Re: [Vo]:Defkalion webcast officially confirmed
right. for the mainstream deniers who parrot the few leaders MIT/Caltech/Harwell, it is evident that it is paranormal claim.. So skeptic society member like Essen are usefull It is right that best would be to send experts in energy... like Elforsk... all that shows that fullfilling any demand of the deniers is hopeless... the only solution for me is to FORCE THEM to swallow the crow, but showing to the public (who is honestly thomasian, ie: accept what they can touch) that it work... add to that that it make someone rich ... and the hypercritics who are simply ambitious will save their career accepting the facts... the others will develop conspiracy society to save their theory from reality... 2013/7/17 Akira Shirakawa shirakawa.ak...@gmail.com On 2013-07-17 03:50, blaze spinnaker wrote: They should be sending in engineers from companies which specialize in calorimetry and power measurement. Cynical skeptics have often complained that a magician or some sort of fraud expert should have been present during public LENR demos to check for possible tricks that regular scientists couldn't think of. Their wish has been fulfilled. Cheers, S.A.
Re: [Vo]:Defkalion webcast officially confirmed
This was on their website (see italian below). Had to dig it out of google cache though. It'll be interesting to get the names of the individuals that show up at the demo. Patenting cold fusionhttp://www.queryonline.it/2013/05/20/brevettare-la-fusione-fredda/ Query http://www.cicap.org/veneto/aggregator/sources/6 - Mon, 05/20/2013 - 09:57 On April 16 the patent office of the United States of America issued the license number US8419919B1 to a project entitled *System and method for generating particles* (system and method for the generation of particles). Behind the name maybe unattractive but is hiding yet another return to the glory of cold fusion. In an article in the weekly investigation *Left* on May 11 **( herehttp://www.left.it/2013/05/09/la-rivincita-della-fusione-fredda/10274/ is an excerpt from the site of the head and herehttp://www.swas.polito.it/services/Rassegna_Stampa/dett.asp?id=4028-171642527 the full text in press), we read: He had to change his name, such as inconvenient witnesses. But after 24 years of ignominy, cold fusion got his first official recognition by the U.S. government: April 16 the U.S. Patent Office has awarded the United States of America represented by the Secretary of the Navy 'a license from the title System and method for generating particles. The processes postulated a time with the name of *cold fusion* are today more properly indicated with the acronym LENR, or *Low Energy Nuclear Reactions* (low energy nuclear reactions). This detail master has nothing to do with but a witch hunt against the cold fusion, but rather a matter of rigor: nuclear fusion is in fact only one of the possible nuclear reactions with energy release and particle production. Another, more general issue concerns the patent system. Over and over again we come across inventions often of dubious value and functioning of doubt which purports to give credibility and scientific foundation based on the fact that you have obtained a patent. A patent is not in any way a substitute for a scientific paper in *peer review* and is not a statement of recognition of the operation by the state issuing it. What is recognized with the patent as a result of the periodic payment of a tax, it is only the authorship of the invention filed together with the legal rights associated with it (which vary depending on the case). In any case, the Patent Office does not check (and can not verify, serve encyclopedic knowledge) that the invention functions. Obtain a patent for an invention is, therefore, much easier than to recognize a theory by the scientific community through the proper process of experimentation and publication of the results and it is for this reason that the patent was often used as a ploy to make public and a sense official theory or discovery controversial as in the case in question, in fact patented a method or a tool suggesting that, since this would only work if the underlying theory was valid, the acceptance of the patent also includes a ' implicit acceptance of the validity of the theory. From the reading of a patent is not possible to evaluate the correctness of the assumptions behind them, and, in the case of repeating, there is no guarantee that the invention behaves as alleged. One described in the patent April 16 ( herehttp://www.freepatentsonline.com/8419919.html a copy pdf) is a system manufacturer / particle detector (presumably protons and alpha particles): revelation is entrusted to the CR-39, a plastic material already widely used in applications dosimetric as well as in optical (unbreakable lenses for spectacles are made with this material), while the production is essentially the prerogative of an electrolytic cell with Palladium salts in heavy water. On one of the two electrodes is realized a deposition of Palladium, which, according to the theorists of LENR, would act as a trap for protons or deuterons enabling the achievement of concentrations sufficient to reactions to occur at low energy. Details aside, nothing particularly innovative compared to the cell of Fleischmann and Pons in 1989. The only effective novelty consists in coupling the normal electric field power of the cell with a magnetic field, a technical solution, which should make the advantage of greater speed in the filing process. As said, then, it seems that the recent obtaining a patent, on the other queued since 2007, adds much to the discussion on the existence of LENR and on their validity as an energy source. We can certainly speak of an official recognition from either the United States government, nor by the scientific community. Categories: Latest from the webhttp://www.cicap.org/veneto/aggregator/categories/1 Brevettare la fusione freddahttp://www.queryonline.it/2013/05/20/brevettare-la-fusione-fredda/ Query http://www.cicap.org/veneto/aggregator/sources/6 - Mon, 05/20/2013 - 09:57 Lo scorso 16 Aprile l’ufficio brevetti degli Stati Uniti d’America ha assegnato la licenza numero US8419919B1
Re: [Vo]:Defkalion webcast officially confirmed
On 2013-07-16 22:58, H Veeder wrote: Copied from a facebook group. Harry Officially confirmed. A couple more links in Italian confirming this news, but not exactly adding yet a whole lot of new details: http://22passi.blogspot.it/2013/07/fusione-fredda-diretta-streaming-22.html http://www.triwu.it/sezione-in-primo-piano/-/asset_publisher/E9rU/content/la-fusione-fredda-va-online Cheers, S.A.
Re: [Vo]:Defkalion webcast officially confirmed
The American version: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Committee_for_Skeptical_Inquiry fondly referred to as PSICOPs.
[Vo]:Fwd: Getting good reviews
-Original Message- From: fznidarsic fznidar...@aol.com To: vortexl vort...@eskimo.com Sent: Wed, Jul 17, 2013 11:34 am Subject: Getting good reviews I have been hammered by peer reviewed editors. They try to write their own papers by changing mine to such an extent. they claim, They will make something of it. This comment has appeared at least 3 times. After all of the changes, for the worse, then they say the paper makes no sense. Amazon and B N have let me write what I wanted. Spome very good reviews and comments have started to come. They technology and science of cold fusion will not arrive through the system. It will arise, years late, in spite of it. http://www.amazon.com/Energy-Cold-Fusion-Antigravity-Znidarsic/product-reviews/1480270237/ref=dp_top_cm_cr_acr_txt?ie=UTF8showViewpoints=1
Re: [Vo]:Defkalion webcast officially confirmed
The odds of this group returning a positive report are higher than for other skeptics societies due to potential co-national bias. The appearance of a conflict of interest would be enough to provide an excuse for the PSICOPs to ignore the report -- although PSICOPs might not go so far as to denounce a sibling group in Italy. On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 10:22 AM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote: The American version: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Committee_for_Skeptical_Inquiry fondly referred to as PSICOPs.
[Vo]:Re: 21st century tech:Energy Update: Speculation on the Cold Fusion Front
there is a followup today... http://www.21stcentech.com/post-yesterday-cold-fusion-produces-plethora-opinions/ about rossi's test, about the rewiring it seems that Levi tell it during an Italian interview. http://www.lenr-forum.com/showthread.php?1554-Rossi-3rd-party-testsp=5368viewfull=1#post5368 I would need a better reference 2013/7/16 Alain Sepeda alain.sep...@gmail.com Energy Update: Speculation on the Cold Fusion Fronthttp://www.21stcentech.com/energy-update-speculation-cold-fusion-front/ http://www.21stcentech.com/energy-update-speculation-cold-fusion-front/ anyway as usual they miss most of the story... being so much uninformed when you claim to inform is , usual and shocking. about e-cat test, they say that e-cat test was started when they came. I agree, but they also says they have rewired all... between the lies and errors of the skeptics and the various claims of testers, it start to be hard to understand... can someone tell me whether or not the e-cat wiring was re-done ?
[Vo]:Cosmologist claims Universe may not be expanding
Cosmologist claims Universe may not be expanding Particles' changing masses could explain why distant galaxies appear to be rushing away. http://www.nature.com/news/cosmologist-claims-universe-may-not-be-expanding-1.13379 harry
[Vo]:Fwd: The Big Question
-Original Message- From: no-reply no-re...@web.renewableenergyworld.com To: Frank Znidarsic Website Contact fznidar...@aol.com Sent: Wed, Jul 17, 2013 12:13 pm Subject: The Big Question View the online version here Renewable Energy World Magazine Dear Frank Znidarsic Website Contact, I would like to inform you of a new exciting editorial opportunity for your company. As part of our series The Big Question in the September/October issue of Renewable Energy World Magazine, we will be asking industry executives for their thoughts on the question below. We invite you to answer this question or forward this note to someone in your organization who might be interested. All responses will be considered for possible publication either online or in our new digital edition of Renewable Energy World magazine. We will highlight a collection representative of the responses we receive, pair them with a photo of the contributor and publish these in our September/October magazine issue or online at RenewableEnergyWorld.com for the world's largest renewable energy audience to read. Please take a minute to share your thoughts with us on this important topic. Thank you for your continued support and for being a part of the largest community of Renewable Energy professionals and enthusiasts worldwide. The deadline to submit your response is Wednesday, July 24, 2013. The question: Several countries, such as Scotland and the Philippines, have recently announced plans to be powered by 100 percent renewable energy. What are the major barriers that these countries face in order to reach this goal? Is 100 percent renewables always achievable or desirable? To submit your response: • Please limit your response to 300 words • When you send in your your response, please include a high-resolution headshot and a bio no longer than 50 words. • Please submit to m...@pennwell.com with The Big Question in the subject field All responses must be received by Wednesday, July 24, 2013. Responses will be considered for the next issue of Renewable Energy World magazine and/or may be posted online at RenewableEnergyWorld.com. Please note that sending in a response is not a guarantee of publication. Editors reserve the right to edit responses for clarity. © 2013. PennWell Corporation. All Rights Reserved. You are invited to view this message because you are a registered reader of RenewableEnergyWorld.com. If you no longer wish to receive emails please click hereto manage your subscription, or send an email to rem...@renewableenergyworld.com This message was sent to Frank Znidarsic Website Contact by RenewableEnergyWorld.com- 98 Spitbrook Rd - Nashua, NH 03062 - United States of America
Re: [Vo]:Fwd: Getting good reviews
In reply to fznidar...@aol.com's message of Wed, 17 Jul 2013 11:35:18 -0400 (EDT): Hi, [snip] I have been hammered by peer reviewed editors. They try to write their own papers by changing mine to such an extent. they claim, They will make something of it. This comment has appeared at least 3 times. After all of the changes, for the worse, then they say the paper makes no sense. That's a good sign Frank. If they don't understand it, it must be far enough from the mainstream of thought that there is a chance that it represents a breakthrough. ;) (However it also means that you haven't done enough to bridge the gap in understanding.) Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
Re: [Vo]:Defkalion webcast officially confirmed
http://www.drboblog.com/defkalion-public-demonstration/ Unconfirmed, but public demos might be in Vancouver and Milano. Supposedly there will be announcements on EGO OUT and Defkalion website. From drboblog: *Breaking News: Defkalion Green Technologies have arranged for two public demonstrations during next week. This company originates from Greece but struggled with fundings and left for Canada last year because of the delicate economic situation in their home country. Company will perform 2 demos from 2 different locations (Vancouver and Milano) during next week. First demonstration 22 July 2013 For European Audience the demos will be 23rd July. (possible earlier) http://www.peswiki.com/index.php/Main_Page Before these demonstrations announcements will be made on EGO OUT and Defkalions webpages. It is the companies R5 reactor that will be tested and science journals and skeptics have been invited to participate. Lets hope for the best… God Bless!*
[Vo]:Rossi vrs. Defkalion, 12 hours streaming grudge match
Be there! See it live! http://22passi.blogspot.com.br/2013/07/fusione-fredda-diretta-streaming-22.html I like the cartoon. I think it should be, okay, I'll see you as in poker. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Fwd: Getting good reviews
Thanks, I started this in my 30's. I am now 60 and have lost my initial enthusiasm. I don't know how Jed keeps going. Frak -Original Message- From: mixent mix...@bigpond.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Wed, Jul 17, 2013 6:23 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Fwd: Getting good reviews In reply to fznidar...@aol.com's message of Wed, 17 Jul 2013 11:35:18 -0400 (EDT): Hi, [snip] I have been hammered by peer reviewed editors. They try to write their own papers by changing mine to such an extent. they claim, They will make something of it. This comment has appeared at least 3 times. After all of the changes, for the worse, then they say the paper makes no sense. That's a good sign Frank. If they don't understand it, it must be far enough from the mainstream of thought that there is a chance that it represents a breakthrough. ;) (However it also means that you haven't done enough to bridge the gap in understanding.) Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
Re: [Vo]:Fwd: Getting good reviews
Martin Fleischmann near his death called it the dreadful research. On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 8:40 PM, fznidar...@aol.com wrote: Thanks, I started this in my 30's. I am now 60 and have lost my initial enthusiasm. I don't know how Jed keeps going. Frak -Original Message- From: mixent mix...@bigpond.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Wed, Jul 17, 2013 6:23 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Fwd: Getting good reviews In reply to fznidar...@aol.com's message of Wed, 17 Jul 2013 11:35:18 -0400 (EDT): Hi, [snip] I have been hammered by peer reviewed editors. They try to write their own papers by changing mine to such an extent. they claim, They will make something of it. This comment has appeared at least 3 times. After all of the changes, for the worse, then they say the paper makes no sense. That's a good sign Frank. If they don't understand it, it must be far enough from the mainstream of thought that there is a chance that it represents a breakthrough. ;) (However it also means that you haven't done enough to bridge the gap in understanding.) Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
[Vo]:Fwd: Getting good reviews
This guy gives all good reviews and sends copies to his son. I don't know him. I am half way through this book it is well written and understandable it is one of those books once you get started reading you find it hard to put down I spent a good part of my sunday reading this book and will most likely read it again and send my son a copy I would highly suggest you buy your self a copy and read it. -Original Message- From: fznidarsic fznidar...@aol.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Wed, Jul 17, 2013 11:35 am Subject: Fwd: Getting good reviews -Original Message- From: fznidarsic fznidar...@aol.com To: vortexl vort...@eskimo.com Sent: Wed, Jul 17, 2013 11:34 am Subject: Getting good reviews I have been hammered by peer reviewed editors. They try to write their own papers by changing mine to such an extent. they claim, They will make something of it. This comment has appeared at least 3 times. After all of the changes, for the worse, then they say the paper makes no sense. Amazon and B N have let me write what I wanted. Spome very good reviews and comments have started to come. They technology and science of cold fusion will not arrive through the system. It will arise, years late, in spite of it. http://www.amazon.com/Energy-Cold-Fusion-Antigravity-Znidarsic/product-reviews/1480270237/ref=dp_top_cm_cr_acr_txt?ie=UTF8showViewpoints=1
Re: [Vo]:Fwd: Getting good reviews
fznidar...@aol.com wrote: Thanks, I started this in my 30's. I am now 60 and have lost my initial enthusiasm. I don't know how Jed keeps going. Spite! I am bent to know, By the worst means, the worst. For mine own good, All causes shall give way: I am in blood Stepp'd in so far that, should I wade no more, Returning were as tedious as go o'er: Strange things I have in head, that will to hand; Which must be acted ere they may be scann'd. - Jed
[Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Fwd: Getting good reviews
Macbeth? Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE Smartphone - Reply message - From: Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]:Fwd: Getting good reviews Date: Wed, Jul 17, 2013 10:09 PM fznidar...@aol.com wrote: Thanks, I started this in my 30's. I am now 60 and have lost my initial enthusiasm. I don't know how Jed keeps going. Spite! I am bent to know, By the worst means, the worst. For mine own good, All causes shall give way: I am in blood Stepp'd in so far that, should I wade no more, Returning were as tedious as go o'er: Strange things I have in head, that will to hand; Which must be acted ere they may be scann'd. - Jed
[Vo]:New preprints from Proton-21
Proton-21 has just published three new preprints: Control of multiscale systems with constraints. 1. Basic principles of the concept of evolution of systems with varying constraints http://arxiv.org/abs/1307.4658 Control of multiscale systems with constraints. 2. Fractal nuclear isomers and clusters http://arxiv.org/abs/1307.4663 Control over multiscale systems with constraints. 3. Geometrodynamics of the evolution of systems with varying constraints http://arxiv.org/abs/1307.4665 PROTON-21 website URL: http://www.proton21.com.ua/index_en.html
Re: [Vo]:Cosmologist claims Universe may not be expanding
On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 10:19 AM, H Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote: From the article: The idea [of increasing mass] may be plausible, but it comes with a big problem: it can't be tested. Mass is what’s known as a dimensional quantity, and can be measured only relative to something else. What I don't quite understand is why astrophysicists are comfortable placing confidence in the expanding universe hypothesis when it is epistemologically indistinguishable from this one (I take the article's word for it). It seems like when two explanations are both indistinguishable and sensible, neither should be given preference. Perhaps they were simply unaware of the possibility. I'm excluding explanations along the lines of invisible pink unicorns, which aren't really plausible. A third possible explanation for the redshift, I suspect, is that the mass of things is staying the same but the speed of light is changing over time. Another one might be that time is slowing down or speeding up (I'm not sure if this could account for the redshift). I suppose you could have all four happening simultaneously -- expansion, change in mass, change in the rate at which time progresses and change in the speed of light. Eric
Re: [Vo]:Cosmologist claims Universe may not be expanding
A 4th possibility... Time does not exist and our 3 dimensions of space are decaying and unfolding concurrently, which varies based upon location in the universe. The good news is we are not getting older.We are decaying “Time is an illusion.” - Albert Einstein Stewart darkmattersalot.com On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 10:28 PM, Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 10:19 AM, H Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote: From the article: The idea [of increasing mass] may be plausible, but it comes with a big problem: it can't be tested. Mass is what’s known as a dimensional quantity, and can be measured only relative to something else. What I don't quite understand is why astrophysicists are comfortable placing confidence in the expanding universe hypothesis when it is epistemologically indistinguishable from this one (I take the article's word for it). It seems like when two explanations are both indistinguishable and sensible, neither should be given preference. Perhaps they were simply unaware of the possibility. I'm excluding explanations along the lines of invisible pink unicorns, which aren't really plausible. A third possible explanation for the redshift, I suspect, is that the mass of things is staying the same but the speed of light is changing over time. Another one might be that time is slowing down or speeding up (I'm not sure if this could account for the redshift). I suppose you could have all four happening simultaneously -- expansion, change in mass, change in the rate at which time progresses and change in the speed of light. Eric
Re: [Vo]:Cosmologist claims Universe may not be expanding
On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 10:28 PM, Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 10:19 AM, H Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote: From the article: The idea [of increasing mass] may be plausible, but it comes with a big problem: it can't be tested. Mass is what’s known as a dimensional quantity, and can be measured only relative to something else. What I don't quite understand is why astrophysicists are comfortable placing confidence in the expanding universe hypothesis when it is epistemologically indistinguishable from this one (I take the article's word for it). It seems like when two explanations are both indistinguishable and sensible, neither should be given preference. Perhaps they were simply unaware of the possibility. I'm excluding explanations along the lines of invisible pink unicorns, which aren't really plausible. A third possible explanation for the redshift, I suspect, is that the mass of things is staying the same but the speed of light is changing over time. Another one might be that time is slowing down or speeding up (I'm not sure if this could account for the redshift). I suppose you could have all four happening simultaneously -- expansion, change in mass, change in the rate at which time progresses and change in the speed of light. Eric I I can't tell if the new mass is created ex-nihilo or if energy is continually being converted into new mass. If the cosmology requires that the conservation of energy applies globally then it implies energy of the universe is slowly being ingested by matter. Harry
