies to the literati) for espousing a theory. Also, in Rusi's case, his team generated a lot of attention and controversy even before their seminal paper published. What would later become his nemesis, Purdue Prof. Tsoukalas sweet-talked Rusi to leave a cushy gov't got at ORNL...and in the interim Tsoukalas rapidly set up a group at PU to replicate BF. Inexplicably Kim's cold fusion theory doesn't seem to be drawing the same kind of attention. I am somewhat confused about the title of the Colloquium. The title gives the impression that multiple specialists will deliver addresses (m-w.com) I only see a time period of 4-5pm with Kim's presentation. s
Re: [Vo]:Storms Theory Explains All Known Cold Fusion Phenomena
Storms responds, Krivit responds: http://newenergytimes.com/v2/blog/?p=126#comment-7388
[Vo]:SRI Experiment HH
http://newenergytimes.com/v2/news/2010/SRI-Expt-HH/SRI-Experiment-HH.shtml Vorts, I have deliberately not provided any explanation, analysis or interpretation. Instead, I'd like to hear your thoughts first. In particular, I'd like to hear your thoughts on the graph drawn by McKubre as compared to the graph I drew. I'd also like to hear your thoughts and analyses on the green and blue lines. Steve
Re: [Vo]:SRI Experiment HH
I don't see any problem or confusion with this. Maybe I am missing something. The bottom graph (Krivit's) is a little confusing. It would be improved with: 1. The error bars. 2. The power on the right y-axis starting at zero. Good ideas Jed. Done. Let me know if that helps clarify. s
Re: [Vo]:SRI Experiment HH
Jed, Without seeing a lot more heat data, I have to agree, it is difficult to derive any meaning from this and that there is, as you say, practically no real-time correlation to the helium. We also are missing a lot of information about their method of helium sampling. Steve At 08:29 PM 2/23/2010, you wrote: I think that is clearer. You can see that the power levels are really not that varied, and there is practically no real-time correlation to the helium. Actually, the error bars are probably even larger because the instrument is at the limits of detection. At higher levels both accuracy and precision improve. That's true of most instruments. Plus, I have no doubt the helium levels really do vary, and this is not just an instrument artifact, for the reasons given in the document: different amounts of helium are captured in the near surface layers of the metal, depending on complex factors. That is well established. You have to go to great lengths to recover all of the helium. During the run the stuff will suddenly vent at odd times, presumably when a crack forms. This is how marginal experimental data looks. If the correlation was better than this I would begin to suspect someone doctored the data. With an instrument that can detect 1 ppb minimum, the difference between 1 and 3 ppb is hardly meaningful. On the other hand the difference between 100 ppb and 101 ppb is more significant and reliable. - Jed At 07:10 AM 2/24/2010, you wrote: I wrote: You can see that the power levels are really not that varied, and there is practically no real-time correlation to the helium. Also bear in mind those are instantaneous power levels, and there is no telling what it was doing in the instant before they were taken. For example, data point #2, 11-29-93 is 35 mW. It might have been 50 mW sometime earlier, which would explain why there is more helium in the cell than there was with data point #1 even though the power level is the same. Cold fusion power does not fluctuate wildly, but it does fluctuate. Also, as I said, the helium you measure at any given moment might have been generated hours or days before, and it is just escaping now through a newly opened crack. You need much higher, more steady power to establish the ratio of helium to heat more accurately. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:SRI Experiment HH
(I was amused to see a skeptic the other day suggest that when Rob Duncan visited Energetics Technology, he should have surreptitiously attached a flask to the cell and taken a sample of helium to see if it really is fusion. I told the skeptic you have to design the experiment from the ground up to do this, and it takes hours or days to collect the sample. These people get their notions of experimental science from Hollywood movies.) - Jed There are skeptics and there are skeptics.
Re: [Vo]:SRI Experiment HH
I haven't taken the time to look into this in detail, but my first impression is that, unless there is a typo, it makes no sense at all to attempt to draw the 23.82 MeV line through Fig. 1, or to draw any conclusions from the graph as to energy per helium atom produced. Perhaps I'm misreading the x axis labeling Excess Power/Current (mW / A), or the intended meaning of the x axis values. To be sensible the x axis should simply be excess energy, i.e. the integral of mW over time. It looks like voltage was roughly uniform, so the (input) mW/A should roughly be a constant, given power P = I * (V - v0). So, basically, the x axis is a constant times excess power. It should be a constant times excess energy to make any sense, or to plot the green line on it. Alternatively, at a constant power the helium could be measured over equally spaced intervals, and then the green line should be horizontal, i.e. fixed amount of helium produced per interval of time corresponding to the mean excess power for the interval. Maybe if someone took the time to look deeper into this they could make some sense of it. Best regards, Horace Heffner http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/ Horace, You are not misreading the X axis label. I too have great difficulty understanding a) the rationale of displaying power/current for the x axis and b) relating power/current to heat (energy) which is what the green line allegedly represents. I've inspected the 300+ page EPRI report and I cannot find mention of calorimetry data for these two runs. (HH Sept. and HH Nov/Dec.) Maybe they somehow derived heat (energy) from power/current??? Jed - You said you didn't find anything confusing. So maybe you can explain what power/current (on the x axis) has to to with heat/4He? Steve
Re: [Vo]:Response from McKubre regarding the Case cell
At 09:54 AM 2/25/2010, you wrote: Okay, I asked McKubre why he thinks the helium in the Case cell declined. Here is part of his response, edited to remove irrelevant comments: . . . I am glad [Krivit and the rest of you people] are encouraged to read the paper . . . Our gas cells are helium-leak-tight. The 4He is actually being absorbed in the carbon substrate at ~200°C. This confused me at first but there is literature on this process from the old days Jed, ask for a citation on the literature. (1950's, Los Alamos I think) -- and we checked it out by direct measurement using 4He in D2 at temperature. The 4He really does absorb slowly -- but only at temperature. Jed, ask for the publication or conference presentation of this check out. So our measurement of 4He rise was something of an underestimate. We also looked at the 4He in the starting material (Case Pd on C catalyst) and found that the solid contained less 4He per unit VOLUME than air, so this was not the source. I still don't understand why Tom [Passell, et al.] made the mistake [in their ICCF-15 paper] . . . They saw the pressure going down and did not guess that the starting 4He was simply being concentrated in the residuum. If we made a mistake (which I cannot rule out, but doubt) then it was not this one. . . . Now that he told me this, about carbon absorbtion, I recall he did discuss it in lectures or papers. - Jed
[Vo]:Imagine that!
Can you believe this??? The http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/f/federal_communications_commission/index.html?inline=nyt-orgFederal Communications Commission is proposing an ambitious 10-year plan that will reimagine the nation's media and technology priorities by establishing high-speed Internet as the country's dominant communication network. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/13/business/media/13fcc.html?themc=th
Re: [Vo]:Imagine that!
Aha! That expains it. At 02:28 PM 3/13/2010, you wrote: It's called 'convergence'. All major corporations' enterprise networks already work this way. Voice, video and data are all on the same network. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convergence_(telecommunications) It will happen. It's just a matter of when. T
Re: [Vo]:Focardi and Rossi paper
Ladies and gentlemen, The truth is, I plead, to a large degree, ignorance of this FocardiRossi matter. It had been originally brought to my attention as a patent, and then I pointed out to the person it was merely a patent application and I said, So what, don't bother me. Even granted patents don't mean that the devices work as stated. Just look at Seth Putterman's patent for sonofusion. So here's my question for all you science hounds: Have FocardiRossi actually published a real paper or presented one at a science conference? Has the FocardiRossi paper/work been vetted, in any way, in the formal science channel or has it just been hyped up on some bogus Web site that is masquerading as some sort of Journal? Journal or Nuclear Physics? Really??? Can someone please tell me something about this? http://whois.domaintools.com/journal-of-nuclear-physics.com And can someone please explain why the good Dr. Melich, allegedly representing the entire DoD, is involved with this? http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?page_id=2 And isn't there some mention in the paper of this having to do with the DoD yet the paper provides no details? And a Board of Advisers comprising the key authors of this paper? Is this a con or what? Will somebody puhleeze tell me that someone is not running a false flag to discredit Ni-H work. Will somebody puhleeze tell me that someone did not go to Focardi and Rossi and represent himself as the DoD and thereby test and validate inflated claims to set them up for a fall. Steve
Re: [Vo]:Focardi and Rossi paper
At 02:35 AM 3/14/2010, you wrote: Interesting, but why would Focardi discredit his own work? I don't think he would want to. Have you been following the thread more closely than I? Is there any support on this research such as a published paper or a conference presentation or is it just this blog site that is made to look like a journal? And what kind of idiot uses this domain name http://whois.domaintools.com/journal-of-nuclear-physics.com when one without hyphens is available and has NEVER been registered? http://whois.domaintools.com/journalofnuclearphysics.com (I'm sure someone will soon grab this domain, it's a great domain name) SOMEBODY registered and used this name knowing full well that no such journal in the English language existed but that the Soviet Journal of Nuclear Physics does not have a Web site. http://journalseek.net/cgi-bin/journalseek/journalsearch.cgi?field=issnquery=0038-5506 Whoever registered the name is probably an American because of the California registration. It has been registered through a proxy service that keeps the identity of the domain owner private. By using a name with hyphens, and of a similar journal that does not have its own web site, they avoid a direct confrontation with the actual journal, if it still exists. But the journal may have been renamed to Physics of Atomic Nuclei http://www.phy.ornl.gov/divops/library/holdings.html I wonder which of the people involved in journal-of-nuclear-physics.com are familiar with the Russian science scene and which of them might be conversant in Russian and who has been a frequent co-author on Russian LENR papers? s
Re: [Vo]:Focardi and Rossi paper
At 01:46 AM 3/15/2010, you wrote: 2010/3/14 Steven Krivit stev...@newenergytimes.com: At 02:35 AM 3/14/2010, you wrote: Interesting, but why would Focardi discredit his own work? I don't think he would want to. Then it can't be a Ni-H research discrediting operation can it? Or one would have to imagine that Focardi himself has been conned. Right. That's not possible. What a relief. Note that multi-kW excess heat must be quite easy to fake in this particular device, with its built-in heating resistor. For example, add AC current of a higher frequency than the meter's bandwidth. Is there any support on this research such as a published paper or a conference presentation or is it just this blog site that is made to look like a journal? Not that I know, apart from the patent application which of course isn't valid support either. Ok...thanks. My next question is how the whole buzz on this started...obviously there was the Journal of Nuclear Physics Web site. But who propagated that around? Anybody know? I have received several queries on this matter from multiple sources from several countries in Europe and in the U.S. Something/someone triggered/launched a viral response. I do not have any clue at the moment what/who did so. S
Re: [Vo]:ACS press release for the upcoming cold fusion session: Krivit's folly.
Dear Vorts, I see by the subject header that some messages on Vortex have been directed at me personally again. I had thought people on Vortex were more mature than this. I had thought people on Vortex had less tolerance for personal attacks. I had thought that personal attacks were unacceptable etiquette here. Perhaps people on Vortex feel that the rules on Vortex are different for me because of the work I do. If that's the way you want Vortex to be, not a problem. Journalists are used to people coming unglued when we report hard-hitting facts that ruffle people's feathers. As I told Jed on the phone just now, the press conference was webcast and Adam Dylewski from the ACS News Service was monitoring the chat room and relaying questions from the Web audience. If Jed hears anything else about me, he is welcome to check his facts with me in advance before spreading hearsay and misunderstandings about me. Steve At 03:53 PM 3/22/2010, you wrote: Ask Steve. I have heard that Steve was relaying e-mailed questions from Larsen during the discussion. I do not mean to imply there is anything wrong with that, by the way. It would good to open these conferences to real-time Internet participation.
[Vo]:Goodbye, Vortex!
Re: Popular Mechanics article
Jed: If other nations are quicker to develop new energy technology than the U.S., then an entire system of economic and political balance may become unstable. This would be a matter of national security just as much, if not more threatening, than bombs. There is the slight possibility that in the coming years, the U.S.'s failure to take CF seriously in the first 15 years may be very, very embarrassing to those who ignored it. Steve
NEW ENERGY TIMES News Flash, July 27, 2004
NEW ENERGY TIMES News Flash, July 27, 2004 The best source for news, information and general education on cold fusion. Boston Globe: Heating up a cold theory I am overjoyed to bring to your attention an excellent article in today's Boston Globe by Ms. Beth Daley. http://www.boston.com/news/science/articles/2004/07/27/heating_up_a_cold_theory?mode=PF Beth contacted me many weeks ago for background information on cold fusion, and she seemed to have an intelligent, inquisitive, respectful attitude about the whole affair. I returned her interest with my support. Through numerous communications, I pointed out various aspects of the cold fusion situation to her and directed her to several key sources. Referring to the cold fusion scientists, her angle was, Why are they still persevering? and What are the prices they have paid?. Naturally, her article only scratches the surface, but the fact that the information was portrayed honestly and responsibly gives me hope that cold fusion is on its way toward being redeemed and respected. A story also appeared yesterday on television news http://www.wfsb.com/Global/story.asp?S=2092115 with a possible lead on the Gene Mallove homicide investigation. Daley also reported this news in her related story, Scientist's violent death shocks cold fusion research network at http://www.boston.com/news/globe/health_science/articles/2004/07/27/scientists_violent_death_shocks_cold_fusion_research_network/ Administrative * Please feel free to forward this newsletter. * If you have received this newsletter from a colleague and you wish to receive future communications from New Energy Times directly, click here to subscribe. * If you do not wish to receive future communications from New Energy Times, please click here to unsubscribe. Copyright 2004 New Energy Times Distribution and publication permitted with permission.
RE: FW: WHAT'S NEW Friday, August 06, 2004
I'd ask him personally, but I don't want to provoke him any more that I already have... and will... At 02:51 PM 8/8/2004 -0400, you wrote: This has to be some sort of mistake or misunderstanding. It is not anyone's idea of a joke, not even Park's. I suppose he was lazy and he did not even bother to call the magazine. - Jed
Bogus Skepticism
Bill B., Rochus has moved his website from http://web.archive.org/web/20030628043116/http://mathpost.la.asu.edu/~boerner/skepticism.html) to http://www.suppressedscience.net/ Steve
Re: ICCF-11 abstract
Jed, I'm glad to hear you have found a way to tie sex into cold fusion. I knew there *had* to be some sort of connection. The field can get quite boring sometimes. Your book should do well. ;) Steve Here is the abbreviated version, which I promised Ed Storms I would not transmit to Jean-Paul: A new book describes how cold fusion will desalinate water, make the deserts bloom, eliminate invasive species, save the world, and improve your sex life. - Jed
Re: ICCF-11 abstract
Indeed. Elizabeth Shue again or do we have votes for a new dream-fusionista? At 09:33 PM 10/14/2004 -0800, you wrote: At 11:26 PM 10/14/4, Colin Quinney wrote: Steve, Pardon my interrupt here but regarding sex and cold fusion, it just won't sell. Jed must name the book Warm Fusion, or better yet, Steamy Fusion :-) Colin Though you make a good point I feel compelled to say that cold fusion was steamy unough for me when Elisabeth Shue was in the picture! Who cares about dry old books. We are way overdue for another good CF movie! 8^) Regards, Horace Heffner
Re: Jacques Benveniste dies
Hell is thawing At 05:53 PM 10/8/2004 -0400, you wrote: I am sorry to see this news: http://www.nature.com/news/2004/041004/full/041004-19.html Here is something amazing though; Nature actually deigns to mention CF is semi-partly-conceivably positive manner. The rest of the article is bunk, including Nature's version of its own role in this travesty. - Jed
Re: ICCF11 Results
Hey Vorts... I met Naudin and interviewed him a bit but he declined to go on record. I know who is paying his salary though I can't disclose it. It is a major agency in France. He was quite nervous about me talking with him and I found that interesting. I am undecided as to whether he is a benefit or a detriment to CF. He clearly has a very sexed-up website and makes it easy for amateurs to get their hands on CF and give it a shot. Is this a good thing? I don't know. Does he give sufficient and respectful credit to Mizuno? I have not spent the time to analyze his site to determine this. My bets are the following: 1. That Naudin attracted his sugar daddy by the strong efforts he has made over the years to create his excellent web presence. 2. The people who pay his salary, who were at ICCF-11 will soon figure out who the real players, the original scientists in this game are. Now that Naudin has made it to the big time (as far as sponsorship), I'll be quite curious if the CF dev and dissemination continues on his website. He didn't forbid me to take his picture - so I'll have a nice mugshot of him in an upcoming newsletter. That's about all I know about JLN. Like Jed, I am working to dig out from data and will have stuff going up on www.newenergytimes.com shortly. At 08:42 AM 11/8/2004 -0800, you wrote: From: Terry Blanton (in reference of the elebaorate Mizuno presentation, which immediate appeared in great detail on Naudin's web-site) A *net* reduction in entropy? Is nothing sacred? Not to Naudin, that is for sure. I am curious whether Jed or any of the other vortex attendees had occassion to meet Naudin? He certainly has his ear to the ground like no other free-energy researcher on the planet, and despite allegations of being more copy-cat that creative genius (probably he is a good helping of both), he must be well-funded... which in France, often means that the *bureaucracy* is somehow involved... after all, they not only invented the term and perfected the institution to its ultimate stage of usefulness (or maximum emmerdement, shall we say)... in effect the bureaucracy is the French national condescension to Communist ideals, which surely would have taken root without it as an weighty counterbalance - IOW a patronizing gesture has now become a dominant way of life... and not a bad one... nor an efficient one either. Of course, Naudin like the more infamous and infinitely more boring Professor Nicholas Bourbaki, could end up being not a single person at all, but a dedicated group of experimenters(doubtful), but ... as they say in Private Eye, I think we should be told *-) Jones
NEW ENERGY TIMES Newsletter, Nov. 16, 2004
NEW ENERGY TIMES TM Newsletter, Nov. 16, 2004 -- Issue #7 Your best source for cold fusion news and information. Copyright 2004 New Energy Times (tm) Table of Contents: New Book on Cold Fusion Available Now U.S. Department of Energy 2004 Cold Fusion Review 11th International Conference on Cold Fusion, Marseilles, France Cold Fusion in the News Speakers Available - Experts on the Subject of Cold Fusion Recent Updates to the New Energy Times (tm) Web site Request for Support Administrative New Book on Cold Fusion Available Now The Rebirth of Cold Fusion: Real Science, Real Hope, Real Energy by Steven B. Krivit and Nadine Winocur, Psy.D., Foreword by Sir Arthur C. Clarke The Rebirth of Cold Fusion informs the general public about the science and significance of this new field of energy research. The original promise of cold fusion - nuclear energy in a tabletop device without harmful radiation - has gained increasing credibility with scientists around the world who have now replicated it hundreds of times through a variety of methods. Through investigative reports and firsthand interviews with cold fusion researchers and critics, this book vividly portrays how the social and political environment failed to support scientific objectivity and resulted in the premature rejection of what may, in fact, turn out to be the planet's greatest hope for survival. http://www.newenergytimes.com/ U.S. Department of Energy 2004 Cold Fusion Review Researchers and science journalists from around the world continue to wait for a conclusion from the 2004 Department of Energy Cold Fusion Review. On Oct. 29, Dr. James Decker, Deputy Directory of the DOE'S Office of Science wrote, We have the reports of 18 reviewers which I received last Wednesday before going on travel. Some of those reports were received later than anticipated. We are carefully sorting through the reviewers' comments. Some time ago, we had a media inquiry that we answered by saying we would release something by the end of the year. I was optimistic in thinking we could get something out this month. I assure you I am working to achieve a release as soon as possible. Decker had also indicated that his current hope for release of a conclusion was during the month of November, but that his priority was to insure that DOE's conclusion was an accurate and fair representation of the various reviewers, rather than to rush to achieve a specific deadline. An interesting twist to the anticipated completion of this review is the Nov. 15, 2004 announcement of the resignation of Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham. According to Reuters, Abraham will stay on until a successor is in place. It was Abraham who took the initiative to receive the interest from the cold fusion community and subsequently task the Office of Science to look into the current status of cold fusion. It has been expected that any announcement from DOE regarding the review would originate from Abraham's office after receiving input from Decker's Office. http://olympics.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=businessNewsstoryID=6815097 New Energy Times (tm) is pleased to present a new web page dedicated to the publicly-known information about the 2004 U.S. Department of Energy Cold Fusion Review, as well as the original 1989 review. The page includes an audio recording, slide presentation, 8 full-text papers, and excerpts from The Rebirth of Cold Fusion. The slide presentation includes, among other details, the names of 11 of the 18 reviewers of this years' review. The other reviewers' names remain secret. http://www.newenergytimes.com/doe/doe.htm 11th International Conference on Condensed Matter Nuclear Science (ICCF-11), Marseilles-Luminy, France Continuing the 15-year tradition which has sustained the body of accumulated knowledge in the field of cold fusion and low energy nuclear reactions, the ICCF-11 conference took place on Oct. 31 through Nov. 5, 2004. The conference was hosted by Jean Paul Biberian, a professor at the University of Marseilles-Luminy, France, and Vittorio Violante a researcher at ENEA Frascati, Italy. Brian Josephson, 1973 Nobel Prize winner in physics, also gave a talk on Good and Bad Ways of Doing Science. The conference was held in Marseilles, France. ICCF is the largest scientific conference in the world devoted exclusively to cold fusion/condensed matter nuclear science. The conference is held once every 12 to 14 months, and rotates between North America, the European continent, and Asia. Scientists from 21 nations and 5 continents attended ICCF-11. Detailed reports of the conference will be presented in subsequent newsletters. Abstracts are now on-line. Thank you for your patience. http://www.newenergytimes.com/iccf11/iccf11.htm Cold Fusion in the News IEEE Spectrum: Cold Fusion Back From the Dead, by Justin Mullins http://www.spectrum.ieee.org/WEBONLY/resource/sep04/0904nfus.html Later this month, the U.S. Department of Energy will receive a report from a panel
NEW ENERGY TIMES Newsletter, Nov. 16, 2004
NEW ENERGY TIMES TM Newsletter, Nov. 16, 2004 -- Issue #7 Your best source for cold fusion news and information. Copyright 2004 New Energy Times (tm) Table of Contents: New Book on Cold Fusion Available Now U.S. Department of Energy 2004 Cold Fusion Review 11th International Conference on Cold Fusion, Marseilles, France Cold Fusion in the News Speakers Available - Experts on the Subject of Cold Fusion Recent Updates to the New Energy Times (tm) Web site Request for Support Administrative New Book on Cold Fusion Available Now The Rebirth of Cold Fusion: Real Science, Real Hope, Real Energy by Steven B. Krivit and Nadine Winocur, Psy.D., Foreword by Sir Arthur C. Clarke The Rebirth of Cold Fusion informs the general public about the science and significance of this new field of energy research. The original promise of cold fusion - nuclear energy in a tabletop device without harmful radiation - has gained increasing credibility with scientists around the world who have now replicated it hundreds of times through a variety of methods. Through investigative reports and firsthand interviews with cold fusion researchers and critics, this book vividly portrays how the social and political environment failed to support scientific objectivity and resulted in the premature rejection of what may, in fact, turn out to be the planet's greatest hope for survival. http://www.newenergytimes.com/ U.S. Department of Energy 2004 Cold Fusion Review Researchers and science journalists from around the world continue to wait for a conclusion from the 2004 Department of Energy Cold Fusion Review. On Oct. 29, Dr. James Decker, Deputy Directory of the DOE'S Office of Science wrote, We have the reports of 18 reviewers which I received last Wednesday before going on travel. Some of those reports were received later than anticipated. We are carefully sorting through the reviewers' comments. Some time ago, we had a media inquiry that we answered by saying we would release something by the end of the year. I was optimistic in thinking we could get something out this month. I assure you I am working to achieve a release as soon as possible. Decker had also indicated that his current hope for release of a conclusion was during the month of November, but that his priority was to insure that DOE's conclusion was an accurate and fair representation of the various reviewers, rather than to rush to achieve a specific deadline. An interesting twist to the anticipated completion of this review is the Nov. 15, 2004 announcement of the resignation of Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham. According to Reuters, Abraham will stay on until a successor is in place. It was Abraham who took the initiative to receive the interest from the cold fusion community and subsequently task the Office of Science to look into the current status of cold fusion. It has been expected that any announcement from DOE regarding the review would originate from Abraham's office after receiving input from Decker's Office. http://olympics.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=businessNewsstoryID=6815097 New Energy Times (tm) is pleased to present a new web page dedicated to the publicly-known information about the 2004 U.S. Department of Energy Cold Fusion Review, as well as the original 1989 review. The page includes an audio recording, notes from a slide presentation, 8 full-text papers, and excerpts from The Rebirth of Cold Fusion. The slide presentation includes, among other details, the names of 11 of the 18 reviewers of this years' review. The other reviewers' names remain secret. http://www.newenergytimes.com/doe/doe.htm 11th International Conference on Condensed Matter Nuclear Science (ICCF-11), Marseilles-Luminy, France Continuing the 15-year tradition which has sustained the body of accumulated knowledge in the field of cold fusion and low energy nuclear reactions, the ICCF-11 conference took place on Oct. 31 through Nov. 5, 2004. The conference was hosted by Jean Paul Biberian, a professor at the University of Marseilles-Luminy, France, and Vittorio Violante a researcher at ENEA Frascati, Italy. Brian Josephson, 1973 Nobel Prize winner in physics, also gave a talk on Good and Bad Ways of Doing Science. The conference was held in Marseilles, France. ICCF is the largest scientific conference in the world devoted exclusively to cold fusion/condensed matter nuclear science. The conference is held once every 12 to 14 months, and rotates between North America, the European continent, and Asia. Scientists from 21 nations and 5 continents attended ICCF-11. Detailed reports of the conference will be presented in subsequent newsletters. Abstracts are now on-line. Thank you for your patience. http://www.newenergytimes.com/iccf11/iccf11.htm Cold Fusion in the News IEEE Spectrum: Cold Fusion Back From the Dead, by Justin Mullins http://www.spectrum.ieee.org/WEBONLY/resource/sep04/0904nfus.html Later this month, the U.S. Department of Energy will receive a report
NEW ENERGY TIMES News Flash, Nov. 11, 2004
For Immediate Release Cold Fusion Fever Spreads Through the Internet (Again) LOS ANGELES, CALIF. Nov. 17, 2004. In a stunning reversal from the lack of media attention throughout the last 15 years, the cold fusion community not only is starting to get widespread attention through the use of the Internet and other forms of electronic communication, but some researchers within the community are actually displeased about this. Two websites, www.newenergytimes.com and www.iscmns.org recently posted information from the most recent international cold fusion conference (ICCF-11), which, to the chagrin of some, contained information which the presenters at the conference did not intend to release publicly. The independent Web sites are maintained by two former information technology specialists, Steven Krivit and William Collis, respectively. Despite the fact that conference presentations were open to the public and press, the disclosure of certain presentations has now come as a surprise and shock to some. I am astonished! said one researcher. This material belongs to me and my fellow authors, apparently oblivious to the fact that a handful of reporters and one television crew were in the audience. The topic of scientific secrecy has reared its ugly head within the cold fusion community and the formerly neglected group of researchers are now grappling with the complex issues of confidentiality and copyrights. The disclosure of one of the presentations caused one of the U.S.' leading cold fusion researchers some consternation, saying that this might result in me not lecturing in this manner again. Despite the concerns of a few, there are others within the community who defend the public's right to know and the free exchange of scientific information. As cold fusion research gains acceptance into mainstream science, it is starting to lose the quiet, private world that so many within the community have, to some extent, enjoyed in the last decade and a half. Errata to Nov. 16, 2004 New Energy Times Newsletter The news story referring to the Nashua Times article regarding Infinite Energy (www.infinite-energy.com) was mistakenly repeated in the recent New Energy Times (tm) newsletter. Recent news from the New Energy Foundation and Infinite Energy is that they are starting to attract new talent and have recently appointed three technical editors, to be announced in the next issue of Infinite Energy magazine.
Re: WashingtonPost article
I was hoping that someone from ICCF11 had a commment about the Israeli company, Energetics Technologies, mentioned in the article, or the presentation by El-Boher, which apparently... at least McKubre thinks is pretty near to having a commercial product. This someone will. I spent quite a bit of time with several of the ET folks. I am eager to share what I've learned, but I ask your patience as it will take me a while to transcribe my recordings and compile my report. I expect to have a brief mention of them in my Dec. newsletter and a more complete article on them in Q1-05. Steve
Re: Introduction
Welcome Haiko! Steve
Re: come to Minnesota
I may be able to help. Please give them my number. Steve (310) 721.5919 At 01:17 PM 1/3/2005, you wrote: Fellow Vortexians; Rumor has it that the University of Minnesota is looking for a cold fusion researcher. Dr. Orimi (sp), emeritus mechanical engineering has published several papers which are archived on the LENR site.
Cold fusion report by Jim Corey of Sandia N.L.available
http://newenergytimes.com/reports/ICCF11-2005-CoreyJim-Trip%20Report.pdf Steve
Re: The Big Science Chill
At 12:31 PM 1/9/2005, you wrote: Perhaps the majority (~60%) of Americans aren't concerned. However, I would say the rest of Americans are concerned. The popularity of Fahrenheit 911 is a good example. Apathy rules I guess. Aw, who cares, anyway! s
NEW ENERGY TIMES (tm) Jan. 10, 2005 -- Issue #8
NEW ENERGY TIMES (tm) Jan. 10, 2005 -- Issue #8 Your best source for cold fusion news and information. Copyright 2005 New Energy Times (tm) All photos by S.B. Krivit unless otherwise noted Available as follows: 1. E-mail version without images available to newsletter subscribers. 2. Full version on the Web: http://www.newenergytimes.com/news/8.htm (Note, if the images don't load properly from the Web, try the following: a) refresh your browser window or b)try Mozilla Firefox or c) download the PDF version.) 3. Full version in PDF: http://www.newenergytimes.com/news/8.pdf Steve
Re: Physics today 1/25/05-feder
RC, I, like Jed, question your assertions. While I agree with you that the Japanese are taking this more seriously than the U.S., your claims seem greatly exaggerated. Do you have any evidence to back them up or to demonstrate how you might know this? At 10:13 AM 1/26/2005 -0500, you wrote: RC Macaulay wrote: The USA programs are unpublished because they are under NSA guidelines. The Japanese are working at warp speed on the same within their Universities as well as their industrial labs. Steven B. Krivit Senior Editor NEW ENERGY TIMES Your best source for cold fusion news and information. 11664 National Blvd. Suite 142 Los Angeles, California, USA 90064 www.newenergytimes.com Office Phone: (310) 470-8189
Re: Accident photo uploaded
The radial pattern of the bottom of they pyrex is interesting.
Re: Physics today 1/25/05 feder
No, I don't. I guess I approach things differently. I don't make statements about the cold fusion field unless I have evidence to back them up. At 07:35 PM 1/26/2005 -0600, you wrote: Steve, I may pose the question.. do you have any evidence they are NOT ? The industrial world is busy, ask Siemems, Toshiba or Boeing/GE Richard
stealth cf research programs
Your theory should be somewhat testable with a little *flypaper*... ;) s If you want to get an indication of how many people, and sometimes even the identities of the people or organizations, who are doing research in your particular field, simply publish your work, and then read the logs on your computer firewall.
Mozilla Firefox - Thumbs up!
While we are on the subject of the Web, I recommend the new Mozilla Firefox in place of the well known browser from you-know-who that is usually referred to by its initials so that it sounds like Aaeee (or Oy Gevalt! in plain English.) - Jed What I like most about it so far is it's default no pop-ups policy. Of, perhaps 200 web sites I've been to since using it, only one failed to display properly with Firefox. It's time to get the word out to web programmers that Works best with Internet Explorer is passe. http://www.mozilla.org/ My webstats indicate that 70% of you use IE, and 19% of you use Firefox. s
2 Press Releases Posted from Mallove Family
www.eugenemallove.org
Re: Role of God in government
Ed, It was filmed starting about 10 days ago. He is currently travelling from NY to Los Angeles. He films each day, edits on his laptop (while driving!) and then uploads the MPG via the Internet once he docks each night. Steve At 11:33 AM 2/7/2005 -0700, you wrote: Thanks, Steve. Hume did a good job. Too bad it had no effect on the election. Ed
RE: Room-Temperature Superconductor Invented 25 Years Ago
Mark, Incldently, he was a test pilot for Nazi V1 flying bombs. He would ride them up and then jump off and parachute down. That's pretty wild. How would such bombs be launched? I'm picturing a cartoon-like scenario of a man wrapping his arms around a missile... Vorts- Incidentally, Mark has some interesting things going on with room-temperature superconductors. http://ultraconductors.com/ Steve
Re: SOLVING REALLY BIG PROBLEMS
At 08:21 PM 2/9/2005 -0500, you wrote: Jeff writes: What is our collective goal regarding the commercialization of CF? Is it to reduce the level of CO2 emissions to reverse global warming? I think Bockris put it most succinctly: It is the basis of a way to continue our Civilization. I've got more comments on the way regarding this in #9 and #10 of the forthcoming issues of New Energy Times. Perhaps the reduction in CO2 emissions will be more than offset by the waste heat output of billions of CF engines, and that global warming will accelerate by direct heating alone! Nope. Can't happen. Two reasons: 1. As I show in the book, cold fusion is so efficient, it would greatly reduce primary energy use for a long time, even if energy consumption increases. See chapters 14 and 15. 2. Heat from engines leaves the atmosphere in about a half hour. You would have to increase heat from motors by a huge factor before it would have a serious impact. To add to what Jed said, It was my understanding that global warming was primarily because of solar radiation hitting the earth, reflecting back towards space, but intercepted by the greenhouse gasses which absorb the wavelengths of reflected radiation and converts it into thermal energy, thereby creating a transparent blanket. Not so much from the heat that is generated initially from terrestrial sources. Yes? No? Steve
Re: Suppressed science web site
That site is the brian-child of former mathematics grad student Rochus Boerner (Arizona State) who moved back to Germany last year. http://www.suppressedscience.net/ http://www.suppressedscience.net/physics.html Many thanks for those two URLs Jed. They contain some very useful stuff. It's nice to have it all together in one document. Frank Grimer
Re: Frank Close still bragging about his role in CF
Hey Jed, You have my synthesis. The same think happens with my voice re-order system two. Steve At 02:21 PM 2/10/2005 -0500, you wrote: I wrote: He and the other hard core components are amazing. I meant opponents. That is what you get when you dictate a message to voice input and press the send key without even looking at it. - Jed
Re: How to appear in the blogoshere?
You have my sympathies Jed. Although I charge for my CF book, I, like you, didn't write it to make money. Getting out the word of my book, and the subject, is a tough sell right now and I think it's all about what you said, these people will not risk their reputations to endorse cold fusion -- or even talk about it. My strategy has been to spend massive amounts of time contacting any and every person I know or learn of that shows some sign of interest and bend their ear a bit. I think you'll agree, this subject should be paramount in scientific and respectable circles. At this point in time, it seems like the strong interest is still clearly in the fringe. Regardless, I do what I can, figuring that every little bit will help and that the results will show up some day. The other part of my strategy has been to avoid preaching to the deaf, as well as the converted. Steve
Thanks V Bill B Donations?
I also want to say to the Vortex group that I really appreciate the recent insightful, articulate and well-reasoned discussions that have occurred here of late. While there may not be any streets or homes here, this is clearly a well-defined and functional community. It is a place that I can count on for intelligent scientific debate and discussion. Thank you Bill B. Hey Bill, how about a Paypal-type system so we can donate? Steve
Re: It is worse because it works better
It turned out they literally flew by the seat of their pants. That's profound! s
Re: the big science chill.
Oh my goodness looks like you've got some clear and horrific facts here Yes, I'm familiar with revenue streams. I've been in IT for 17 years and seen the major emphasis and push for the big boys in IT to develop them in services once they realized that hardware and software sales were losing margins and had little future. I can't help but wonder, what does this Cintra story all mean? The majority of people are sheep? They want to be sheep? They don't know they are sheep? They like taking it from the wolves? Have they been programmed to such an extent that they don't care about disturbing facts? s
Re: Energy War
Nice one, Jed If several hundred researchers could all make large mistakes using 100 and 200-year-old techniques, science would never work in the first place. That is like asserting that you can select 200 carpenters at random, have each of them build a wooden house, and when they finish every single house might collapse because of mistakes the carpenters made. That would not happen in the lifetime of the universe. Of course newly-built houses do collapse from time to time. Individual carpenters do make drastic mistakes, and so do individual electrochemists. But they are never *all* mistaken. Steve
Re: Bottomless well
what facts did he cite? At 03:38 PM 2/14/2005 -0600, you wrote: Michael Medved, michaelmedved.com interviewed Peter Huber author of The Bottomless Well. Huber poopooed Hupert's Peak thesis. According to him, there are enough petroleum resources in this hemisphere to last the entire world for a century. Then there is our coal reserves. He ignored my question about the collapse of the dollar. Further information on the book is on Medved's website.
Re: BBC Horizon to feature Taleyarkhan
have !). Caveat: this criticism relates to the first ORNL announcement and they may have issued an addenda, but if so, it didn't make the news. I am told that the second paper addressed the criticism from the first paper: http://newenergytimes.com/news/8.htm#impulsedevices s
Who lives near Spokane, WA?
Dear Vorts, I am seeking to get coverage of some CF-related news, possibly in Spokane, WA next month. Is there anybody in the area with a digital recorder, a couple of hours of time, and some curiosity? This request comes with no pay but an offer for genuine appreciation and recognition. Reply privately please. Thanks, Steve
Re: BBC Horizon to feature Taleyarkhan
Thomas, I don't understand how hot fusion in bubbles differs from what the other LERN researchers are doing, I've written about this in detail in my book, and also in part, in two articles in the New Energy Times newsletter #8 http://newenergytimes.com/news/8.htm . Search on bubble and sonofusion. Steve
Re: Math Problem, humor (OT)
Uggh :)
Planck's second law (science progresses one funeral at a time)
Incidentally, based on my experiences dealing with people who oppose cold fusion, I do not think any of them -- Park, the Japanese, or the Sci. Am. editors -- has the slightest inkling he might be wrong. They sincerely believe that cold fusion is 100% unadulterated fraud and garbage. I have to agree with Jed on that. I've seen the same behavior. And it's not a mental behavior. It's a manifestation of a fixed belief. I have little hope for such people. Though Park is slightly different. I think he likes attention first, and facts second. If cf ever gets publicly accepted in his lifetime, I predict he'll be one of the early ones who privately knew it all along. Park has some brians (though no tact) and he also is close with at least one prominent cf researcher - so when he smells things starting to turn, he'll choose the winners's side. It's already started. He was quoted a few months ago as saying, I wouldn't invest in cold fusion just yet. Let's see what investment advice he has in 24 months. But Happer, Huizenga, Close - SciAm - they've dug themselves so deep, and they, unlike Park, are isolated from the field. I don't think they can dig out. Steve
Re: A cause celebre?
Frank, You want press attention? I'll give you press attention. Start a research program to develop a CF bomb with the avowed intention of saving America by getting there before the terrorists do. You will get all the press attention you can handle - and then some. Probably get quite a lot of financial support from crazy gun lobby billionaires too, I shouldn't wonder. Charles called the incident a meltdown. I'm not quite sure why he labeled it as such. I interviewed Ashley as well, and also read Taubes' interview of Ashley. They all match. I talked with Martin about this in as much detail as he was willing and able to remember. There was particulate in the air in the morning - but nothing was burning. The hole in the concrete floor was 30cm wide by 10cm deep. Somebody want to tell me that the concrete *melted*? I don't think so. Steve
Re: A cause celebre?
Because he said he will probably retire. He is giving up. He has been trying for years to get funding. He even thought of going to China. I shot back an answer saying Wait! I will do my best to help. The other readers here should pitch in, and tell Mel Miles you stand with him. - Jed Jed, I think our best tools and weapons are the Internet. In light of the fact that what we have here is a failure to communicate between the cold fusion community and the rest of the world, I am thinking of developing some video documentary segments and putting them up on New Energy Times. These are my understandings: - The general public is much more receptive to video than they are print. - Since we are dealing with a -belief- and -perception- problem, and not a fact problem, the effect of a real live person talking, appearing visually, can not only have a far more powerful effect to reach people, but it also has the ability to carry emotions, which text does not. And emotions, not facts, are what drive people to act and respond. This is my situation and proposal: I am in a position to create a short video documentary of Mel. He lives just an hour away from me. I just went down to SPAWAR and filmed Szpak, Boss and Gordon a few weeks ago in anticipation of their forthcoming Volume 3. We shot about 1.5 hours talking about many aspects in general, as well as their unique contribution to the field, co-deposition. I did that shoot on the cheap with a local filmmaker who's had some experience doing documentaries and who is sympathetic to cold fusion. Mind you, he's not a producer-type, deep-pockets-type, Chris is a hands-on tech-type and knows how to stage, shoot and edit. I have not yet figured out what level and quality of post-production I want to do on the SPAWAR segment yet. Part of that depends on funds. So I can see doing some film work with Mel's situation. I know his story and could easily have a nice talk with him on-camera, maybe get some of the ULV administrators on camera showing their support of Mel, etc. Here is my situation: My computer niche has slowly obsoleted itself, down to now about 5% of my time. I've had plans to start up in a new business altogether, but a few weeks ago, after I produced newsletter #8, an individual said he liked what I was doing - and offered to kick in some limited support. For the moment, I am doing everything I can for this cause, directing my attention to provide news and educational information on the field. I've got a few projects on the burner right now. I'm giving two presentations at APS in March, and I have newsletter #9 in the works. Between the Mizuno explosion and the Miles/Horwitz issue, I'm scrambling as quick as I can to write and edit. Once that's done, I'm going to engage in a hunt for additional funding to continue this work. The point of all this, coming back to the thread, is that if anybody is interested in helping to pay the post-production costs for either/both the SPAWAR segment and a future M.Miles segment, I will make them happen and make the documentaries freely available on the Web. The costs to shoot are relatively inexpensive, but I don't know off the top of my head the post-production (editing etc.) costs. If anyone is interested in funding this project, I can get pricing options. Also, tax-deductible donations can be arranged. However, there is an unavoidable fact that must be considered with this outreach idea: We still need a news hook. We can make the most interesting, inspiring short documentary, but if the public doesn't CLEARLY have something to tie the situation to in their own lives - it won't go any further than preaching to the choir. The story needs to reach people that have not yet been reached on the subject of cold fusion. What would drive people to learn about this story? What fear? What desire? People need to picture gasoline at $10 or $20 a gallon. Or rising ocean water levels. Or more extinct species. Or buying cold fusion batteries from China. By the way, the predecessor to my book, The 2004 Cold Fusion Report has been translated into Chinese (by volunteers, no less) and is in the editing and proof-reading phase...I think this shows some rather strong interest. So I guess this is where I come full circle - and arrive without a crucial answer to this enigma. How to get the attention of people who don't know and don't care, but would really want to know and care - if they only knew -- just a little more. I leave this question in the hands of the brilliant group mind of Vortex. One further thought...as Grimer noted, on the subject of Machiavelli. Do we really expect the government to support cold fusion? Is this a fantasy? Honestly, I think the best way to get the USG to fund cold fusion is for China to show up with a cold fusion reactor or heater. Sputnik, the sequel. Steve
Re: A cause celebre?
Jed, Just a thought .. it may be more strategic to posture DOE as acting more ridiculously rather than unfairly. Steve
RE: Article about Wikipedia
You must be filtering my messages, too! g FAIR WARNING: Wikipedia, like Vortex, has its own culture, and exists as a fairly well-defined community along with their own written and unwritten rules. The Wiki cold fusion page appears to be run by people who are for the most part, very different from the people here on V. The Wikians pride themselves on representing mainstream science, and not representing fringe POV (points of views), even though fringe POVs just might happen to be far more knowledgeable and accurate. It might APPEAR as though one can just jump in and make a correction on the honor system (for example, correcting the note about no excess heat) but prepared - many of the Wiki veterans won't think twice about immediately erasing your contribution and asking questions later. I think it would be great if more Vortexians contributed to the CF Wiki, but you should just know what you are up against. If you make any updates, be sure to add a title comment that summarizes your change. Make use of the Discussion page - it's quite helpful. And don't be too shocked at the level of ignorance reflected on the page. I had a run-in a while back with one of the Wiki-ops - he thought he was so smart about cold fusion because he was a plasma fusion grad student at Columbia. Steve At 09:56 AM 3/2/2005 -0500, you wrote: John Steck wrote: You must be filtering my messages... 8^) No, I was aware of that. The URL I listed is an article in Wired magazine about Wikipedia. I have been aware of their cold fusion article for some time, because it has a link to LENR-CANR.org, and I see people visiting from it from time to time. The cold fusion article is not good. It needs extensive revisions. For example, it says: Energy source vs power store While the output power is higher than the input power during the power burst, the power balance over the whole experiment does not show significant imbalances. Since the mechanism under the power burst is not known, one cannot say whether energy is really produced, or simply stored during the early stages of the experiment (loading of deuterium in the Palladium cathode) for later release during the power burst. As the readers here surely realize, this is nonsense. - Jed
Re: CF Expert?
I have his CV - yep, it's Oriani W.R. Whitney Award (1987) winner: Richard Oriani. Bingo. He is indeed an expert in CF. - Jed
Re: Big CF breakthrough reported
Korean patent On http://iesiusa.com/intellectual.html there is a list of patents, but I don't recognize the number format. Can someone help? 10-20020026277 would be particularly interesting. :) Steve
Re: Big CF breakthrough reported
Good work Robin. From their SEC filing (on their Web site) Patents 1. Hydrogen Technology 1. Korean Patent Application No. 10-2002-0026277 Energy Generating Device This patent has only been filed in Korean and has not been translated into English. The patent basically describes how the manufactured prototype Hydrogen Energy unit works. FWIW, as you notice, this is a patent pending. Their Web site does not say pending. Perhaps it was granted after the SEC filing. This too, from the filing: 2. Korean Patent Application No. 10-2002-0069231 Apparatus for Generating Hydrogen Gas Worldwide Patent Cooperation Treaties (PCT) Patent No. KR2003/002395 Perhaps they may be found on the WIPO site if you have the time to look. After spending hours searching the Korean patent database, I am slowly coming to the conclusion that this is a disinformation site. I was told about this situation by two people who are leaders in the cold fusion community over the past few days. Honestly, I am up to my eyebrows in editing the next newsletter so I've not dedicated much time to digging into this yet, but I'm happy to share my view: I'm skeptical. Optimistic but skeptical. The words Jed used to title this thread were the same I heard from an informant, perhaps the same one. We are all hoping for the day the sun will shine from the little CF jar, myself included. I think it's important for all of us to always do our own thinking, no matter which prominent U.S. theorist decides to endorse a particular commercial enterprise. This is one of the big lessons about cold fusion: Think for your (our) selves. Investigate and assess the facts and make up one's own decision. Perhaps this is a big breakthrough. How do we know that at this time? Certainly not from their Web site. Certainly not from their SEC filing and certainly not from searches of their patents. Perhaps this is a big story and I may miss being the first to report it, but I'm sorry, I need to see a lot more. We all remember Genesis World Energy, right? I've seen another website recently about an NGO that seems to really have their heart in the right place - but there's something weird about it, I can't quite put my finger on it. www.gifnet.org . Back to Innovative Energy Solutions, as soon as I kick out New Energy Times #9 I'll dig deeper into this. They have a main office in Vegas. I'm not opposed to driving out there any paying them a visit. Though I was told that they have intentionally kept a low profile so as to keep their lead from larger companies who could easily overpower them with massive resources. Seems reasonable. I have a few names and phone numbers to go on. If anybody digs up anything else interesting, I'll appreciate seeing that here. And whatever I turn up I'll kick it back to the community in New Energy Times #10. IES does seem to more transparent that GWE, posting their SEC filing and addresses and salaries of principals and such. I give them a lot of credit for that. Steve
Re: Big CF breakthrough reported
Jed, Potopov is before my time. Can you say just a word or two about it? It worked? Didn't work? Status unknown? Thanks, Steve At 02:25 PM 3/3/2005 -0500, you wrote: A Friend wrote to me: The people I know who have been [to visit IESI] and seen the equipment can't say anything other than there are big objects making lots of noise but no data is apparent or being offered. It smells strongly of Potopov to me. - Jed
Re: Message sent to wikipedia editor
At 03:31 PM 3/3/2005 -0900, you wrote: Why not simply make a short statement that is not arguable. Something like: A differing minority view is held by over 200 retired scientists and university professors who are working on cold fusion energy. For related publications see: http://lenr-canr.org/. If such a clearly true statement is deleted then the cause is pure prejudice. Maybe we could get together a vigilante team to repost that short statement whenever it is deleted. I agree. Further, if you can a. Make clear, highly-objective, easily verifiable statements and b. Defend it with vocal proponents (Vortex community Wiki) it should work. s
Re: The CoFu Bomb Game
Why not develop a computer game in which you first have to kidnap various scientists such as Dr Bones and Professor Fleshman and then persuade them using various macabre instruments Don't forget the evil Dr. Park, attempting to protect the establishment at all costs. Keep with the theme, that would be the evil Dr. Pork, I believe. s
RE: CF on NPR
Jed wrote: Yes, I do -- for a good reason. The short segment they broadcast with Ira Flatow was quite fair and accurate. Flatow has often communicated with us that he knows what the story is. He was a little timid, but accurate. I am hoping the other reporters on NPR contact him and discuss the matter. Since he is their science reporter it is likely they will. Jed - If mainstream news media did their job, there would be no need for Infinite Energy or New Energy Times. If mainstream science publishing did their job, there would be no need for LENR-CANR.org. But these entities cater to the dominant, safe public view. They lack either/both the courage or the foresight to explore the unknown. Another viewpoint: Henry Bauer touches on the very heart of why mainstream science journalism has been largely unwilling/unable to bridge the communication gap between the cold fusion community and the broader science community. A constant dilemma for reporters, Bauer says, is that they need access to sources, and if they publish material that casts doubt on the official view, they risk losing access to official sources. Source: Journal of Scientific Exploration, Science in the 21st Century: Knowledge Monopolies and Research Cartels, by Henry H. Bauer (Vol. 18 #4 pp. 643--660, Winter 2004) http://newenergytimes.com/Library/2004BauerH-21stCenturyScience.pdf Courtesy of http://www.scientificexploration.org/index.html s
RE: CF on NPR
That is true. And yet Flatow's report was accurate and positive, albeit timid. Some people in the media get away with reporting facts about cold fusion, and they are not punished by losing access. I suspect the others would also escape unscathed, but perhaps they are cowards and do not want to risk it. Most, I think, simply buy the establishment's line without question. I have contacted many people in the media and elsewhere. Only a few have responded, and most of those have parroted the Scientific American or some other official source. Often they cite phantom sources. They claim the DoE ERAB report said this or that, when it said nothing of the kind. In other words, laziness causes more harm than fear. - Jed Jed, I forgot to mention. Yes, I agree with you about Flatow. I have listened to his question and dialogue in cf reports he has done and it is crystal clear to me that he knows much more than he tells. But he knows how to keep his producers happy, and keep his job, too. And that is his choice. s
Re: Energy - The Big Picture DRAFT #2
Horace, You may be care to send this to Gustav GROB email: info at uniseo.org. He may have an interest, as well as an influence to see something productive happen with your ideas. Steve
Re: University of Illinois Measures Bubble Temp
This article seems a bit absurd. It refers to the bubble temp of 15,000 deg. C as 4 times as hot as the sun. Wanna bet somebody lost three zeros? s
Re: Bethe Dead at 98
Horgan say we have reached the end of science already, and they are doing their level best to fulfill this prophesy. Fleischmann thinks they will win. I hope not, but I don't know. Yes, Martin sure does. Posted last night: http://newenergytimes.com/Conversations/FleischmannByLietz.htm s
Wikipedia
Hey Jed, Congratulations on your progress on the Wiki CF page. You have been surprisingly diplomatic ;) . I also respect the time you put in as evidenced by the discussion page. It seems to have paid off. Your contribution is significant for two reasons: 1. Your corrections to Energy source vs power store are right on target and just plain honest. 2. You've established a method, using references, that is acceptable to the Wiki community. As you and others will note, your work has not been defaced or challenged. So there is hope. I'll see what I can do to help, a little bit here and there. Maybe we can make the Wiki page the best, most accurate, and most progressive reference for CF after all. s
Re: Budding Scientist 8^)
True empirical observations. I guess it could have been worse..there are other senses he could have used. ;) At 08:42 PM 3/21/2005 -0900, you wrote: Occasionally one runs across something that MUST be shared. Curiosity: an essential ingrediant for science. See: http://home.pacbell.net/dianna_do/monkeysniff.htm Regards, Horace Heffner
Fwd: Transmutation report
Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2005 20:59:26 +0100 From: Haiko Lietz [EMAIL PROTECTED] Dear all, This email is to let you know about my report on MHI's transmutation experiments on German National Radio. Incidentally it was aired on today's 16th anniversary of the announcement of cold fusion. German article and on-demand audio are here: http://www.dradio.de/dlf/sendungen/forschak/359485/ Steve Krivit has the English version on his site: http://www.newenergytimes.com/news/2005Mitsubishi-Answer-Lietz.htm I deliberately headlined my article Mitsubishi's Answer to Nuclear Waste as a response to the call European Union needs a clear answer on nuclear waste by European Energy Commissioner Andris Piebalgs: http://europa.eu.int/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=SPEECH/05/122format=HTMLaged=0language=ENguiLanguage=en Best regards Haiko Lietz Science Reporter Germany
Re: Wikipedia
Perhaps it will be the best for the general public, but for scientists nothing can beat original sources. True. Scott Chubb and I had a very pleasant talk with Jack Sandweiss, editor of Physical Review Letters, and also Prof. at Yale University yesterday at the APS conference. He seemed truly open-minded. Though the bottom line came to this - he, and I suspect others like him, is busy - and doesn't have much motivation to take the time to inquire more deeply about CF. Considering the low probability (in the minds of honest skeptics) of cf, what will motivate scientists to even look (through the telescope)? We have the data. Now, how do we get their interest? Perhaps when more papers get published, perhaps not. Perhaps the interest will be driven by commerce and the science community will be very surprised one day. Steve
Re: Wikipedia
Jed, Pessimistic, yes. Logical and realistic, yes. Perhaps we need miracle #4, whatever that will be. Steve
Re: Garbage from space.com
done - thanks for the address At 02:52 PM 3/24/2005 -0800, you wrote: I think you can reach the author at; [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.seti.org/site/pp.asp?c=ktJ2J9MMIsEb=179047 Jed Rothwell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: How do you contact these idots?!? I do not see a contact page or editor. Let's everyone write to them, and set them straight. __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: Easter
Lets get back to science. Richard Amen to that! s
Re: $105 per Barrel
Thanks Terry. I was wondering when we'd see those predictions in the mainstream. Funny that they use the word spike. s At 08:49 AM 4/1/2005 -0800, you wrote: Goldman Sachs analysis sees $105 super spike: http://uk.biz.yahoo.com/050331/323/ffes2.html Do you Yahoo!? Better first dates. More second dates. Yahoo! Personals
COLD FUSION RETURNS TO MIT
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE APRIL 20, 2005 CONTACT: Melissa Brown New Energy Times (310) 470-8189 COLD FUSION GOES BACK TO SCHOOL AT THE MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY CAMBRIDGE, MASS, April 20, 2005 -- The Massachusetts Institute of Technology will host a daylong colloquium May 21, on the topics of cold fusion and other clean energy research. The clean energy colloquium is a timely opportunity for the active but underfunded cold fusion community in the United States to discuss recent progress, perspectives and possible actions, research professor David J. Nagel of The George Washington University said. The debate on this controversial topic was rekindled by the 2004 Department of Energy cold fusion review (See News menu at the NewEnergyTimes.com Web site.) The reviewers remained undecided about cold fusion but encouraged further study in this mysterious new scientific field. A healthy skepticism is warranted, says Steven B. Krivit, author of a recent book on cold fusion. However, the facts show that cold fusion experiments have been demonstrated, reproduced, replicated and published in peer-review journals. Experimental evidence consistently demonstrates that nuclear-scale energy, in the form of heat, is being generated without harmful radiation, greenhouse gasses or nuclear waste. With the uncertain future of oil and natural gas supplies, and the undeniable rising cost of oil, the prospect of clean nuclear energy comes at an ideal time. One of the presenters, Dr. Mitchell Swartz of JET Thermal Products, has developed a working experimental cold fusion reactor. Swartz demonstrated the device at MIT in August 2003 during the 10th International Conference on Cold Fusion. Program and registration information for the colloquium is available under the Conferences menu at the NewEnergyTimes.com Web site.
RE: Times: Tabletop Fusion
Could this similarity to sonofusion be part of Putterman's nefarious agenda... you remember, in his recent downplaying of normal sonofusion. This guy could end up being a bad actor in terms of intellectual-greed, so to speak... but thanks to the internet his past deeds will likely catch up with him, sooner rather than later. Jones, I'm on it. I smell some bad fish and I think its close by here in LA. The BBC Horizon ploy was disgusting. Please feel free to (privately) send me any other leads. Steve
The Economist: Cold fusion - Honest!
This is hilarious... The Economist article is titled: Cold fusion - Honest! I haven't seen the Science article yet, but the title looks like it too, is relating the story to cold fusion. The UCLA team should have given their work a nifty name like Crystal Fusion to give the press something to latch onto. Oops. Too late for that. I In 1989 the press needed a label and they misapplied Jones work to FP's. Voila - the birth of Cold fusion. Now some of them don't know what to call the UCLA work. I guess cold fusion will do. Deja vu. s Tabletop Accelerator Breaks 'Cold Fusion' Jinx But Won't Yield ... Science Magazine (subscription) - USA A crystal with a strange property is at the heart of a clever method for inducing nuclear fusion in a tabletop-sized device. The ... Cold fusion Economist - UK PHYSICISTS who meddle with cold fusion, like psychologists who dabble in the paranormal, are likely to be labelled quacks by their peers. ...
Re: ICCF-11 papers are depressing
Hmmm. Not good. At 05:43 PM 5/2/2005 -0400, you wrote: These ICCF-11 papers are depressing. There are only a few experimental papers. Most are reviews of old work, or papers about theory. As far as I can tell, most of the theory is of the crackpot variety, and usually about subjects unrelated to CF, such as POSSIBLE NUCLEAR TRANSMUTATION OF NITROGEN IN THE EARTH'S ATMOSPHERE. This field is dying, and I cannot think of any way to save it. - Jed
[Vo]:
Your best source for news and information on low energy nuclear reactions September 10, 2006 -- Issue #18 ISSUE #18 is available online at http://newenergytimes.com/news/2006/NET18.htm EDITORIALS AND OPINION 1. From the Editor 2. To the Editor NEWS ANNOUNCEMENTS 3. The Communications Institute National Energy Symposiums ANALYSIS AND PERSPECTIVES 4. Bubble Fusion Discoverer Taleyarkhan Strikes Back 5. Reasonable Doubt 6. Amber's Answer To The Question Of Reproducibility 7. On The Allegations of Fraud Against Fleischmann and Pons 8. The Five Press Conferences Of Cold Fusion PUBLICATIONS 9. Cold Fusion Book Published by Kozima 10. Fourth Widom-Larsen LENR Theory Paper Released SCIENCE AND ENERGY NEWS 11. The World's Second Most Expensive Science Experiment 12. Electric Power Research Institute Cold Fusion Videotape Released 13. Steorn Challenges The First Law Of Thermodynamics 14. Brigham Young University Professor Steven Jones Rebukes Cold Fusion, Again 15. BP: Beyond Propaganda 16. Walter Meyerhof, Stanford Cold Fusion Foe, Dies At 84 17. Gustave (Bob) Kohn: February 12, 1910 - August 20, 2006 New Energy Times (tm) is a project of New Energy Institute, an independent 501(c)(3) nonprofit corporation which provides information and educational services to help bring about the clean-energy revolution. The New Energy Times (tm) newsletter, Web site, and documentary projects are made possible by the generous contributions of our sponsors and supporters. If you have received this announcement from a colleague and you wish to be added to the New Energy Times (tm) mailing list, or if you would like to unsubscribe, click here http://newenergytimes.com/news/news.htm.
Re: [Vo]: Chinese Tokomak Fusion
working on it.. s At 07:50 PM 9/30/2006, you wrote: Has anyone got anything more about the recent Chinese claim of producing fusion power from their 'EAST' reactor.
Re: [Vo]: Steve Krivit NO LONGER urges participation in Wikipedia
Well, some of you attempted to intervene, and I applaud you, whoever it was, but it seems the like things are a bit out of control there at the moment. I'm appalled that such destruction could occur and that it has been left to stand. Let them have their way. One day they will wake up to a very big surprise. S
Re: [Vo]: What happened?
Yang's going strong, as far as I know...but flying way below the radar. Stringham's probably got something viable but I suspect he's trying to negotiate his fair share of the bucket of gold. I've heard no details from Energetics but they're a wildcard...they have a large and dynamic team and they hold their cards close to their chest... There may be others - I'm not sure. Anybody else that has made loud assertions or speculations is most likely full of crap. Why? 'Cause if they really had something, they wouldn't need to shout from rooftops. They'd be signing up major partners left and right and working like the bejeezus to figure out how to go from benchtop to display case before the next guy does. s At 08:22 PM 10/16/2006, you wrote: About a year of so ago Jed mentioned that private efforts were going on just under the radar. A few of these efforts were going to produce results within the next year. What happened? I have heard nothing. Are these efforts done? It has been a long time. Frank Znidarsic
[Vo]:
Your best source for news and information on low energy nuclear reactions October 16, 2006 Lefteri Tsoukalas has resigned as head of the School of Nuclear Engineering today, according to Purdue spokeswoman Jeanne Norberg. Tsoukalas remains on staff at Purdue, Norberg said. Tsoukalas was one of the two named accusers who made cutting remarks against physicist Rusi Taleyarkhan to journalist Eugenie Samuel Reich, writing for Nature. Exact details of the reason for Tsoukalas' resignation and to what extent it pertains to the Taleyarkhan matter are not known. A source who wishes to remain anonymous indicated that Purdue's policy of handling internal complaints may have been violated. Taleyarkhan is one of the world's leading researchers on bubble fusion, an experimental investigation into energy research that Taleyarkhan considers a possible alternative to the large, costly and more-accepted forms of conventional fusion research as well as a possible alternative to fossil fuels. Nature hastily published a series of four articles on March 8 that appeared to be an attack and an effort to silence the work of Taleyarkhan. He has been working for months since the publication to respond to the attacks on his work and character. The articles, which could have destroyed Taleyarkhan's career, were published in Nature's news section before the alleged scientific evidence against his work was published in the scientific literature. One of the articles was titled Silencing the Hype, which displayed an intolerance for new science as well as a breakdown in the relationship between science and science journalism. On Oct. 6, Physical Review Letters published the alleged evidence from Seth Putterman's colleague Brian Naranjo, both of UCLA, and Taleyarkhan's successful rebuttal. (Related story) On a related matter, Brian Josephson of Cambridge, a 1973 Nobel prize winner in physics, is questioning whether Nature has violated journalism ethics as outlined by the United Kingdom Press Complaints Commission. Specifically, Josephson questions whether Nature published inaccurate, misleading or distorted information and whether Nature failed, once the facts were brought to its attention, to publish a correction, promptly and with due prominence, and -where appropriate - an apology.
Re: [Vo]: Beyond Petroleum
Terry.. Bravo for identifying those blips on the radarvery insightful...I'll pass this along to some folks I know in commodities and see what I get... At 08:41 AM 10/31/2006, you wrote: Does anyone know what is happenin' with BP? Their share price is near it's year low, they have closed their pay online site, and they are no longer taking applications for gas credit cards. Odd. Terry
[Vo]: Fwd: Beyond Petroleum
Date: Wed, 01 Nov 2006 16:36:44 -0800 From: Steve Krivit [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Beyond Petroleum aha...good info...thanks they don't call themselves British Petroleum anymore ...just BP... ughh. Maybe I can forgo the name Steve Krivit and just have people call me SK? ;) SK At 02:41 PM 11/1/2006, you wrote: Hi Steve: I presume you are referring to British Petroleum. Given the problems they are having with their pipeline I don't think you need any pending major news. Whatever comes out of that is going to be between bad and worse. There is clearly culpability on BP's side. What is not clear, yet, is whether it will be negligence or malfeasance. Cutting down on gas cards may be liability limiting move. OTOH, as it says on the gas card home page, the Web site is new. It could simply be that the site does not work right. -
[Vo]: Bill Beaty's inspiring Videos
Thanks to Bill Beaty's inspiring science videos on YouTube, I've decided to start putting up some of my own content. So when you're really bored and have nothing to do, here's the first piece. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ke_ZhgAKjhs Short documentary on SPAWAR Systems Center San Diego Low Energy Nuclear Reactions (cold fusion) research. Filmed on Feb. 18, 2005. Produced by New Energy Times, a project of New Energy Institute. Hosted by Steven B. Krivit s
Re: [Vo]: Bill Beaty's inspiring Videos
Jed, Good idea. Done. Steve: You or someone else with an account at you tube should go back and add a brief message saying that people can read papers by SPAWARS researchers at your webpage and LENR-CANR.org. A couple of comments have been posted in which people express confusion about the research. - Jed
Re: [Vo]: Bill Beaty's inspiring Videos
Hi Jones, Thanks for the encouragement. I have a whole lot of video content that has been piling up. I've been sort of struggling with the technology... wmv vs. rp or both? mp4 vs. swf? stream vs. download? This is my first experience with UT and I love it. SWF is the ideal format but it had previously been a hassle to convert it to that. Now, UT does a)for free and b)automatically. From the users' side, UT has made shockwave ubiquitous. So - do expect more to come ...however, I'm sorry that I can give you any near-term expectations for more news on the tritium, but would you accept charged particles instead? http://newenergytimes.com/news/2006/NET19.htm P.S. I logged out and dropped SPAWAR in the search box and it brought me right to the clip. S
Re: [Vo]: Bill Beaty's inspiring Videos
http://lenr-canr.org/Collections/USNavy.htm If it is a pain in the butt to change this, don't bother. No problema s
[Vo]: AN OPEN LETTER TO RUSS GEORGE
AN OPEN LETTER TO RUSS GEORGE Dear Mr. George, It's been six months since we published our report in New Energy Times on your work and that of D2Fusion. People in the CMNS community are still asking me as recently as last week if D2Fusion ever provided any form of response, either formal or informal, to our investigation. I tell them that we have not received any communication from you or D2Fusion, that you have not challenged our facts, our context or our representations. Consequently, I've decided to send this open letter to you, by way of the CMNS and VORTEX lists, as I gather that many people are interested in your response to our report. As I believe is well known, I made multiple statements, both to you privately, as well as to the CMNS community, that New Energy Times would afford you with the opportunity to rebut and respond. To date, you have elected not to do so. I hope we all agree that a frank and forthright discussion is in the best interests of the CMNS community. Failing an open response by you to the significant issues raised by New Energy Times, it would seem reasonable and necessary to conclude that you find our investigation and findings rigorous and accurate. Thank you for that and I wish you good luck and success in your endeavors. Sincerely, Steve Krivit Editor, New Energy Times New Energy Times Five-Part Investigation Into D2Fusion: http://newenergytimes.com/news/2006/NET16.htm#d21 http://newenergytimes.com/news/2006/NET16.htm#d22 http://newenergytimes.com/news/2006/NET16.htm#d23 http://newenergytimes.com/news/2006/NET16.htm#d24 http://newenergytimes.com/news/2006/NET16.htm#d25
[Vo]:
Your best source for news and information on low energy nuclear reactions November 10, 2006 -- Issue #19 ISSUE #19 is available online at http://newenergytimes.com/news/2006/NET19.htm EDITORIALS AND OPINION 1. Guest Editorial 2. To the Editor NEWS ANNOUNCEMENTS 3. The 13th International Conference on Condensed Matter Nuclear Science (ICCF-13) 4. American Physical Society March Meeting 5. Symposium on New Energy Technology at the American Chemical Society 6. The 13th International Conference on Emerging Nuclear Energy Sciences (ICENES-2007) ANALYSIS AND PERSPECTIVES 7. Extraordinary Evidence 8. The Galileo Project 9. Brief Report on ASTI06 Workshop 10. PUBLICATIONS 11. SCIENCE AND ENERGY NEWS 12. BITS AND PIECES New Energy Times (tm) is a project of New Energy Institute, an independent 501(c)(3) nonprofit corporation which provides information and educational services to help bring about the clean-energy revolution. The New Energy Times (tm) newsletter, Web site, and documentary projects are made possible by the generous contributions of our sponsors and supporters. We invite you to join with us in this effort to help bring a better future for all of earth's current and future residents. If you have received this announcement from a colleague and you wish to be added to the New Energy Times (tm) mailing list, or if you would like to unsubscribe, click here http://newenergytimes.com/news/news.htm.
Re: [Vo]: New Energy Times
At 07:30 AM 11/10/2006, you wrote: I have supplied a Subject Header. We'll see if it takes. Looks like Steve has become infected with blank-Vo syndrome. Glad I'm not the only one. I don't know why the header dropped. I sent the same exact message to the CMNS list and the header (subject line) was retained in that post. This was the original header (subject line): NEW ENERGY TIMES (tm) NOV. 10, 2006 -- Issue #19 Any thoughts on a disinfectant are appreciated Steve
Re: [Vo]: New Energy Times
Actually, as far as the high voltage - Claytor did employ that with success some time ago, if I'm not mistaken. Jones, Through the electrolytic circuit or in an outside field? Steve
Re: [Vo]: New Energy Times
Did I miss anything ... err ... other than... well the thing which is most likely of all of these g That being: 7) an alteration in time itself such that a normal QM probability distributions and determinations become highly skewed. Jones Good lord! ;) Steve
Re: [Vo]: New Energy Times
Greetings Mike, Would you be pleased to know that you are the first to find a flaw in our article? I am honored that it was found by you and I am not surprised considering your expert background. current now reads potential I'll run that B-field value by the team early next week and report back here with my findings. Remind me to include you next time on the technical proofreading! :) Steve At 06:35 PM 11/10/2006, you wrote: - Original Message - From: Mark S Bilk [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Vo]: New Energy Times Those are indeed wonderful results from the, er, space war people, but I don't understand how an external DC electric field can have any effect inside the electrolytic cell. The resistance of the container walls is so much greater than that of the electrolyte that all of the voltage drop, i.e., the electric field, would be across the walls, and none across the electrolyte and its contents. Mark's point is well taken. The voltage drop across the electrolyte will not be zero, however. The text is also slightly in error in referring to a 6000 volt current. Again, starements about the field strength of the magnets are way off. The magnets might produce a 12 kilogauss field under test conditions, but not with the large gap involved, and 12,200 gauss is by no means a moderate strength; it is quite high. These quibbles aside, what is important that immediate effects were produced by these fields, even though their mnagnitude at the active site is not correctly stated. Mike Carrell
