date:20120912

I agree Eric; but, I use wikipedia a little differently from most.  I
use it as a reference source, rarely quoting wiki together because the
truth is volatile there; but, the reference base at the bottom of the
articles is a treasure trove.

T

RE: [Vo]:New paper on cavitation/sonofusion

2012-09-12 Thread Jones Beene


From: Axil Axil 

Doesn't LeClair's cavatation patent take the Quantum
Potential Corporation out of the fusion from cavitation business?

LeClair's IP  is a joke. Below is the important prior art in sonofusion, all
of them building on the original Flynn patent from 1978. 
Table may not show up in plain text. Flynn:

http://www.google.com/patents/US4333796

In effect - there is only one player in the field based on current IP
coverage: Impulse Devices


Citing Patent   Filing date Issue date  Original Assignee
Title   
US5659173
http://www.google.com/patents/US5659173?dq=cavitation-induced+fusionei=AYB
QUNvZJ8mTiAKluYGgDgFeb 23, 1994Aug 19, 1997The Regents of the
University of CaliforniaConverting acoustic energy into useful other
energy forms

US5858104
http://www.google.com/patents/US5858104?dq=cavitation-induced+fusionei=AYB
QUNvZJ8mTiAKluYGgDgDec 21, 1995Jan 12, 1999The United States of
America as represented by the Secretary of the Navy System for focused
generation of pressure by bubble formation and collapse 
US5968323
http://www.google.com/patents/US5968323?dq=cavitation-induced+fusionei=AYB
QUNvZJ8mTiAKluYGgDgJul 15, 1997Oct 19, 1999Method and
apparatus for generating large velocity, high pressure, and high temperature
conditions  
US6361747
http://www.google.com/patents/US6361747?dq=cavitation-induced+fusionei=AYB
QUNvZJ8mTiAKluYGgDgNov 21, 2000Mar 26, 2002Sonertec Inc.
Reactor with acoustic cavitation
US6460415
http://www.google.com/patents/US6460415?dq=cavitation-induced+fusionei=AYB
QUNvZJ8mTiAKluYGgDgMar 7, 2000 Oct 8, 2002 Vibratory
system utilizing shock wave vibratory force 



US6956316
http://www.google.com/patents/US6956316?dq=cavitation-induced+fusionei=AYB
QUNvZJ8mTiAKluYGgDgSep 17, 2004Oct 18, 2005Impulse Devices,
Inc.Acoustic driver assembly for a spherical cavitation chamber 
US6958568
http://www.google.com/patents/US6958568?dq=cavitation-induced+fusionei=AYB
QUNvZJ8mTiAKluYGgDgSep 17, 2004Oct 25, 2005Impulse Devices,
Inc.Acoustic driver assembly for a spherical cavitation chamber 
US6958569
http://www.google.com/patents/US6958569?dq=cavitation-induced+fusionei=AYB
QUNvZJ8mTiAKluYGgDgSep 1, 2004 Oct 25, 2005Impulse Devices,
Inc.Acoustic driver assembly for a spherical cavitation chamber 
US6960869
http://www.google.com/patents/US6960869?dq=cavitation-induced+fusionei=AYB
QUNvZJ8mTiAKluYGgDgSep 17, 2004Nov 1, 2005 Impulse Devices,
Inc.Acoustic driver assembly for a spherical cavitation chamber 
US7040804
http://www.google.com/patents/US7040804?dq=cavitation-induced+fusionei=AYB
QUNvZJ8mTiAKluYGgDgJun 30, 2003May 9, 2006 The Institute of
Space and Astronautical Science Method for measuring diffusion coefficient
in conductive melts, and apparatus for measuring the same   
US7049730
http://www.google.com/patents/US7049730?dq=cavitation-induced+fusionei=AYB
QUNvZJ8mTiAKluYGgDgMar 11, 2005May 23, 2006Impulse Devices,
Inc.Acoustic driver assembly for a spherical cavitation chamber 
US7057328
http://www.google.com/patents/US7057328?dq=cavitation-induced+fusionei=AYB
QUNvZJ8mTiAKluYGgDgMar 21, 2005Jun 6, 2006 Impulse Devices,
Inc.Acoustic driver assembly for a spherical cavitation chamber 
US7073258
http://www.google.com/patents/US7073258?dq=cavitation-induced+fusionei=AYB
QUNvZJ8mTiAKluYGgDgSep 7, 2004 Jul 11, 2006Impulse Devices,
Inc.Method of constructing a port assembly in a spherical cavitation
chamber 
US7103956
http://www.google.com/patents/US7103956?dq=cavitation-induced+fusionei=AYB
QUNvZJ8mTiAKluYGgDgAug 23, 2004Sep 12, 2006Impulse Devices,
Inc.Method of fabricating a spherical cavitation chamber
US7122941
http://www.google.com/patents/US7122941?dq=cavitation-induced+fusionei=AYB
QUNvZJ8mTiAKluYGgDgMay 5, 2005 Oct 17, 2006Impulse Devices,
Inc.Acoustic driver assembly with recessed head mass contact surface

US7122943
http://www.google.com/patents/US7122943?dq=cavitation-induced+fusionei=AYB
QUNvZJ8mTiAKluYGgDgMay 6, 2005 Oct 17, 2006Impulse Devices,
Inc.Acoustic driver assembly with restricted contact area   
US7126256
http://www.google.com/patents/US7126256?dq=cavitation-induced+fusionei=AYB
QUNvZJ8mTiAKluYGgDgMay 5, 2005 Oct 24, 2006Impulse Devices,
Inc.Acoustic driver assembly with recessed head mass contact surface

US7126258
http://www.google.com/patents/US7126258?dq=cavitation-induced+fusionei=AYB
QUNvZJ8mTiAKluYGgDgMay 5, 2005 Oct 24, 2006Impulse Devices,
Inc.Acoustic driver assembly with recessed head mass contact surface

RE: [Vo]:How can the Wikipedia process be so good if does not work?

2012-09-12 Thread Jones Beene

Terry, Eric

You ever open a Sampler box of Godiva or other fine chocolates and find
that are a few that you do not like as well as the rest...

Most are close to heaven, of course ...

Wiki is like that. You pass over the one or two that you do not favor (i.e.
cherry-filled) and savor the rest.

For those of us who dabble in the cutting-edge - trying to make sense of
LENR - Wiki is fully one-half the value of the internet. It is simply too
onerous to convey complicated ideas without it, since a Wiki citation avoids
a couple of pages of needed text in your posting, in favor of a more cogent
explanation. 

Here is an apt spur-of-the-moment example, by way of a metaphor for a force
that is so powerful, that you can kill it off one day, and it will be back
in full regalia the next:

The king is dead, long live the king 

QED - Yup, wiki's even got that bit of self-contradiction covered.

-Original Message-
From: Terry Blanton 

I agree Eric; but, I use wikipedia a little differently from most.  I
use it as a reference source, rarely quoting wiki together because the
truth is volatile there; but, the reference base at the bottom of the
articles is a treasure trove.

T

Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy on Hi-Temp Superconductivity LENR

2012-09-12 Thread fznidarsic


- proposes that high temp superconductivity may develop in surface
plasmons when very high (10^11 V/m) E-field gradients develop at the
interface between collectively oscillating electrons and collectively
oscillating protons.

snip




They are getting closer.  Next they must dump the neutrons and define the 
velocity of the collective oscillation as one million meters per second.  At 
that velocity the impedance of the nuclear and electronic sites is matched.


Frank Znidarsic

Re: [Vo]:How can the Wikipedia process be so good if does not work?

Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.com wrote:


 I appreciate the sentiment.  But I'll place myself on record for thinking
 that Wikipedia is incredible.  It is one of the handiest things to come
 about in the last ten or so years.


The Model T Ford was also incredible. It was wonderful breakthrough
technology. My mother drove one at age 13 through the streets of New York
City. She said that people who grew up in a world where cars are everywhere
cannot imagine how liberating they were. Along the same lines, young people
today who grew up with computers have no idea how difficult it was to use
typewriters and pens, and paper reference books.

The Model T was great, but it was a first-generation product. It had a lot
of problems. It was dangerous. It worked well on dirt roads and rough
surfaces, but by the mid 1920s paved roads were becoming more common,
speeds were faster, and in any kind of wind the Model T was blow all over
the road. It lasted for a long time, but was eventually replaced with the
Model A and by competing cars from other manufacturers.

Wikipedia was a good first generation product. It is still quite useful,
just as Model T cars were used well into the 1940s. But it is unwieldy,
poorly designed in many ways, and the administrative structure is chaotic,
corrupt, and badly in need of replacement. Henry Ford said wanted to keep
making the Model T forever but he was finally forced to stop, and upgrade.

Ford was forced to upgrade mainly by competition from GM and other car
companies. For years, he had the whole market to himself. If GM had not
starting eating his lunch, he would have cranked out Model T cars for
another decade. What we need is competition with Wikipedia. Unfortunately,
it appears to be natural monopoly the way telephone service was until the
1980s, and the way microcomputer operating systems are today. A natural
monopoly produces a hegemony, in these cases ATT and Microsoft. They
happened to come along first, in a situation where the first to arrive
takes everything. Wikipedia is the same way.

As I said, Wikipedia is good for some things but not others. If fails when
the encyclopedia entry is controversial. The main problems are that it
allows anonymous editing, and it has no respect for authorities in
complicated, specialized subjects. I hope that it is reformed, or -- if it
is not -- that some competing encyclopedia arises. Perhaps
another encyclopedia can be established that specialized is scientific
subjects such as cold fusion, and that does a better job using more
traditional academic standards. We can leave the present Wikipedia to deal
with popular culture, Japanese comic strips, and so on.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:New paper on cavitation/sonofusion

Wow!  Our former Vort, Ross Tessian, has quite a bit of IP there!  For
new comers, Ross used to post here and one day said, I'm going to go
off and start a company, and he did.

How long ago, Jones?  Y2K?

T

RE: [Vo]:New paper on cavitation/sonofusion

2012-09-12 Thread Jones Beene

Last I heard, Ross was no longer at Impulse Devices, although another report
says he returned after an absence. 

They have a decent web presence, but since no one can yet make a living from
LENR alone - they are into many other things like sonochemistry (to pay the
bills).

http://www.impulsedevices.com/


-Original Message-
From: Terry Blanton 

Wow!  Our former Vort, Ross Tessian, has quite a bit of IP there!  For
new comers, Ross used to post here and one day said, I'm going to go
off and start a company, and he did.

How long ago, Jones?  Y2K?

T

Re: [Vo]:Wikipedia E-Cat article for deletion

2012-09-12 Thread Abd ul-Rahman Lomax

At 10:04 PM 9/9/2012, Jouni Valkonen wrote:
On 10 September 2012 02:52, Jed Rothwell
mailto:jedrothw...@gmail.comjedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:

You do not need to satisfy people. You need to
report the replicated, peer-reviewed facts of
the matter. Science is not a popularity contest.

That is true, but here cold fusion science has failed.Â

Correlation of excess power and helium
production duringÂ D2O and H2O electrolysis using palladium cathodes

http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/MilesMcorrelatio.pdfhttp://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/MilesMcorrelatio.pdf

Here is one example of the good peer-reviewed
paper, but where is the replication of the data?

The correlation has been confirmed, with higher accuracy.

This finding about the correlation to be
reliable, there should be several successful
replication attempts published. But where are those?

Look at Storms, Status of cold fusion (2010),
Naturwissenschaften. A preprint is hosted on lenr-canr.org.

Basically, any PdD experiments that measure heat
helium serve as partial replication, or full
confirmation if the experiments are a coherent
series. It's not been done as much as I'd like,
but what has been done is quite adequate to confirm the fact of correlation.

The paper is almost 20 years old. There are few,
yes, but not good enough quality data and often
the data is evenÂ conflicting. E.g. some studies
suggest that both H and D are working.

There are thousands of studies in the field. You
are lumping them together and expecting them to
be consistent. First of all the field is named
cold fusion, and there are some ready
assumptions that there is only one effect. That
is very unlikely to be the case, though Storms
does propose a common mechanism. His theory is
highly speculative in certain ways (but it's
designed to fit what is known, so it's quite
worthy of respect, even if it might be incorrect in various ways.

PdD experiments produce helium. That is
considered established in the field, and the
inference that the reaction has an expected Q of
23.8 MeV/He-4 (that of deuterium fusing to
helium, by whatever mechanism or intermediate
pathway) is so strong that some papers which
measure helium then use the expected helium as a
comparison value. But it can be quite difficult
to accurately capture and measure all the helium.

We have no idea what is produced if there is a
heat effect with light water. What was recognized
early on was that light water was not a clean
control. However, in Pd experiments, light water
used as a control shows far less heat than
deuterium. In SRI P13/P14, the hydrogen control
is essentially dead. It's noisy, when the
bubbling gets intense as the current is ramped up, that's all.

Whether or not light water results were an effect
from the low deuterium content of light water
would be one idea, but there have been persistent
reports of light water heat results, particularly with nickel.

This has *nothing to do* with PdD results. NiH
could be wonderful or bogus. Referring to varying
reports of NiH results as in some way weakening
the heat/helium work is an ungrounded fantasy.

Further, the FPHE is known to be highly variable.
That is, what appear to be the exact same
conditions (which is typically with a single
experimenter, since researchers vary their exact
approaches), results can vary widely. Most
research has had a simple goal: to increase the
heat signal, and to increase reliability. Much
progress has been made, to the point where many
groups can expect most cells to show heat, but it still varies a lot.

Given that helium is accepted, and that it's
expensive and difficult to measure, not a lot of
work has been done. However, if I were running a
lab doing CF experiments, with PdD, I'd want to
routinely measure helium, even if only as cell
samples. It's a confirmation of the calorimetry.

The work to nail down the heat/helium ratio is of
little commercial value, so it's unwise to expect
it to be done by commercially-funded research.
This is a job for academia, mostly.

Now, given the variable effect, this allows
identical experiments to be used to measure the
heat/helium ratio. Just treat all cells the same,
measure the heat, and measure the helium. There
are more details than that, but this is the basic
idea. No additional control is needed, though
running hydrogen controls has been done. Hydrogen
control cells do not show helium. Only deuterium
cells producing excess heat show helium, in the
reported work. The analyses are done blind, so
that those measuring the helium do not know the
history of the cell from which the sample was taken.

Perhaps the status of cold fusion could be
better if there were better marketing of ideas.

Scientists are not trained in marketing. How Pons
and Fleischmann were treated by the scientific
community was a travesty. This has all been
well-documented in the academic literature, it
was a total breakdown of how

Re: [Vo]:New paper on cavitation/sonofusion

2012-09-12 Thread Ron Wormus


Aren't LeClair's claims completely unsubstantiated?
Ron

--On Wednesday, September 12, 2012 1:20 AM -0400 Axil Axil 
janap...@gmail.com wrote:




Doesn't LeClair's cavatation patent take the Quantum Potential
Corporation out of the fusion from cavitation business?
 
Cheers:   Axil


On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 10:46 PM, pagnu...@htdconnect.com wrote:

Cavitation-Induced Fusion: Proof of Concept - Max I. Fomitchev-Zamilov

Cavitation-induced fusion (also known as bubble fusion or sonofusion) has
been a topic of much debate and controversy and is generally (albeit
incorrectly) perceived as unworkable. In this paper we present the
theoretical foundations of cavitation-induced fusion and summarize the
experimental results of the research conducted in the past 20 years.
Based
on
the systematic study of all available data we conclude that the
cavitation-induced fusion is feasible, doable, and can be used for
commercial power generation. We present the results of our own research
and disclose a
commercial reactor prototype.

http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1209/1209.2407.pdf

[Vo]:New Miley Patent

Courtesy of LENR Forum - Follow links at -

http://www.lenrforum.eu/viewtopic.php?t=569p=2283

U.S. Patent No. US 8,227,020  July 24, 2012

ABSTRACT:

Techniques to form dislocation cores along an interface of a multilayer thin
film structure are described.  The loading and/or deloading of isotopes of
hydrogen are also described in association with core formation.  The
described techniques can be applied to superconductive structure formation,
x-ray and charged particle generation, nuclear reaction processes, and/or
inertial confinement targets.

Re: [Vo]:How can the Wikipedia process be so good if does not work?

refer-a-pedia

wiki-ference

On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 8:31 AM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote:
 I agree Eric; but, I use wikipedia a little differently from most.  I
 use it as a reference source, rarely quoting wiki together because the
 truth is volatile there; but, the reference base at the bottom of the
 articles is a treasure trove.

 T

Re: [Vo]:How can the Wikipedia process be so good if does not work?

Perhaps all the very controversial subjects from the current wikipedia
should be removed and placed in a distinct wikipedia dedicated to very
controversial subjects.
harry



On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 10:05 AM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:

 As I said, Wikipedia is good for some things but not others. If fails when
 the encyclopedia entry is controversial. The main problems are that it
 allows anonymous editing, and it has no respect for authorities in
 complicated, specialized subjects. I hope that it is reformed, or -- if it
 is not -- that some competing encyclopedia arises. Perhaps another
 encyclopedia can be established that specialized is scientific subjects such
 as cold fusion, and that does a better job using more traditional academic
 standards. We can leave the present Wikipedia to deal with popular culture,
 Japanese comic strips, and so on.

 - Jed

[Vo]:nuclear physicist as dutch prime minister?

2012-09-12 Thread Andre Blum


Hi,

Just to inform you: it is election day in the Netherlands. Polls show 
that either the PvdA (moderate socialist party) or VVD (liberals) will 
get out as the biggest.


Leader of the PvdA is Diederik Samsom, who was a nuclear physicist and 
was an active member of Greenpeace. See 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diederik_Samsom. He aims to be the next 
prime minister.


For a NYT backgrounder on todays elections:

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/12/world/europe/dutch-voters-may-point-way-for-rest-of-europe.html?_r=1pagewanted=all

Andre

Re: [Vo]:nuclear physicist as dutch prime minister?

2012-09-12 Thread Andre Blum

BTW: I was looking for the right words. PvdA would be called a 
social-democratic party (labour). Disregard socialist.



On 09/12/2012 01:21 PM, Andre Blum wrote:

Hi,

Just to inform you: it is election day in the Netherlands. Polls show 
that either the PvdA (moderate socialist party) or VVD (liberals) will 
get out as the biggest.


Leader of the PvdA is Diederik Samsom, who was a nuclear physicist and 
was an active member of Greenpeace. See 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diederik_Samsom. He aims to be the next 
prime minister.


For a NYT backgrounder on todays elections:

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/12/world/europe/dutch-voters-may-point-way-for-rest-of-europe.html?_r=1pagewanted=all

Andre

Re: [Vo]:How can the Wikipedia process be so good if does not work?

Harry Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote:

Perhaps all the very controversial subjects from the current wikipedia
 should be removed and placed in a distinct wikipedia dedicated to very
 controversial subjects.


I do not think that will happen. The Wikipedia management would not agree.
I do not see any need for that. Here is how I imagine it might work:

Someone else starts an on-line encyclopedia of science, based on
traditional academic standards. Maybe the APS or a university could do
this. Gradually, more readers turn to the academic website. Wikipedia
articles on science are read less often. They are not updated as much. Some
are revised with information from the academic site, and links to it.

(I don't like the APS policies toward cold fusion but I suppose they can
handle other subjects better than Wikipedia does.)

Getting back to my analogy, the Model T was not replaced overnight. It was
replaced gradually over many years as competition heated up. Sales at GM
overtook Ford in 1927. That was the year Ford finally stopped producing the
model T.

The car was improved over the production run. It wasn't the exact same
machine from 1908 to 1927. Wikipedia has also been improved. It might be
improved again, with a better structure, to address the weaknesses that I
and others have pointed out.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy on Hi-Temp Superconductivity LENR

2012-09-12 Thread David L Babcock


For any here puzzled-
Pointing out the obvious:
If, while temperature is rising, some increasing portion of a resistive 
conductor becomes superconductive, the overall resistance of the entire 
conductor will decrease. If this decrease exceeds an increase which 
temperature rise is causing at the same time, you get non-monotonic 
resistivity vs temp.


Ol' Bab

On 9/12/2012 1:36 AM, pagnu...@htdconnect.com wrote:

Jeff,

The reports cited in the presentation are of hi-temp superconductivity (I
believe), rather than just non-monotonic resistivity vs. temp phenomena.

It may be worth looking at the recently reported hi-temp superconductivity
seen in fractal materials - e.g.,

High-temperature superconductivity: The benefit of fractal dirt
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v466/n7308/full/466825a.html

Fractals make better superconductors
http://www.nanotech-now.com/news.cgi?story_id=39593

Fractals promise higher-temperature Superconductors
http://www.stealthskater.com/Documents/Fractals_04.pdf

X-rays control disorder in superconductor
http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/2011/aug/31/x-rays-control-disorder-in-superconductor

Fractals boost superconductivity
http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/2010/aug/13/fractals-boost-superconductivity

-- Lou Pagnucco



Jeff Berkowitz wrote:

To answer my own question: yes, here
http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/CelaniFcunimnallo.pdf on page 3, in item (3)
of the numbered list.

Of course, it could be some unrelated effect; but decreasing electrical
resistance with increasing temperature is very odd, and it certainly is an
interesting coincidence.

Jeff

On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 10:06 PM, Jeff Berkowitz pdx...@gmail.com wrote:


Lasers not necessary? Hasn't Celani been reporting a negative
temperature
coefficient of resistance that appears about the time his processed
wires
begin producing heat? I might have this wrong ...

Jeff


On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 9:59 PM, pagnu...@htdconnect.com wrote:


Low Energy Neutron Reaactions (LENRs)

http://www.slideshare.net/lewisglarsen
-- or at --

http://www.slideshare.net/slideshow/embed_code/14256059?hostedIn=slidesharereferer=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.slideshare.net%2Flewisglarsen#

- proposes that high temp superconductivity may develop in surface
plasmons when very high (10^11 V/m) E-field gradients develop at the
interface between collectively oscillating electrons and collectively
oscillating protons.

Perhaps this is testable using laser pulses, as described in -

Surface plasmon enhanced electron acceleration with few-cycle laser
pulses
http://www.szfki.hu/~dombi/DombiLPB27_291.pdf

- since they can create field gradients of at least 3.7 X 10^11 V/m
(p.293)

-- Lou Pagnucco

Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy on Hi-Temp Superconductivity LENR

2012-09-12 Thread Axil Axil

This increase in conductivity is casued by the formation of cooper pairs of
protons through the action of thr Shukla-Eliasson Attractive Force. See my
last post - Friedel oscillations


Cheers:   Axil


On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 2:02 PM, David L Babcock ol...@rochester.rr.comwrote:

 For any here puzzled-
 Pointing out the obvious:
 If, while temperature is rising, some increasing portion of a resistive
 conductor becomes superconductive, the overall resistance of the entire
 conductor will decrease. If this decrease exceeds an increase which
 temperature rise is causing at the same time, you get non-monotonic
 resistivity vs temp.

 Ol' Bab


 On 9/12/2012 1:36 AM, pagnu...@htdconnect.com wrote:

 Jeff,

 The reports cited in the presentation are of hi-temp superconductivity (I
 believe), rather than just non-monotonic resistivity vs. temp phenomena.

 It may be worth looking at the recently reported hi-temp superconductivity
 seen in fractal materials - e.g.,

 High-temperature superconductivity: The benefit of fractal dirt
 http://www.nature.com/nature/**journal/v466/n7308/full/**466825a.htmlhttp://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v466/n7308/full/466825a.html

 Fractals make better superconductors
 http://www.nanotech-now.com/**news.cgi?story_id=39593http://www.nanotech-now.com/news.cgi?story_id=39593

 Fractals promise higher-temperature Superconductors
 http://www.stealthskater.com/**Documents/Fractals_04.pdfhttp://www.stealthskater.com/Documents/Fractals_04.pdf

 X-rays control disorder in superconductor
 http://physicsworld.com/cws/**article/news/2011/aug/31/x-**
 rays-control-disorder-in-**superconductorhttp://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/2011/aug/31/x-rays-control-disorder-in-superconductor

 Fractals boost superconductivity
 http://physicsworld.com/cws/**article/news/2010/aug/13/**fractals-boost-*
 *superconductivityhttp://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/2010/aug/13/fractals-boost-superconductivity

 -- Lou Pagnucco



 Jeff Berkowitz wrote:

 To answer my own question: yes, here
 http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/**CelaniFcunimnallo.pdfhttp://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/CelaniFcunimnallo.pdfon
  page 3, in item (3)
 of the numbered list.

 Of course, it could be some unrelated effect; but decreasing electrical
 resistance with increasing temperature is very odd, and it certainly is
 an
 interesting coincidence.

 Jeff

 On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 10:06 PM, Jeff Berkowitz pdx...@gmail.com
 wrote:

  Lasers not necessary? Hasn't Celani been reporting a negative
 temperature
 coefficient of resistance that appears about the time his processed
 wires
 begin producing heat? I might have this wrong ...

 Jeff


 On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 9:59 PM, pagnu...@htdconnect.com wrote:

  Low Energy Neutron Reaactions (LENRs)

 http://www.slideshare.net/**lewisglarsenhttp://www.slideshare.net/lewisglarsen
 -- or at --

 http://www.slideshare.net/**slideshow/embed_code/14256059?**
 hostedIn=slidesharereferer=**http%3A%2F%2Fwww.slideshare.**
 net%2Flewisglarsen#http://www.slideshare.net/slideshow/embed_code/14256059?hostedIn=slidesharereferer=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.slideshare.net%2Flewisglarsen#

 - proposes that high temp superconductivity may develop in surface
 plasmons when very high (10^11 V/m) E-field gradients develop at the
 interface between collectively oscillating electrons and collectively
 oscillating protons.

 Perhaps this is testable using laser pulses, as described in -

 Surface plasmon enhanced electron acceleration with few-cycle laser
 pulses
 http://www.szfki.hu/~dombi/**DombiLPB27_291.pdfhttp://www.szfki.hu/~dombi/DombiLPB27_291.pdf

 - since they can create field gradients of at least 3.7 X 10^11 V/m
 (p.293)

 -- Lou Pagnucco

Re: [Vo]:Cold fusion has been suppressed -- no evidence for a conspiracy

2012-09-12 Thread Guenter Wildgruber

Jed,
I am quite neutral on that.
Wheter it is Gerischer or Brian Josephson, or even Laughlin, whom I admire.

Their opinion does not matter substantially.
Those are fringe-opinions, which do not influence mainstream science a lot.
They eventually are heard by people like You and me, but that's it.

The 'mainstream' consists of people  with access to the money in the 
science-community, via politicians with open ears, promoting 'progress', or 
what they understand by that, with synergy-effects to the carreers/money-pots 
of both .
By that, the system stabilizes itself. 
To break that alliance of self-interest and ignorance is bordering the 
impossible.

Now the freaky amateures step in: (Rossi, DGTG, etc.)
What chance do they have?

This says the pessimist in me.

OK?

Guenter






 Von: Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com
An: vortex-l@eskimo.com 
Gesendet: 22:01 Dienstag, 11.September 2012
Betreff: Re: [Vo]:Cold fusion has been suppressed -- no evidence for a 
conspiracy
 

Guenter Wildgruber gwildgru...@ymail.com wrote:
 
This is a completely different institute, and one probaly has to know the 
intricacies of the Max-Planck organization.


The same or different, you would think that the Director's opinions might have 
weight when it comes to accepting or rejecting a important claim. Cold fusion 
is not the sort of thing you should try once and the put aside. In view of the 
fact that hundreds of other labs successfully replicated, it is incumbent upon 
any scientific organization to look carefully, and not to jump to conclusions.


 
PLEASE DO NOT COMPARE THOSE!


I am not comparing them. I am pointing out that German's leading electrochemist 
endorsed cold fusion.

 
Foreigners naturally do not understand the fine-print of such a delicate 
institution. 
I can understand that.


Altogether too delicate. Subject to fainting spells, no doubt. They can't bring 
themselves to take a second look at the most important breakthrough in the 
history of technology. Poor dears!

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:How can the Wikipedia process be so good if does not work?

On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 1:59 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
 Harry Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote:

 Perhaps all the very controversial subjects from the current wikipedia
 should be removed and placed in a distinct wikipedia dedicated to very
 controversial subjects.


 I do not think that will happen. The Wikipedia management would not agree. I
 do not see any need for that. Here is how I imagine it might work:

 Someone else starts an on-line encyclopedia of science, based on traditional
 academic standards. Maybe the APS or a university could do this. Gradually,
 more readers turn to the academic website. Wikipedia articles on science are
 read less often. They are not updated as much. Some are revised with
 information from the academic site, and links to it.

 (I don't like the APS policies toward cold fusion but I suppose they can
 handle other subjects better than Wikipedia does.)

 Getting back to my analogy, the Model T was not replaced overnight. It was
 replaced gradually over many years as competition heated up. Sales at GM
 overtook Ford in 1927. That was the year Ford finally stopped producing the
 model T.

 The car was improved over the production run. It wasn't the exact same
 machine from 1908 to 1927. Wikipedia has also been improved. It might be
 improved again, with a better structure, to address the weaknesses that I
 and others have pointed out.

 - Jed


I think contributors to a controversial subject must self-identify as
either pro or con. That way readers can *immediately* see from the
user name on which side of the controversy each contributor stands.
The controversial subject should also be moderated but not in
anonymity.

harry

Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy on Hi-Temp Superconductivity LENR

2012-09-12 Thread Jeff Berkowitz

Also if you go to the later slides in the presentation Lou originally
posted, there is some mention of experimental evidence for something like
non-monotonic resistivity - it may be described as wild swings (?) on
the slide). I haven't searched the archive for the reference(s).

Jeff

On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 11:10 AM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote:

 This increase in conductivity is casued by the formation of cooper pairs
 of protons through the action of thr Shukla-Eliasson Attractive Force.
 See my last post - Friedel oscillations


 Cheers:   Axil


 On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 2:02 PM, David L Babcock 
 ol...@rochester.rr.comwrote:

 For any here puzzled-
 Pointing out the obvious:
 If, while temperature is rising, some increasing portion of a resistive
 conductor becomes superconductive, the overall resistance of the entire
 conductor will decrease. If this decrease exceeds an increase which
 temperature rise is causing at the same time, you get non-monotonic
 resistivity vs temp.

 Ol' Bab


 On 9/12/2012 1:36 AM, pagnu...@htdconnect.com wrote:

 Jeff,

 The reports cited in the presentation are of hi-temp superconductivity (I
 believe), rather than just non-monotonic resistivity vs. temp phenomena.

 It may be worth looking at the recently reported hi-temp
 superconductivity
 seen in fractal materials - e.g.,

 High-temperature superconductivity: The benefit of fractal dirt
 http://www.nature.com/nature/**journal/v466/n7308/full/**466825a.htmlhttp://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v466/n7308/full/466825a.html

 Fractals make better superconductors
 http://www.nanotech-now.com/**news.cgi?story_id=39593http://www.nanotech-now.com/news.cgi?story_id=39593

 Fractals promise higher-temperature Superconductors
 http://www.stealthskater.com/**Documents/Fractals_04.pdfhttp://www.stealthskater.com/Documents/Fractals_04.pdf

 X-rays control disorder in superconductor
 http://physicsworld.com/cws/**article/news/2011/aug/31/x-**
 rays-control-disorder-in-**superconductorhttp://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/2011/aug/31/x-rays-control-disorder-in-superconductor

 Fractals boost superconductivity
 http://physicsworld.com/cws/**article/news/2010/aug/13/**fractals-boost-
 **superconductivityhttp://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/2010/aug/13/fractals-boost-superconductivity

 -- Lou Pagnucco



 Jeff Berkowitz wrote:

 To answer my own question: yes, here
 http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/**CelaniFcunimnallo.pdfhttp://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/CelaniFcunimnallo.pdfon
  page 3, in item (3)
 of the numbered list.

 Of course, it could be some unrelated effect; but decreasing electrical
 resistance with increasing temperature is very odd, and it certainly is
 an
 interesting coincidence.

 Jeff

 On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 10:06 PM, Jeff Berkowitz pdx...@gmail.com
 wrote:

  Lasers not necessary? Hasn't Celani been reporting a negative
 temperature
 coefficient of resistance that appears about the time his processed
 wires
 begin producing heat? I might have this wrong ...

 Jeff


 On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 9:59 PM, pagnu...@htdconnect.com wrote:

  Low Energy Neutron Reaactions (LENRs)

 http://www.slideshare.net/**lewisglarsenhttp://www.slideshare.net/lewisglarsen
 -- or at --

 http://www.slideshare.net/**slideshow/embed_code/14256059?**
 hostedIn=slidesharereferer=**http%3A%2F%2Fwww.slideshare.**
 net%2Flewisglarsen#http://www.slideshare.net/slideshow/embed_code/14256059?hostedIn=slidesharereferer=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.slideshare.net%2Flewisglarsen#

 - proposes that high temp superconductivity may develop in surface
 plasmons when very high (10^11 V/m) E-field gradients develop at the
 interface between collectively oscillating electrons and collectively
 oscillating protons.

 Perhaps this is testable using laser pulses, as described in -

 Surface plasmon enhanced electron acceleration with few-cycle laser
 pulses
 http://www.szfki.hu/~dombi/**DombiLPB27_291.pdfhttp://www.szfki.hu/~dombi/DombiLPB27_291.pdf

 - since they can create field gradients of at least 3.7 X 10^11 V/m
 (p.293)

 -- Lou Pagnucco

Re: [Vo]:How can the Wikipedia process be so good if does not work?

Harry Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote:


 I think contributors to a controversial subject must self-identify as
 either pro or con. That way readers can *immediately* see from the
 user name on which side of the controversy each contributor stands.


Exactly. To simplify: Just have signed articles, like in Encyclopedia
Britannica. You can have multiple authors. If the subject is controversial,
you can two articles, one by supporters, and one by opponents. Why not?


The controversial subject should also be moderated but not in
 anonymity.


Right. That is is in line with what Larry Sanger wrote:

http://wikipediocracy.com/2012/09/05/on-the-moral-bankruptcy-of-wikipedias-anonymous-administration/

(I appended a comment.)

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Friedel oscillations

Axil,

Your URL reference was clipped.
www.physics.uiowa.edu/.../EPSICPP_2012_Talk_Merlino.ppt

Were you referring to one of the figures in --
Dusty plasmas: Experiments on nonlinear dust acoustic waves,
shocks, and structures
http://www.physics.uiowa.edu/~rmerlino/EPS_ICPP_2012_PPFC_MS.pdf
-- ?

-- Lou Pagnucco

Axil wrote:
 *Friedel oscillations*

 Why is a rough surface treatment on the surface of the substrate material
 used to support LENR so very important?

 The Shukla-Eliasson (SE) force will act to screen positive charge for both
 protons and the positive nuclei of metal substrate atoms resulting in
 these
 positive charged entities to attract each other. This is only possible
 when
 the density of degenerate electrons are within a range of 5.4 _ 10^19/cc 
 n0  6.7 _ 10^24/cc.

 This Shukla-Eliasson (SE) force does a number of things in LENR. Not only
 does it suppress the coulomb barrier of metal substrate atoms. It forms
 cooper pairs of protons that aggregate into a Bose-Ernestine condensate
 right on top of the screened suppressed metal nuclei.

 *A dusty plasma model of the Shukla-Eliasson (SE) force.*

 Experimentalists can use dusty plasma to visualize and demonstrate how
 electrostatic charge and quantum mechanics will interact at the subatomic
 level. This model can equate dusty plasma acoustic waves with Friedel
 oscillations of degenerate electrons.

 This dusty plasma model will also show how a confined space will
 concentrate the collective wave forms of degenerate electrons inside a
 surface cavity.

 This is the reason why such LENR developers as Rossi and Celani roughen
 the
 surfaces of their substrates; Rossi with nickel hairs and Celani with
 etching.  By doing this cavity formation process, they greatly amplify
 degenerate electron concentrations using Friedel oscillations.

 The last pages of this reference show how this electron amplification
 takes
 place.

 www.physics.uiowa.edu/.../EPSICPP_2012_Talk_Merlino.ppt

 The analogy goes as follows for the Rossi Process.

 The anode is the source of positive charge; in the Rossi case, it is a
 superatom.

 In the Rossi analogy, the slit is the nickel hairs on the micro powder
 grains.

 The concentrations of degenerate electrons form in between the nickel
 hairs
 under the influence of the large Friedel oscillations of the degenerate
 electrons induced by the positively charged superatom.

 This amplified induced electron cloud will now induce coulomb barrier
 lowering and proton condensate formation in and around the walls of the
 nearby surface cavity.
 The description of the Shukla-Eliasson (SE) force is just been released
 and
 is a major breakthrough in understanding electron screening behavior.

 See

 Clustering of Ions at Atomic-Dimensions in Quantum Plasmas

 *http://arxiv.org/pdf/1209.0914*
 **
 **
 **
 *Cheers:   Axil*
 **

 **

Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy on Hi-Temp Superconductivity LENR

David,

I agree.  If the resistance fluctuates under constant potential, transient
superconductivity, or ballistic conduction may be occuring.  If the
resistance follows the same deterministic non-monotonic path each time the
voltage is swept, then maybe something like Esaki-diode (differential)
negative resistance is happening.

-- LP

David L Babcock wrote:
 For any here puzzled-
 Pointing out the obvious:
 If, while temperature is rising, some increasing portion of a resistive
 conductor becomes superconductive, the overall resistance of the entire
 conductor will decrease. If this decrease exceeds an increase which
 temperature rise is causing at the same time, you get non-monotonic
 resistivity vs temp.

 Ol' Bab

 On 9/12/2012 1:36 AM, pagnu...@htdconnect.com wrote:
 Jeff,

 The reports cited in the presentation are of hi-temp superconductivity
 (I
 believe), rather than just non-monotonic resistivity vs. temp phenomena.

 It may be worth looking at the recently reported hi-temp
 superconductivity
 seen in fractal materials - e.g.,

 High-temperature superconductivity: The benefit of fractal dirt
 http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v466/n7308/full/466825a.html

 Fractals make better superconductors
 http://www.nanotech-now.com/news.cgi?story_id=39593

 Fractals promise higher-temperature Superconductors
 http://www.stealthskater.com/Documents/Fractals_04.pdf

 X-rays control disorder in superconductor
 http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/2011/aug/31/x-rays-control-disorder-in-superconductor

 Fractals boost superconductivity
 http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/2010/aug/13/fractals-boost-superconductivity

 -- Lou Pagnucco



 Jeff Berkowitz wrote:
 To answer my own question: yes, here
 http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/CelaniFcunimnallo.pdf on page 3, in item
 (3)
 of the numbered list.

 Of course, it could be some unrelated effect; but decreasing electrical
 resistance with increasing temperature is very odd, and it certainly is
 an
 interesting coincidence.

 Jeff

 On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 10:06 PM, Jeff Berkowitz pdx...@gmail.com
 wrote:

 Lasers not necessary? Hasn't Celani been reporting a negative
 temperature
 coefficient of resistance that appears about the time his processed
 wires
 begin producing heat? I might have this wrong ...

 Jeff


 On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 9:59 PM, pagnu...@htdconnect.com wrote:

 Low Energy Neutron Reaactions (LENRs)

 http://www.slideshare.net/lewisglarsen
 -- or at --

 http://www.slideshare.net/slideshow/embed_code/14256059?hostedIn=slidesharereferer=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.slideshare.net%2Flewisglarsen#

 - proposes that high temp superconductivity may develop in surface
 plasmons when very high (10^11 V/m) E-field gradients develop at the
 interface between collectively oscillating electrons and collectively
 oscillating protons.

 Perhaps this is testable using laser pulses, as described in -

 Surface plasmon enhanced electron acceleration with few-cycle laser
 pulses
 http://www.szfki.hu/~dombi/DombiLPB27_291.pdf

 - since they can create field gradients of at least 3.7 X 10^11 V/m
 (p.293)

 -- Lou Pagnucco

Re: [Vo]:How can the Wikipedia process be so good if does not work?

I wrote:

If the subject is controversial, you can [have] two articles, one by
 supporters, and one by opponents. Why not?


This is against the rules in Wikipedia. They insist that people reach
a compromise taking into accounts all points of view. They want one and
only one article per topic. (Actually, you are not supposed to have a
point of view.) I do not understand why they have this rule, or why they
are so opposed to articles with distinct, separate points of view.

It reminds of newspapers and TV news from the 1950s to 1990s, when they
tried hard to be neutral. Meaning objective. Some people considered
Walter Cronkite the epitome of reliable neutrality. He had an aura.

I never thought the newspapers were neutral. Frankly, I prefer the approach
newspapers had in the 19th century and again today, where you knew which
side the editorial staff sympathized with. You could judge how objective
they were by reading different accounts of the same story.

Incidentally, you do have to give Wikipedia credit for knowing about and
discussing their own weaknesses, such as their fetish for incorporating all
points of view:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Randy_in_Boise

The see the problems, but they don't do anything about them.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Friedel oscillations

2012-09-12 Thread Axil Axil

Lou, your link will work.

Try this link to get to the PPT I intended.

http://www.google.com/url?sa=trct=jq=esrc=sfrm=1source=webcd=8cad=rjasqi=2ved=0CE0QFjAHurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.physics.uiowa.edu%2F~rmerlino%2FEPS%26ICPP_2012_Talk_Merlino.pptei=OSBQUO6SJKnF0AH5uoG4CAusg=AFQjCNE98b__RtGBayIn9Vyu2ItpU50Bxwsig2=TJRzKiDGn3l9EiPP_cRMoQCheers:
Axil
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 2:38 PM, pagnu...@htdconnect.com wrote:

Axil,

Your URL reference was clipped.
www.physics.uiowa.edu/.../EPSICPP_2012_Talk_Merlino.ppt

Were you referring to one of the figures in --
Dusty plasmas: Experiments on nonlinear dust acoustic waves,
shocks, and structures
http://www.physics.uiowa.edu/~rmerlino/EPS_ICPP_2012_PPFC_MS.pdf
-- ?

-- Lou Pagnucco

Axil wrote:
*Friedel oscillations*

Why is a rough surface treatment on the surface of the substrate material
used to support LENR so very important?

The Shukla-Eliasson (SE) force will act to screen positive charge for
both
protons and the positive nuclei of metal substrate atoms resulting in
these
positive charged entities to attract each other. This is only possible
when
the density of degenerate electrons are within a range of 5.4 _ 10^19/cc

n0 6.7 _ 10^24/cc.

This Shukla-Eliasson (SE) force does a number of things in LENR. Not only
does it suppress the coulomb barrier of metal substrate atoms. It forms
cooper pairs of protons that aggregate into a Bose-Ernestine condensate
right on top of the screened suppressed metal nuclei.

*A dusty plasma model of the Shukla-Eliasson (SE) force.*

Experimentalists can use dusty plasma to visualize and demonstrate how
electrostatic charge and quantum mechanics will interact at the subatomic
level. This model can equate dusty plasma acoustic waves with Friedel
oscillations of degenerate electrons.

This dusty plasma model will also show how a confined space will
concentrate the collective wave forms of degenerate electrons inside a
surface cavity.

This is the reason why such LENR developers as Rossi and Celani roughen
the
surfaces of their substrates; Rossi with nickel hairs and Celani with
etching. By doing this cavity formation process, they greatly amplify
degenerate electron concentrations using Friedel oscillations.

The last pages of this reference show how this electron amplification
takes
place.

www.physics.uiowa.edu/.../EPSICPP_2012_Talk_Merlino.ppt

The analogy goes as follows for the Rossi Process.

The anode is the source of positive charge; in the Rossi case, it is a
superatom.

In the Rossi analogy, the slit is the nickel hairs on the micro powder
grains.

The concentrations of degenerate electrons form in between the nickel
hairs
under the influence of the large Friedel oscillations of the degenerate
electrons induced by the positively charged superatom.

This amplified induced electron cloud will now induce coulomb barrier
lowering and proton condensate formation in and around the walls of the
nearby surface cavity.
The description of the Shukla-Eliasson (SE) force is just been released
and
is a major breakthrough in understanding electron screening behavior.

See

Clustering of Ions at Atomic-Dimensions in Quantum Plasmas

*http://arxiv.org/pdf/1209.0914*
**
**
**
*Cheers: Axil*
**

[Vo]:Peswiki Sterling Allen Report : Self-looped infinite COP ecat ?

2012-09-12 Thread Alan J Fletcher


http://pesn.com/2012/09/11/9602180_2012_E-Cat_Conference_Report--1_MW_E-Cat_Ready/

(plus other links).

Biggest news/ leak  is :

 A little secret I'll let you in on is that Rossi does have 
self-looped data for the Hot-Cat, but chose not to release that at 
this time. Self-looped is effectively a COP of infinity. One likely 
reason for Rossi holding back on that data is that the present 
stipulation of the safety certification requires that the unit not be 
self-looped.


He also says that the 2.3 COP Hot eCat is throttled back for safety reasons.


(lenr.qumbu.com -- analyzing the Rossi/Focardi eCat  -- and the 
defkalion hyperion -- Hi, google!)

Re: [Vo]:How can the Wikipedia process be so good if does not work?

2012-09-12 Thread Alain Sepeda

2012/9/12 Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com

 Harry Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote:


 I think contributors to a controversial subject must self-identify as
 either pro or con. That way readers can *immediately* see from the
 user name on which side of the controversy each contributor stands.


 Exactly. To simplify: Just have signed articles, like in Encyclopedia
 Britannica. You can have multiple authors. If the subject is controversial,
 you can two articles, one by supporters, and one by opponents. Why not?


I agree.

there is a strong demand of specific lobbies to have their own
wikipedia-like.
Wikiliberal (for liberal economics, not US liberal...)
some green wiki
...

We have set a wiki on lenrnews, but we don't have much resource to feed
it...
I just wood like to have basic information, description of various point of
view , even if negative, with arguments.

anyway, is it productive if LENR reach the market in 12 month...




 The controversial subject should also be moderated but not in
 anonymity.


 Right. That is is in line with what Larry Sanger wrote:


 http://wikipediocracy.com/2012/09/05/on-the-moral-bankruptcy-of-wikipedias-anonymous-administration/

 (I appended a comment.)

 - Jed

Re: [Vo]:Peswiki Sterling Allen Report : Self-looped infinite COP ecat ?

2012-09-12 Thread Peter Gluck

If it is true, it is great. If...
Peter

On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 10:09 PM, Alan J Fletcher a...@well.com wrote:

 http://pesn.com/2012/09/11/**9602180_2012_E-Cat_Conference_**
 Report--1_MW_E-Cat_Ready/http://pesn.com/2012/09/11/9602180_2012_E-Cat_Conference_Report--1_MW_E-Cat_Ready/

 (plus other links).

 Biggest news/ leak  is :

  A little secret I'll let you in on is that Rossi does have self-looped
 data for the Hot-Cat, but chose not to release that at this time.
 Self-looped is effectively a COP of infinity. One likely reason for Rossi
 holding back on that data is that the present stipulation of the safety
 certification requires that the unit not be self-looped.

 He also says that the 2.3 COP Hot eCat is throttled back for safety
 reasons.


 (lenr.qumbu.com -- analyzing the Rossi/Focardi eCat  -- and the defkalion
 hyperion -- Hi, google!)




-- 
Dr. Peter Gluck
Cluj, Romania
http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com

Re: [Vo]:How can the Wikipedia process be so good if does not work?

2012-09-12 Thread Alain Sepeda

in fact I've heard of wikipedia spitrit in the old time :
it was to express reasonable opinion, all reasonable opinions, with
reference data, show controversies, ...

but on some subject I follow I've see that peer-reviewed but non mainstream
point of view get thrown out by ideological non scientific lobbies...

some subject that are proved scientifically are presented as controversial
or fringe, while their are mainstream in the technical domain, yet
unpopular in popular ideology...
(see ormesis)...
clearly wikipedia sine 5-8 years have been cleaned by some non scientific
powerfull lobbies (and not corporate)...
More over I see more and more fringe science , but popular for those
lobbies.

funnily on a vulgarization science , futura-science.fr, I've seen the same
thought-police, allowing very fringe discussion, but violently rejecting
some serious non consensual discussion, like LENR..

2012/9/12 Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com

 I wrote:

 If the subject is controversial, you can [have] two articles, one by
 supporters, and one by opponents. Why not?


 This is against the rules in Wikipedia. They insist that people reach
 a compromise taking into accounts all points of view. They want one and
 only one article per topic. (Actually, you are not supposed to have a
 point of view.) I do not understand why they have this rule, or why they
 are so opposed to articles with distinct, separate points of view.

 It reminds of newspapers and TV news from the 1950s to 1990s, when they
 tried hard to be neutral. Meaning objective. Some people considered
 Walter Cronkite the epitome of reliable neutrality. He had an aura.

 I never thought the newspapers were neutral. Frankly, I prefer the
 approach newspapers had in the 19th century and again today, where you knew
 which side the editorial staff sympathized with. You could judge how
 objective they were by reading different accounts of the same story.

 Incidentally, you do have to give Wikipedia credit for knowing about and
 discussing their own weaknesses, such as their fetish for incorporating all
 points of view:

  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Randy_in_Boise

 The see the problems, but they don't do anything about them.

 - Jed

Re: [Vo]:New Miley Patent

2012-09-12 Thread Jeff Berkowitz

http://www.google.com/patents?id=WhIgAgAAEBAJpg=PA1lpg=PA1dq=%22Low+Energy+Nuclear+Reaction%22source=blots=Xuf1yRH2vBsig=142QFcoB_2WmhjeCiLVn9AuUGlUhl=ensa=Xei=qEROUKH4JsjSrQHKmIGoBwved=0CD4Q6AEwBQgoback=.gde_4132340_member_161859049#v=onepageqf=false


Isn't this sort of big deal? Not so much because of what the patent covers,
but because the USPTO actually granted it? Claim 11, for example,
specifically mentions charged particles and x-rays.

Or perhaps the fact that the claims aren't limited to CF/LENR (e.g. also
superconductivity, claim 12) was significant?

Jeff

On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 9:50 AM, pagnu...@htdconnect.com wrote:

 Courtesy of LENR Forum - Follow links at -

 http://www.lenrforum.eu/viewtopic.php?t=569p=2283

 U.S. Patent No. US 8,227,020  July 24, 2012

 ABSTRACT:

 Techniques to form dislocation cores along an interface of a multilayer
 thin
 film structure are described.  The loading and/or deloading of isotopes of
 hydrogen are also described in association with core formation.  The
 described techniques can be applied to superconductive structure formation,
 x-ray and charged particle generation, nuclear reaction processes, and/or
 inertial confinement targets.

Re: [Vo]:How can the Wikipedia process be so good if does not work?

On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 2:56 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
 I wrote:

 If the subject is controversial, you can [have] two articles, one by
 supporters, and one by opponents. Why not?


 This is against the rules in Wikipedia. They insist that people reach a
 compromise taking into accounts all points of view. They want one and only
 one article per topic. (Actually, you are not supposed to have a point of
 view.) I do not understand why they have this rule, or why they are so
 opposed to articles with distinct, separate points of view.

 It reminds of newspapers and TV news from the 1950s to 1990s, when they
 tried hard to be neutral. Meaning objective. Some people considered
 Walter Cronkite the epitome of reliable neutrality. He had an aura.

 I never thought the newspapers were neutral. Frankly, I prefer the approach
 newspapers had in the 19th century and again today, where you knew which
 side the editorial staff sympathized with. You could judge how objective
 they were by reading different accounts of the same story.

 Incidentally, you do have to give Wikipedia credit for knowing about and
 discussing their own weaknesses, such as their fetish for incorporating all
 points of view:

 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Randy_in_Boise

 The see the problems, but they don't do anything about them.

 - Jed


It reminds me of the persistent absuse that has occured within some
institutions. The abuse persists because it happens behind closed
doors, but in the case of wikipedia anonymity serves the function of
closed doors. It also reminds me cyber bullying. There are probably
(new) laws against cyber bullying that could be applied to wikipedia.

Harry

Re: [Vo]:1MW Escrow Account?

From 
PESNhttp://pesn.com/2012/09/11/9602180_2012_E-Cat_Conference_Report--1_MW_E-Cat_Ready/
:

One third of the $1.5 million price is paid up front, and two thirds is
paid after a successful performance test; and if the performance test
doesn't meet the specifications, then the deposit is refunded.


On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 12:03 PM, James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote:

 The main reason I pay attention to Rossi, aside from the fact that cold
 fusion research was not suppressed in Italy to nearly the extent it was in
 the US and most of the rest of Europe, is my impression that the only
 source of money he had from the E-Cat was through the sale of the 1MW
 thermal plant and that all such sales went through an escrow process
 where-by the customer's engineers could certify the device operated as
 advertised and do so according to their own non-destructive tests.

 What part of my impression is false, if any?  Cites?

[Vo]:1-Cylinder Papp -- Bob Rohner

2012-09-12 Thread Alan J Fletcher



Sterling Allen also posted a link to a video

http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Bob_Rohner%27s_Noble_Gas_Engine#Plasma_Cycle_is_Not_Air_Driven

A 1-cylinder Papp is assembled from scratch, charged with gas and
operated.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0fd-coQ84XU 
The cylinder fires against a large spring : it looks to me as if it moves
at least an inch. On the recovery stroke it generates current through a
capacitor, driving an electric motor. This was just set up to prove it's
not air-driven (feuding Rohners) -- there's no way of calculating the
power balance.
He has a cylinder of pre-mixed gas (which he says costs $1700).

(lenr.qumbu.com -- analyzing the Rossi/Focardi eCat -- and the
defkalion hyperion -- Hi, google!)

Re: [Vo]:How can the Wikipedia process be so good if does not work?

2012-09-12 Thread Jouni Valkonen

On Sep 12, 2012, at 5:05 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
 The main problems are that it allows anonymous editing, and it has no respect 
 for authorities in complicated, specialized subjects. I hope that it is 
 reformed, or -- if it is not -- that some competing encyclopedia arises. 
 Perhaps another encyclopedia can be established that specialized is 
 scientific subjects such as cold fusion, and that does a better job using 
 more traditional academic standards.

Encyclopedia for cold fusion would be quite good idea. Although wikiversity's 
resources are quite comprehensive.

What I would add to the wikiversity, is a good and comprehensive video lecture 
series about the topic. I think 30-90 45 mins video lectures would be great. If 
lecture series is well made, it will find very fast good reviews and thus it 
increases a lot the gredibility of arguments. The main difficulty with cold 
fusion is, that it is very difficult to evaluate the reliability of sources.

I think that your criticism about wikipedia is disproportional. Controversial 
subjects are not that important, because usually there are very good reasons 
why they are controversial. Wikipedia is just not the right place to settle 
controversies. If something cannot be settled without writing 'walls of text', 
then we must seriously question whether it can be expressed in wikipedia, 
without that people get false impressions while they are reading compact 
wikiarticles about the topic.

I think that it would be good idea to have in paraller, more specialized 
version of wikipedia. 

I would dream about wiki like online community that would be used also for 
original research and debate. However discussion should civilized and 
moderated. Something like light peer review process, that before any comments 
are published, they are reviewed by several established experts and editors. 
And if necessary, feed back and suggestion for change are given before 
publishing.

―Jouni

Re: [Vo]:Peswiki Sterling Allen Report : Self-looped infinite COP ecat ?

2012-09-12 Thread David Roberson


I agree Peter.  I do not see any hint of strong positive thermal feedback in 
the data from the meeting.  It would have been better for Rossi to have skipped 
revealing this data entirely since it does little to support his claims.  My 
simulations make me question whether or not there is any additional heat at all 
being generated by the device since the time response curves look very similar 
over a wide range of temperatures.  It is quite difficult to believe that Rossi 
has discovered a technique that has linear gain over such a range.

It is unfortunate that the data from this meeting was so far removed from what 
we were expecting.  If Rossi wants me to believe him this time, he must 
demonstrate that self looped performance.

Dave


-Original Message-
From: Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Wed, Sep 12, 2012 3:15 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Peswiki Sterling Allen Report : Self-looped infinite COP ecat 
?


If it is true, it is great. If...
Peter


On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 10:09 PM, Alan J Fletcher a...@well.com wrote:

http://pesn.com/2012/09/11/9602180_2012_E-Cat_Conference_Report--1_MW_E-Cat_Ready/

(plus other links).

Biggest news/ leak  is :

 A little secret I'll let you in on is that Rossi does have self-looped data 
 for the Hot-Cat, but chose not to release that at this time. Self-looped is 
 effectively a COP of infinity. One likely reason for Rossi holding back on 
 that data is that the present stipulation of the safety certification 
 requires that the unit not be self-looped.

He also says that the 2.3 COP Hot eCat is throttled back for safety reasons.


(lenr.qumbu.com -- analyzing the Rossi/Focardi eCat  -- and the defkalion 
hyperion -- Hi, google!) 






-- 
Dr. Peter Gluck
Cluj, Romania
http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com

Re: [Vo]:New Miley Patent


Jeff Berkowitz wrote:

Isn't this sort of big deal? Not so much because of what the patent 
covers, but because the USPTO actually granted it? Claim 11, for 
example, specifically mentions charged particles and x-rays.


Yes, it is a big deal. I don't know what to make of it. Perhaps the P.O. 
has changed its policy. Maybe not . . . In the past, a few patents such 
Patterson's got through on a technicality. I do not know what happened here.


- Jed

[Vo]:New press release on fractal graphite hi-temp superconductivity

Tom Andersen just sent me this new press release on hi-temp 'fractal'
superconductivity -

Room Temperature Superconductivity Found in Graphite Grains

Water-soaked grains of carbon superconduct at room temperature,
claim a team of physicists from Germany

http://www.technologyreview.com/view/429203/room-temperature-superconductivity-found-in/?ref=rss

Their full preprint is available at -

Can doping graphite trigger room temperature superconductivity? Evidence
for granular high-temperature superconductivity in water-treated graphite
powder
http://arxiv.org/abs/1209.1938

For those interested in hi-temp super-/ballistic-conductivity,
in fractal and colloidal conductors, here are some related papers
by the same group, and two (possibly) related patents:

Length dependence of the resistance in graphite: Influence of ballistic
transport
http://arxiv.org/abs/1201.3004

Ballistic transport at room temperature in micrometer size multigraphene
http://arxiv.org/abs/1012.1100

Ferromagnetic- and superconducting-like behavior of the electrical
resistance of inhomogeneous graphite flake
http://arxiv.org/abs/0903.3303

US Patent Application 20080085834
- Superconductive circuits with efficient method

The present invention relates to superconductors, superconductive
circuits, and electrical superconductive processes. More specifically,
this invention relates to high-temperature superconductors and electrical
superconductive processes occurring near normal room or ambient
temperatures [...]
Researchers have recently discovered that the addition of certain
nanoparticles less than 100 nanometers in size, when added to water, oil,
or glycol mixtures, results in a nanofluid (a colloid with nanoparticles)
that exhibits a substantial rise in thermal conductivity. In U.S. Pat.
No. 6,221,275 (Choi, et al., 2001), a method is disclosed for producing
nanocrystalline particles of such substances as copper, copper oxide,
or aluminum oxide. The nanocrystalline particles are then dispersed
in fluids such as [...]

http://www.patentstorm.us/applications/20080085834/description.html

United States Patent Application 20110233061 (Brian Ahern)
- AMPLIFICATION OF ENERGETIC REACTIONS

Methods and apparatus for energy production through the amplification of
energetic reactions. A method includes amplifying an energy release from
a dispersion of nanoparticles containing a concentration of
hydrogen/deuterium nuclei, the nanoparticles suspended in a dielectric
medium in a presence of hydrogen/deuterium gas, wherein an energy input
is provided by high voltage pulses between two electrodes embedded
in the dispersion of nanoparticles. [...]
Energetic reactions described fully herein are amplified by an inverse
skin effect. These very small discharge pathways are so narrow that the
magnetic fields close to them are amplified to magnitudes unachievable
by other methods.

Distributing nanoparticles in a dielectric (ceramic) matrix between two
high voltage electrodes is a method according to the principles of the
present invention for amplifying an energy output from the
hydrated/deuterated metal nanoparticles in the dielectric matrix. High
voltage pulses cause arc formations. The arc formations focus energy and
the arc formations are channeled from one macroscopic grain to another
macroscopic grain. Once a discharge is interior to a macroscopic grain
the pulse is further focused into nanoparticles along the lowest
impedance pathway. The arcs interior to the grains are where the
energetic reactions are maximized.

The nanoparticles provide a constellation of short circuiting elements
for each current pulse. Each succeeding pulse finds a different pathway
that minimizes the impedance between two electrodes. An overpressure of
hydrogen is needed to prevent discharges from sliding over a surface of
the macroscopic grains rather than through the grains and thereby
through the hydrated nanoparticles. Low pressure hydrogen gas favors
surface discharging.

Liquid dielectrics produce similar energy focusing capabilities as the
ceramic matrices. Liquid systems provide a direct method for producing
nanoparticles in situ. [...]

http://www.freepatentsonline.com/y2011/0233061.html

-- Lou Pagnucco

[Vo]:no evidence yet of safety certificate.

This blog called Shut down Rossi can't find any evidence that safety
certificate was issue by SGS as Rossi claims.

http://shutdownrossi.com/?page_id=1774

I suppose it is possible that the certificate was issued under a
different company name because SGS only confirms that a certificate
was not issued to any of the companies listed by the owner of Shut
down Rossi

Harry

Re: [Vo]:no evidence yet of safety certificate.

2012-09-12 Thread OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson

From Harry:

 This blog called Shut down Rossi can't find any evidence that safety
 certificate was issue by SGS as Rossi claims.

 http://shutdownrossi.com/?page_id=1774

this is hilarious.

I guess I shouldn't be surprised. How many wannabe rossi related
websites are there now?

Regards
Steven Vincent Johnson
www.OrionWorks.com
www.zazzle.com/orionworks

Re: [Vo]:Peswiki Sterling Allen Report : Self-looped infinite COP ecat ?

One likely reason for Rossi holding back on that data is that the
present stipulation of the safety certification requires that the unit
not be self-looped.

:-)

T

Re: [Vo]:no evidence yet of safety certificate.


Harry Veeder wrote:


This blog called Shut down Rossi can't find any evidence that safety
certificate was issue by SGS as Rossi claims.


This person has it in for Rossi, doesn't he?

Rossi rubs people the wrong way.

Why worry about Rossi? Who has he hurt, other than himself? If he is all 
that the critics claim, a scammer and so on, surely he will 
self-destruct and go away. He seems always on the verge of 
self-destructing. If he has what he claims, he is a superlative genius 
and history will forgive his eccentricities. I don't mind being 
associated with him either way. I am happy to upload anything he or his 
supporters send me. I will upload the information and let the reader decide.


Some people say we need to crack down on Rossi to preserve the honor and 
reputation of cold fusion. Cold fusion does not have those things. 
Nothing that Rossi could do would make us more of a laughingstock and we 
are already. So why worry?


Seriously -- who cares what other people think? If you are one of these 
people who cares about what the mass media and the rest of the world 
thinks about your opinions, or if you hate being called a fool or a 
lunatic, I advise you to stay far away from cold fusion. When you 
advocate cold fusion in polite society, it is like being in a bad dream 
where you find yourself at a formal dinner at the White House wearing 
pajamas.


- Jed

Re: [Vo]:New Miley Patent

2012-09-12 Thread Daniel Rocha

This should give Rossi much more confidence to show his invention... if it
was not for his totally confusing writing.

2012/9/12 Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com

 Jeff Berkowitz wrote:

  Isn't this sort of big deal? Not so much because of what the patent
 covers, but because the USPTO actually granted it? Claim 11, for example,
 specifically mentions charged particles and x-rays.


 Yes, it is a big deal. I don't know what to make of it. Perhaps the P.O.
 has changed its policy. Maybe not . . . In the past, a few patents such
 Patterson's got through on a technicality. I do not know what happened here.

 - Jed




-- 
Daniel Rocha - RJ
danieldi...@gmail.com

Re: [Vo]:1-Cylinder Papp -- Bob Rohner

As I previously reported here at vortex-l, Bob is claiming no coil is
required.  This video demonstrates it.  I think it also places in serious
doubt the ring electromagnet
hypothesishttp://pesn.com/2012/08/24/9602167_Noble_Gas_Plasma_or_Aluminum_Ring_Electromagnet/
posited
by Sterling Allen.  However I didn't see any retraction of that hypothesis
associated with Sterling Allen's presentation of this video.

On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 2:55 PM, Alan J Fletcher a...@well.com wrote:

  Sterling Allen also posted a link to a video
 http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Bob_Rohner%27s_Noble_Gas_Engine#Plasma_Cycle_is_Not_Air_Drivenhttp://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Bob_Rohner's_Noble_Gas_Engine#Plasma_Cycle_is_Not_Air_Driven

 A 1-cylinder Papp is assembled from scratch, charged with gas and operated.

  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0fd-coQ84XU

 The cylinder fires against a large spring : it looks to me as if it moves
 at least an inch. On the recovery stroke it generates current through a
 capacitor, driving an electric motor. This was just set up to prove it's
 not air-driven (feuding Rohners) -- there's no way of calculating the power
 balance.

 He has a cylinder of pre-mixed gas (which he says costs $1700).
 **

 ** (lenr.qumbu.com -- analyzing the Rossi/Focardi eCat  -- and the
 defkalion hyperion -- Hi, google!)

Re: [Vo]:1-Cylinder Papp -- Bob Rohner

I now see the link to Wes's retraction on Sterling Allen's page.

http://pesn.com/2012/08/24/9602167_Noble_Gas_Plasma_or_Aluminum_Ring_Electromagnet/#retraction

On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 6:55 PM, James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote:

 As I previously reported here at vortex-l, Bob is claiming no coil is
 required.  This video demonstrates it.  I think it also places in serious
 doubt the ring electromagnet 
 hypothesishttp://pesn.com/2012/08/24/9602167_Noble_Gas_Plasma_or_Aluminum_Ring_Electromagnet/
  posited
 by Sterling Allen.  However I didn't see any retraction of that hypothesis
 associated with Sterling Allen's presentation of this video.


 On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 2:55 PM, Alan J Fletcher a...@well.com wrote:

  Sterling Allen also posted a link to a video
 http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Bob_Rohner%27s_Noble_Gas_Engine#Plasma_Cycle_is_Not_Air_Drivenhttp://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Bob_Rohner's_Noble_Gas_Engine#Plasma_Cycle_is_Not_Air_Driven

 A 1-cylinder Papp is assembled from scratch, charged with gas and
 operated.

  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0fd-coQ84XU

 The cylinder fires against a large spring : it looks to me as if it moves
 at least an inch. On the recovery stroke it generates current through a
 capacitor, driving an electric motor. This was just set up to prove it's
 not air-driven (feuding Rohners) -- there's no way of calculating the power
 balance.

 He has a cylinder of pre-mixed gas (which he says costs $1700).
 **

 ** (lenr.qumbu.com -- analyzing the Rossi/Focardi eCat  -- and the
 defkalion hyperion -- Hi, google!)

Re: [Vo]:1-Cylinder Papp -- Bob Rohner

2012-09-12 Thread ChemE Stewart

One can also figure out how to operate their microwave at home with the
door open if they are tricky enough but i would advise against it.

On Wednesday, September 12, 2012, James Bowery wrote:

As I previously reported here at vortex-l, Bob is claiming no coil is
required. This video demonstrates it. I think it also places in serious
doubt the ring electromagnet
hypothesishttp://pesn.com/2012/08/24/9602167_Noble_Gas_Plasma_or_Aluminum_Ring_Electromagnet/
posited
by Sterling Allen. However I didn't see any retraction of that hypothesis
associated with Sterling Allen's presentation of this video.

On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 2:55 PM, Alan J Fletcher
a...@well.comjavascript:_e({}, 'cvml', 'a...@well.com');
wrote:

Sterling Allen also posted a link to a video
http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Bob_Rohner%27s_Noble_Gas_Engine#Plasma_Cycle_is_Not_Air_Drivenhttp://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Bob_Rohner's_Noble_Gas_Engine#Plasma_Cycle_is_Not_Air_Driven

A 1-cylinder Papp is assembled from scratch, charged with gas and
operated.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0fd-coQ84XU

The cylinder fires against a large spring : it looks to me as if it moves
at least an inch. On the recovery stroke it generates current through a
capacitor, driving an electric motor. This was just set up to prove it's
not air-driven (feuding Rohners) -- there's no way of calculating the power
balance.

He has a cylinder of pre-mixed gas (which he says costs $1700).
**

** (lenr.qumbu.com -- analyzing the Rossi/Focardi eCat -- and the
defkalion hyperion -- Hi, google!)

Re: [Vo]:1-Cylinder Papp -- Bob Rohner

On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 8:46 PM, ChemE Stewart cheme...@gmail.com wrote:
 One can also figure out how to operate their microwave at home with the door
 open if they are tricky enough but i would advise against it.

Unless you like cataracts.

T

Re: [Vo]:no evidence yet of safety certificate.

2012-09-12 Thread Akira Shirakawa


On 2012-09-12 23:04, Harry Veeder wrote:

I suppose it is possible that the certificate was issued under a
different company name because SGS only confirms that a certificate
was not issued to any of the companies listed by the owner of Shut
down Rossi


I would say it's highly probable that the certificate was not issued 
under Leonardo, EFA or any individual by the name of Andrea Rossi. 
Beware of the very strong POV the site owner is trying to push on his 
readers by clever writing and presenting style.


Cheers,
S.A.

Re: [Vo]:1-Cylinder Papp -- Bob Rohner

After carefully considering the consequences of your theories, I most
certainly would never operate my microwave at home with the door open -- it
would let the gremlins out.

On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 7:46 PM, ChemE Stewart cheme...@gmail.com wrote:

One can also figure out how to operate their microwave at home with the
door open if they are tricky enough but i would advise against it.

On Wednesday, September 12, 2012, James Bowery wrote:

On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 2:55 PM, Alan J Fletcher a...@well.com wrote:

A 1-cylinder Papp is assembled from scratch, charged with gas and
operated.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0fd-coQ84XU

The cylinder fires against a large spring : it looks to me as if it
moves at least an inch. On the recovery stroke it generates current through
a capacitor, driving an electric motor. This was just set up to prove it's
not air-driven (feuding Rohners) -- there's no way of calculating the power
balance.

He has a cylinder of pre-mixed gas (which he says costs $1700).
**

** (lenr.qumbu.com -- analyzing the Rossi/Focardi eCat -- and the
defkalion hyperion -- Hi, google!)

Re: [Vo]:1-Cylinder Papp -- Bob Rohner

2012-09-12 Thread ChemE Stewart

Smart man. I get the impression Papp was much brighter than the Rohner
Bros.

On Wednesday, September 12, 2012, James Bowery wrote:

After carefully considering the consequences of your theories, I most
certainly would never operate my microwave at home with the door open -- it
would let the gremlins out.

On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 7:46 PM, ChemE Stewart
cheme...@gmail.comjavascript:_e({}, 'cvml', 'cheme...@gmail.com');
wrote:

One can also figure out how to operate their microwave at home with the
door open if they are tricky enough but i would advise against it.

On Wednesday, September 12, 2012, James Bowery wrote:

On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 2:55 PM, Alan J Fletcher a...@well.com wrote:

A 1-cylinder Papp is assembled from scratch, charged with gas and
operated.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0fd-coQ84XU

The cylinder fires against a large spring : it looks to me as if it
moves at least an inch. On the recovery stroke it generates current through
a capacitor, driving an electric motor. This was just set up to prove it's
not air-driven (feuding Rohners) -- there's no way of calculating the power
balance.

He has a cylinder of pre-mixed gas (which he says costs $1700).
**

** (lenr.qumbu.com -- analyzing the Rossi/Focardi eCat -- and the
defkalion hyperion -- Hi, google!)

Re: [Vo]:1-Cylinder Papp -- Bob Rohner