Re: [Vo]:The first real NiH reactor
I agree, hydrogen will diffuse through metal walls until the hydrogen pressure (partial pressure) is the same on both sides. On 24 February 2012 20:54, mix...@bigpond.com wrote: In reply to Axil Axil's message of Sun, 19 Feb 2012 16:20:54 -0500: Hi, [snip] • The high pressure CO2 coolant will eliminate hydrogen exfiltration from the hot kernel stainless steel reactor kernel walls; I don't think so. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
Re: [Vo]:The first real NiH reactor
Robin: Think, say 20 atoms of Ni in a cluster surrounded by H gas. The thermal energy in the cluster increases and transforms the increase of kenetic energy to the surrounding H. H is the heat transfer agent. Not good. Better: Surround cluster with other inert medium. Example: mix Cu, Fe, MgH2 and Ni nano size powder (Each previously treated by soaking at 180 C for 2 days under 100 psi H) and ball mill under an inert atmosphere. Add mineral oil or othe nonreactive heat transfer agent, either liquid or solid to mill. If product is liquid, 10 plate Duda heat exchange and Delco fuel pump to circulate and trigger reaction as per Chan II Method. If solid, encapsolate in as small a Cu envelope as possible to allow Frequincy Generator EMF triggering as per Phen, Chan etc. Total cost under $1,000.00 Less verbal hot air is possibly the most important catalyst to discovery. Motivation is simply curiosity Reality
RE: [Vo]:South Africa Fuel-Free Generator Report : Theory?
Jones: From what I gather, a lead storage battery alone can power a device at the same time it is being charged by an oscillating circuit containing inductors, capacitors and diodes. With proper tuning an LENR reaction within the battery would supply the the energy. Keeping it simple, Reality
[Vo]:Protestants vs Catholics
http://www.defkalion-energy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=24t=1168 Re: Physics and Models Defkalion GT Posted: Sat Feb 25, 2012 11:34 am Site Admin Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2011 6:56 am Posts: 488 Since the last 2 decades, several theories have been proposed to explain LENR phenomena and Huizenga's three questions: Question #1: of how the Coulomb barrier is penetrated Question #2: the lack of strong neutron emissions Question #3: the lack of strong emission of gamma or x-rays A short summary of most of them is presented in alphabetic order inhttp://newenergytimes.com/v2/sr/Theorie ... ndex.shtml. This incomplete presentation includes: Bazhutov-Vereshkov Theory Chubb (Scott) Theory Chubb ( Talbot) Theory Fisher Theory Gareev Theory Hagelstein Theory Hora-Miley Theory Kim-Zubarev Theory Kirkinskii-Novikov Theory Kozima Theory Li Theory Preparata Theory Sinha-Meulenberg Theory Storms Theory Szpak Theory Takahashi Theory Widom-Larsen Theory whilst several other proposed theories are omitted from this list such as (not included all): Frank Znidarsic theory, Stoyan Sarg Sargoytchev/ M. Kanarev theory, Yeong E. Kim theory, Wladimir Guglinski/ C. Stremmenos theory, Y.T. Didenko/K. S. Suslick theory etc All of the above proposed theories are base on the assumption that only one type of reaction can occur in LENR: either those related with strong forces or those related with weak forces. In most cases, results of such theories contradict with existing general theories or dogmas of present incomplete models of theoretical physics. There is a strong possibility of a forthcoming LENR theories war between the members of the existing small community of LENR/CF researchers (possible conflicts closely related with government funding to be released in the area). Such war could turn out to be a new War of Religion, similar to the 1562- 1598 war between the catholics (the strong force fans in this case) and the protestants (the weak force fans), where all involved parties will claim their one faith slogan against all the others. We are following the orthodox approach, which is not to get involved in such conflicts, even though we already have a pretty good understanding on what really is going on during all faces (sic - phases) of what we have called as adynamic multistage chemically assisted low energy nuclei reactions. Our decision is to do our job, which is to provide to the market safe and stable high performance products and to the scientific community with all the hard evidence from LENR phenomena measured with new type of specially designed instrumentation that we had to build to support our product's RD. As history of science and philosophy teaches us, when there is a conflict because of duality, in all cases the truth lies in their synthesis (Plotinus- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plotinus ) Thank you
[Vo]:stremmenos on interview with haglestein, theory, ni+H developpement (indirectly rossi DGT)
an article about an open letter by stremmenos after a talk with Hagelstein. talk about the way the theory proposed by focardi make possible the developpemet of Ni+H reactors like rossi or DGT... http://22passi.blogspot.com/2012/02/stremmenos-interviene-proposito-di.html?utm_source=feedburnerutm_medium=feed for me it seems indirectly to support that rossi and DGT started from Focardi ideas, not from inventing/stealing... anyway I could not translate it correctly with microsoft translator al http://www.microsofttranslator.com/BV.aspx?ref=BVNavfrom=to=ena=http%3A%2F%2F22passi.blogspot.com%2F2012%2F02%2Fstremmenos-interviene-proposito-di.html%3Futm_source%3Dfeedburner%26utm_medium%3Dfeed if someone can translate correctly
[Vo]:Defkalion position on LENR theories
http://www.defkalion-energy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=6674#p6674 DGT just answer some question on theories: could be translated as swiss neutrality, or secularity... they talk of duality,and seems ti criticize position that exclude others... Since the last 2 decades, several theories have been proposed to explain LENR phenomena and Huizenga's three questions: Question #1: of how the Coulomb barrier is penetrated Question #2: the lack of strong neutron emissions Question #3: the lack of strong emission of gamma or x-rays A short summary of most of them is presented in alphabetic order in http://newenergytimes.com/v2/sr/Theorie ... ndex.shtml http://newenergytimes.com/v2/sr/Theories/TheoryIndex.shtml. This incomplete presentation includes: *Bazhutov-Vereshkov Theory* ** *Chubb (Scott) Theory* ** *Chubb ( Talbot) Theory* ** *Fisher Theory * ** *Gareev Theory* ** *Hagelstein Theory* ** *Hora-Miley Theory* ** *Kim-Zubarev Theory* ** *Kirkinskii-Novikov Theory* ** *Kozima Theory * ** *Li Theory * ** *Preparata Theory * ** *Sinha-Meulenberg Theory* ** *Storms Theory * ** *Szpak Theory* ** *Takahashi Theory* ** *Widom-Larsen Theory* whilst several other proposed theories are omitted from this list such as (not included all): *Frank Znidarsic theory, * ** *Stoyan Sarg Sargoytchev/ M. Kanarev theory,* ** *Yeong E. Kim theory,* ** *Wladimir Guglinski/ C. Stremmenos theory,* ** *Y.T. Didenko/K. S. Suslick theory* etc All of the above proposed theories are base on the assumption that only one type of reaction can occur in LENR: either those related with strong forces or those related with weak forces. In most cases, results of such theories contradict with existing general theories or dogmas of present incomplete models of theoretical physics. There is a strong possibility of a forthcoming LENR theories war between the members of the existing small community of LENR/CF researchers (possible conflicts closely related with government funding to be released in the area). Such war could turn out to be a new War of Religion, similar to the 1562- 1598 war between the catholics (the strong force fans in this case) and the protestants (the weak force fans), where all involved parties will claim their one faith slogan against all the others. We are following the orthodox approach, which is not to get involved in such conflicts, even though we already have a pretty good understanding on what really is going on during all faces of what we have called as adynamic multistage chemically assisted low energy nuclei reactions. Our decision is to do our job, which is to provide to the market safe and stable high performance products *and* to the scientific community with all the hard evidence from LENR phenomena measured with new type of specially designed instrumentation that we had to build to support our product's RD. As history of science and philosophy teaches us, when there is a conflict because of duality, in all cases the truth lies in their synthesis (Plotinus- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plotinus ) Thank you
RE: [Vo]:Test day in Greece time
Shoot! I have to respond to this. NOONE, PLEASE CHECK YOUR PERSONAL RETURN EMAIL SETTINGS WHEN YOU RESPOND TO POSTS IN VORTEX-L. EVERYONE WHO ATTEMPTS TO RESPOND TO YOUR VORTEX POSTS ARE CONSTANTLY IN DANGER OF SENDING EMAIL TO YOUR PERSONAL EMAIL ACCOUNT, NOT TO VORTEX-L. WE HAVE TO MANUALLY OVERIDE YOUR CURRENT REPLY SETTINGS. PLEASE FIX THIS! I realize we are speaking hypothetically here. I also realize I'm speaking to the equivalent of a brick wall. But alas, that is the cross I must bear. The fact is if I was in a situation where I was an inventor and my technology was stolen, money would be the last thing on my mind. If I was forced to accept money, I would work with lawyers to try and find the best way to use it against the company that stole my technology. I would not care how much I had to benefit, or the world had to benefit. So, what this all really boils down to is the fact that it's about your rights and your principals. This concept you've come up with concerning your rights and principals are so important to you that you really don't give a crap what happens to the world - just as long as you don't end up prostituting your rights and principles. Well, I can appreciate your principals, but only to a certain extent... The rest of it just turns into a horrible Greek tragedy. I am in the real world. I realize I am not a law expert, but at the same time I know what is right and what is wrong. If I had a technology that was stolen, I would simply strive to do anything and everything to prevent the other company from being able to use my technology. I might fail, and they might be allowed to sell the technology. But I would do everything (that is peaceful and non-violent) to hinder that company for the rest of my life. Hopefully, I would at least slow down the proliferation of the stolen technology. In other words, your rights' and principals are so important to you that you really don't give a crap what happens to the world for which you and the rest of us live in, as you go about defending your rights and principals. If your peaceful attempts to hinder the manufacture of something that would benefit the world are realized, you don't consider how potentially violent that could turn out to be for everyone being prevented from benefiting from the invention? I wonder what Jesus would have to say about that? Sadly, you and others seem to think the needs of the many are more important than the rights of the individual. That is how our sickening world works these days (for the most part). However, I hope that will change in the future. The rights of the individual must be protected at all cost, because otherwise life becomes meaningless. If I do not have my rights and freedoms protected, I might as well not be alive. If I had an amazing invention that I knew would benefit the world, I most certainly would want to profit from it. As much as I could! However, I hope I would also weigh my own personal individual rights principals with the rights principals of the rest of the world. I'm not the only person on this planet who has rights and principals that need to be respected, you know. If someone stole my money making invention, I'd go to court, just as you would. However, in my case if it was becoming clear to me that it would be unlikely that I'd get my invention back I would seek to get the matter settled through some kind of a financial compensation / arrangement. Since it is likely that I would have sufficient evidence to prove that I deserve SOME kind of compensation for my contribution to society, I suspect a financial arrangement would eventually be worked out. Why would I want to, as you seem to want to do, spend the rest of my life trying to turn the life of my competitor enemy into what I hope will be a bloody living hell for the rest of his life...all on principal of protecting my personal rights? Quite frankly, I think you are so worried about not having any principals or rights at all in which to hang your hat on that you are willing to sacrifice the rights and principals of rest of the world, just so you can prove to yourself that you actually DO have rights and principals that you stand by. Have you so little sense of self-confidence in yourself that this is the only kind of self-destructive action you can conjure up - all in the name of proving to yourself that you do have rights and principals? Again, what would Jesus have to say about that? What would Jesus have to say about focusing all of your actions on the need to protect your own rights to such a maniacal degree that it ends up trashing the rights of your neighbor. Alas, I realize this response of mine is futile. Talking to noone noone about rights is like talking to a brick wall. All I can say is that I sure don't want to live by noone's principals. By my religion that would result in WAY TOO much bad karma that would likely take me several
[Vo]:Re: stremmenos on interview with haglestein, theory, ni+H developpement (indirectly rossi DGT)
just to add that this text from stremmenos seems linked to artcile by hagelstein , that also need to be translated(better than by MS or google translator) http://22passi.blogspot.com/2012/02/peter-hagelstein-sulla-fusione-fredda.html?utm_source=feedburnerutm_medium=feed http://22passi.blogspot.com/2012/02/peter-hagelstein-sulla-fusione-fredda_24.html?utm_source=feedburnerutm_medium=feed 2012/2/25 Alain Sepeda alain.sep...@gmail.com an article about an open letter by stremmenos after a talk with Hagelstein. talk about the way the theory proposed by focardi make possible the developpemet of Ni+H reactors like rossi or DGT... http://22passi.blogspot.com/2012/02/stremmenos-interviene-proposito-di.html?utm_source=feedburnerutm_medium=feed for me it seems indirectly to support that rossi and DGT started from Focardi ideas, not from inventing/stealing... anyway I could not translate it correctly with microsoft translator al http://www.microsofttranslator.com/BV.aspx?ref=BVNavfrom=to=ena=http%3A%2F%2F22passi.blogspot.com%2F2012%2F02%2Fstremmenos-interviene-proposito-di.html%3Futm_source%3Dfeedburner%26utm_medium%3Dfeed if someone can translate correctly
Re: [Vo]:Test day in Greece time
Please take this to vortexb.
[Vo]:Protestants vs Catholics
Terry, The 21st century has arrived with a replacement for the fractured, patched and obsolete Physics of the 20th century. Read it as the new revelation of Wladimir Guglinski and become a believer. Simple, sound, easy and a perfect tight fir for universal aspects of our Physical life. Stand clear of commingling Spiritual and Physical concepts. Clarity at last, Reality
RE: [Vo]:The first real NiH reactor
-Original Message- From: integral.property.serv...@gmail.com Robin: Think, say 20 atoms of Ni in a cluster surrounded by H gas. The thermal energy in the cluster increases and transforms the increase of kenetic energy to the surrounding H. H is the heat transfer agent. Not good. Why is this not good? H is an excellent heat transfer agent. The thermal energy occurs on the surface of the cluster, not on its interior, probably in Casimir pits so overheating is actually tempered and controlled by this kind of heat transfer and outward vector. I would call that desirable. BTW - Why do you assume there is a Chan method? Everything I have seen from Chan, including his writing and online demeanor and so-called experiment is most consistent with an undergraduate student playing a silly prank to see how much gullibility is out there in LENR_LAND, instead of the effort of a serious scientist. (there is a megaton of gullibility and he seems to have tapped into it). Has he now put up videos or supplied pictures and data? Apologies if I have missed something that makes him looks serious, as otherwise this character should have been written-off as silly bogosity weeks ago - without a minimal degree of validation. Jones
Re: [Vo]:Defkalion position on LENR theories
IMHO Defkalion has told that they do not believe in simple theories. I have said the same starting with my topology is the keypaper in 1992. Our colleague Daniel Rocha has said that LENR is something like photosynthesis. Not very encouraging, we still not know how photosynthesis works- in all its stages. Peter On Sat, Feb 25, 2012 at 6:08 PM, Alain Sepeda alain.sep...@gmail.comwrote: http://www.defkalion-energy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=6674#p6674 DGT just answer some question on theories: could be translated as swiss neutrality, or secularity... they talk of duality,and seems ti criticize position that exclude others... Since the last 2 decades, several theories have been proposed to explain LENR phenomena and Huizenga's three questions: Question #1: of how the Coulomb barrier is penetrated Question #2: the lack of strong neutron emissions Question #3: the lack of strong emission of gamma or x-rays A short summary of most of them is presented in alphabetic order in http://newenergytimes.com/v2/sr/Theorie ... ndex.shtmlhttp://newenergytimes.com/v2/sr/Theories/TheoryIndex.shtml. This incomplete presentation includes: *Bazhutov-Vereshkov Theory* ** *Chubb (Scott) Theory* ** *Chubb ( Talbot) Theory* ** *Fisher Theory * ** *Gareev Theory* ** *Hagelstein Theory* ** *Hora-Miley Theory* ** *Kim-Zubarev Theory* ** *Kirkinskii-Novikov Theory* ** *Kozima Theory * ** *Li Theory * ** *Preparata Theory * ** *Sinha-Meulenberg Theory* ** *Storms Theory * ** *Szpak Theory* ** *Takahashi Theory* ** *Widom-Larsen Theory* whilst several other proposed theories are omitted from this list such as (not included all): *Frank Znidarsic theory, * ** *Stoyan Sarg Sargoytchev/ M. Kanarev theory,* ** *Yeong E. Kim theory,* ** *Wladimir Guglinski/ C. Stremmenos theory,* ** *Y.T. Didenko/K. S. Suslick theory* etc All of the above proposed theories are base on the assumption that only one type of reaction can occur in LENR: either those related with strong forces or those related with weak forces. In most cases, results of such theories contradict with existing general theories or dogmas of present incomplete models of theoretical physics. There is a strong possibility of a forthcoming LENR theories war between the members of the existing small community of LENR/CF researchers (possible conflicts closely related with government funding to be released in the area). Such war could turn out to be a new War of Religion, similar to the 1562- 1598 war between the catholics (the strong force fans in this case) and the protestants (the weak force fans), where all involved parties will claim their one faith slogan against all the others. We are following the orthodox approach, which is not to get involved in such conflicts, even though we already have a pretty good understanding on what really is going on during all faces of what we have called as adynamic multistage chemically assisted low energy nuclei reactions. Our decision is to do our job, which is to provide to the market safe and stable high performance products *and* to the scientific community with all the hard evidence from LENR phenomena measured with new type of specially designed instrumentation that we had to build to support our product's RD. As history of science and philosophy teaches us, when there is a conflict because of duality, in all cases the truth lies in their synthesis (Plotinus- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plotinus ) Thank you -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
RE: [Vo]:South Africa Fuel-Free Generator Report : Theory?
Getting back to Reality so to speak: Here is Mills' thinking on a robust battery, based on fractional hydrogen (hydrino) operating as the electrolyte itself: http://www.blacklightpower.com/battery.shtml And yes, this would be simple and effective, if this species were stable and could be contained. But Mills has had well over a decade to produce a prototype and none has been seen. That may only mean this particular method does not work when another slightly related method could work, especially if the other method depends simply on an energetic electrode reaction and not a new kind of charge carrier. What I am suggesting is that the gain does not need to be related to Mills hydrided charge carrier, but instead could be related to enhancing the redox see-saw that is already there. If one can produce a battery with recurrent EUV reactions happening on an electrode (either electrode), then these photons will reverse the local oxidation states and provide extra energy that way. This is a completely different way of doing what Mills proposes, and it is not unlike the Bedini method. However, let me say there is zero evidence that these guys in SA have done this, and even if they have, John Bedini has the expertise and a patent portfolio that is looking to be almost bulletproof, so only a fool would follow Sterling Allan's advice. I'll repeat the prediction that Sterling will never receive a working device from them. Jones -Original Message- From: integral.property.serv...@gmail.com Subject: RE: [Vo]:South Africa Fuel-Free Generator Report : Theory? Jones: From what I gather, a lead storage battery alone can power a device at the same time it is being charged by an oscillating circuit containing inductors, capacitors and diodes. With proper tuning an LENR reaction within the battery would supply the the energy. Keeping it simple, Reality
RE: [Vo]:Protestants vs Catholics
I think Reality has been talking to Rich Murray! :-) -mark -Original Message- From: integral.property.serv...@gmail.com [mailto:integral.property.serv...@gmail.com] Sent: Saturday, February 25, 2012 8:28 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]:Protestants vs Catholics Terry, The 21st century has arrived with a replacement for the fractured, patched and obsolete Physics of the 20th century. Read it as the new revelation of Wladimir Guglinski and become a believer. Simple, sound, easy and a perfect tight fir for universal aspects of our Physical life. Stand clear of commingling Spiritual and Physical concepts. Clarity at last, Reality
RE: [Vo]:Test day in Greece time
Noone^2 wrote: I not a very jovial person. Yaaa think? J Whatever the baggage you're carrying around with you, don't you think it's time to let it go? It does nothing by make one's life miserable and full of drama. -m
Re: [Vo]:South Africa Fuel-Free Generator Report : Theory?
http://freeenergynews.com/SmartScarecrow/2012/02/23/ - Original Message - From: zer tte c_foreig...@yahoo.com Sent: Friday, February 24, 2012 6:28:43 PM Some new details emerged yesterday from the Smartscarecrow show.
Re: [Vo]:Re: stremmenos on interview with haglestein, theory, ni+H developpement (indirectly rossi DGT)
a fast translation,dear Alain Peter Hagelstein says he thinks that Rossi’s generator is derived from that of Piantelli. If that is true than his (Peter’s) physical models developed for Pd-D are seeming to reproduce well for what is observed for Ni-H systems. Stremmenos strongly disagrees says Rossi has realizws a huge increase of the energy produced but also has contributed much at a qualitative level with the using of Ni powders and with the addition of the catalyst which he keeps secret in justified mode. The intuition of Rossi (but his, Stremmenos too) to use Ni powder instead of Ni rods as stubbornly insisted Piantelli (trying to optimize the effect with adequate geometric forms) was based on the simple observation that transmutations take place only on the surface- ergo for increasing these effects clearly nuclear we have to increase the surface we have use powders of Ni or of some other transition metals konown to give the cold fusion effect due to their common crystalline structure. Rossi has had also the intuition that the low energetic yields (5-15 Watts) for all the CF experiments are due to the low concentration of atomic hydrogen which easily solves and interacts with the metal. H2, D2 molecular hydrogen or deuterium were dominating and these are extremely stable and insoluble both at the temperatures of the processes- electrolytic or diffusive (start to dissociate only above 2100C)- in my opinion, introducing a chemical catalyst (?) that lowers the dissociation temperature you obtain plenty of atomic hydrogen that easily interacts with Ni. For the discussion of other ideas and results coming (with a delay of at least 15 years from the “prestigious MIT” via Prof Hagelstein I want to discuss about a) results coming not from the rich means of MIT but from the more modest of UniBo b) experimental results of spectroscopic measurements (Raman) of interest for Hagelstein as author of theories is interested to study in depth for a confrontation of his opinion with mine- that is only an opinion of an experimental physicist. N. T what he says about Piantelli is not true, the last paragraph is not clear even in Greek – but it says something like “you can be smart but I am even smarter On Sat, Feb 25, 2012 at 6:13 PM, Alain Sepeda alain.sep...@gmail.comwrote: just to add that this text from stremmenos seems linked to artcile by hagelstein , that also need to be translated(better than by MS or google translator) http://22passi.blogspot.com/2012/02/peter-hagelstein-sulla-fusione-fredda.html?utm_source=feedburnerutm_medium=feed http://22passi.blogspot.com/2012/02/peter-hagelstein-sulla-fusione-fredda_24.html?utm_source=feedburnerutm_medium=feed 2012/2/25 Alain Sepeda alain.sep...@gmail.com an article about an open letter by stremmenos after a talk with Hagelstein. talk about the way the theory proposed by focardi make possible the developpemet of Ni+H reactors like rossi or DGT... http://22passi.blogspot.com/2012/02/stremmenos-interviene-proposito-di.html?utm_source=feedburnerutm_medium=feed for me it seems indirectly to support that rossi and DGT started from Focardi ideas, not from inventing/stealing... anyway I could not translate it correctly with microsoft translator al http://www.microsofttranslator.com/BV.aspx?ref=BVNavfrom=to=ena=http%3A%2F%2F22passi.blogspot.com%2F2012%2F02%2Fstremmenos-interviene-proposito-di.html%3Futm_source%3Dfeedburner%26utm_medium%3Dfeed if someone can translate correctly -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
[Vo]:The Smith LENR Prize
http://ecatnews.com/?p=2094 The Smith LENR Prize http://ecatnews.com/?p=2090#comment-21006 Dick Smith Reply February 24, 2012 at 10:48 pm George [ hants?] . Unfortunately there is a staggering amount of circunstantial evidence that increases every week. I have been asked on this site to use the $1 million for something really useful. I would be interested in extending the $1 m offer to any person who can come up with a practical device that has an output of at least 1KW through LENRs No. I would not be interested in being involved in any testing however I would accept a statement from any respected leading authority in this field. I am sure with suggestions from people on this site we could come up with a list. The offer would remain open for 12 months and would be genuine. I have been able to assist charities, including science based institutions in the past with donations of over $20 m including single donations of up to $4m and I consider myself fortunate to be able to do this . I will say this now- I believe there is almost no chance that the money will be paid out even though I will be delighted if it is. Look forward to some sensible discussion on this . Remember I am not prepared to spend any time being involved in testing or research. That’s because I reckon in ten years I would find that I had wasted much time without effective results
Re: [Vo]:The Smith LENR Prize
- Original Message - http://ecatnews.com/?p=2094 The Smith LENR Prize Dick Smith Reply February 25, 2012 at 12:19 pm Rather than come up with a minimum COP I would prefer that the organization making the statement work that out themselves. For example I am positive that before respected organizations such as NASA or ANSTO. ( Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation) would agree that a practical 1KW LENR unit existed they themselves would ensure that there testing parameters and controls were impeccable . This is because their very credibility depends on their published record of scientific accuracy. Yes individual eccentric people working for one of these organizations may make claims from time to time that are not supported by the whole organization -,that’s ok and healthy, but it’s not what I am looking for. I would be happy to develop a formal statement which lists the organizations that would be acceptable. I would imagine all government organizations similar to NASA and ANSTO in countries with world accepted scientific credibility would also be acceptable. And by “practical” I mean a unit which can do something worthwhile with the 1 KW output at an affordable cost ie- similar to the claims of Rossi and Defkalion. Is this a fair requirement? If not I will remove it. Dick Smith Reply February 25, 2012 at 12:32 pm Gregory. Are you serious? You reckon I rejected the Rossi ” sale offer ” for no good reason. I gave a very good reason. That was that I do not believe such an operating unit actually exists and the purchase offer was just a delaying tactic while more agencies are sold. My present offer is public. If a claimant can get the required recognition from an agreed reputable body and I do not pay they can sue me and they will undoubtedly win. Dick Smith Reply February 25, 2012 at 12:56 pm Yes I would be happy to accept non-nuclear type organizations as long as they have credibility with the majority of reasonable people in the world scientific community. I can see a large list of suitable organizations. - - - - - - - It's not clear if a black box test is acceptable. Otherwise, I don't see why he objected to Defkalion's offer.
Re: [Vo]:Protestants vs Catholics
Terry thanks for not forgetting about me. Stevek told me directly that my stuff was not even worth putting on his list. Frank Znidarsic
[Vo]:Before and After
Results of the clean up from the March 11th, 2011 tsunami in Japan: http://www.theatlantic.com/infocus/2012/02/japan-earthquake-before-and-after/100251/ (takes a while to load) T
[Vo]:
Please read: http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com/2012/02/informavores-sunday-no-496.html I will be happy if you could make discoveries here. I have made them too Wish you a very interesting, creatively interesting new week Peter -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
