Re: [Vo]:Meta-analysis of the cause of failure of Cold Fusion experiments?
Gas poisoning is a result of the NMR active nature of the poison. The poison wastes the life blood of LENR: magnetic energy because it converts that energy into RF radiation. Air is a deadly LENR poison because it contains nitrogen, a NMR active gas. On Sun, Aug 3, 2014 at 1:28 AM, Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com wrote: All excellent papers- very scientific. The cause of failed experiment is actually trivial- only surfaces free of adsorbed gases can work - initiate LENR. Deep degassing is a must- and in an electro-chemical cell it is impossible- almost. Piantelli (see his EU Patent) and DGT (see the ICCF-18 demo) have confirmed the necessity of gas free have confirmed this. In case this elementary condition is fulfilled the excess heat production can achieve the levels of the unique cathode 64 of Energetics- much higher working temperatures are necessary for a reasonable production of active sites. This idea was never taken seriously by Ed Storms and other authorities in the field- and irreproducibility reigns. Is this just a coincidence or is causal- we will probably never know. Gas phase. high temperature NIH generators will be studied and go commercially while electrochemical cells with their poisoned cathodes will be used in the labs...less and less (masochism has limits) NIH has NOT much to learn from PdD protium and deuterium the most different isotopes of all- different species actually. Where one works, the other does not (in LENR)- Mizuno's new D works is a brand new way for D. Peter On Sun, Aug 3, 2014 at 5:14 AM, Alan Fletcher a...@well.com wrote: Also Cravens and Letts 2008 : The Enabling Criteria Of Electrochemical Heat: Beyond Reasonable Doubt http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/CravensDtheenablin.pdf -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
Re: [Vo]:Can the Hydrino explain excess heat in NiH and PdD systems?
Mills himself says NO, hydrinos have nothing to do with LENR. Peter On Sun, Aug 3, 2014 at 12:23 AM, Jojo Iznart jojoiznar...@gmail.com wrote: Folks, I am asking this question because I truly do not know the answer and clearly, I am not qualified to even begin to answer it. Maybe those who have actually studied Mills GUTCP book can help answer this question. (Mike and Robin? up for some calculations.) This is a bounce off the other thread Mills hydrinos is not LENR where people speculated that hydrinos is probably not LENR. But it seems to me that if we are not so blinded by our own pet theories, that we can properly evaluate if Hydrinos H1/4 state really can explain the excess anomalous heat we get with NiH and PdD systems. Specifically for now, I want to focus on the energy balance and reactions rates. Assuming for now, that hyrdinos are the causative factor, can it explain Rossi's high temp results with the Hotcat? Consider this scenario for now. Suppose Nickel nanopowder has a catalytic function like Titanium nanopowder. The Nickel nanopowder would catalyze transition to H1/4 state and explode like we've seen in Mills explosion. Some of the nanopowder explodes, scatters, melts but still able to catalyze further reactions, cause they are still nano powder, albeit a finer nano powder like Mills claims. Hence, you have a continuous recycling of nickel nanopowder capable of catalyzing H1/4 transitions. The Temperature controls (for some reason - this is the Miracle in this scenario) the catalyzation and reaction rates. When it reaches a certain point, the reaction rates overshoot, runs away and melts the reactor. The above scenario would explain a few stubborn facts we know about LENR reactions that can never be explained satisfactorily otherwise 1. This would explain the positive feedback and run away reaction in many experiments. Control the temps, otherwise too much hydrino transistions occur and KABOOM! 2. This would also explain why there is no hard radiation. 3. This would explain why the reactions continue even at extremely high temperatures, enough to melt whatever Nickel nanostructure NAEs and even possibly to sublimate some nanopowders of Nickel itself. 4. This is certainly a more satisfying explanation than the BEC soliton formation at extremely high temps and all the convoluted explanations on how to thermalize the gammas or other hard radiation. 5. This is certainly a more satisfying explanation than BEC metaphasic shielding protecting the nickel nanostructures from melting. (Metaphasic shielding is another miracle that is added to the repetoire of miracles that need to be explained. It seems our theories require more miracles to explain a miracle. We end up with more miracles to explain than what we began with.) 6. (This next point is speculation so may not be a valid point.) This is certainly a more satisfying explanation to the continued presence of NAE to cause reactions to continue up to the runaway melting point of the reactor. It seems to me that once the reactor has melted, the inside environment would have been exposed to outside air hence should have quenched the BEC or solitons or whatever it is, It seems that a tiny hole in the reactor would have quickly quenched the BEC, soltions, etc reaction before it creates a bigger hole. Tell me if I am wrong on this? Didn't the Levi first Hotcat totally melt? This tells me that the reaction continued even after the inside was exposed to outside air. If you are knowledgeable enough and understand Hydrinos enough, please help me do the calculations of the energy balance. Can the hydrino transition even be catalyzed by high temps instead of high currents like in the Suncell? Jojo -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
Re: [Vo]:Meta-analysis of the cause of failure of Cold Fusion experiments?
yes that is it, even if the more recent of McKubre is more synthetic... 2014-08-03 4:14 GMT+02:00 Alan Fletcher a...@well.com: Also Cravens and Letts 2008 : The Enabling Criteria Of Electrochemical Heat: Beyond Reasonable Doubt http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/CravensDtheenablin.pdf
Re: [Vo]:Meta-analysis of the cause of failure of Cold Fusion experiments?
2014-08-03 7:28 GMT+02:00 Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com: species my question are mostly for argumentation (I'm preparing a kit for skeptics... hopeless I know). I just need phenomenological result with reference to data, involving failed experiments. really some damaged brain don't understand that physics is not a medical study, that the cause of failure can be for unknown parameters and bad setup. If I was not informed of transistor history by my education i would sure condider that as a poor MSc I missed something that PhD only can understand... anyway finance groupthink bibble and corp functional stupidity learned me that the highest education is prone to groupthink, structurally, not individually. the ability of some to stay locked is fascinating... as much as my ability to continue argumenting with walls... in a way it is funny like cat playing with a mouse. goodtraining for the real fight.
[Vo]:A collection of round magnets coming apart from centrifugal forces
A collection of round magnets coming apart from centrifugal forces https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kNbH8Y1HgQQ Harry
RE: [Vo]:Can the Hydrino explain excess heat in NiH and PdD systems?
Sunday Sermon Many years ago I think it had been speculated that very early in BLP's inception, Dr. Mills made both a conscious and strategic decision to distance the body of his work from the CF/LENR field as quickly as possible. After watching the public skewering of Pons and Fleischmann I could see how Dr. Mills would want to make sure nobody would possibly find any kind of similarities pertaining to what BLP is trying to accomplish and attempt to compare their due diligence with what's been going on within the much more federated CANR-LENR field. Of course, it didn't take long for BLP to run into its own unique form of banishment from the scientific establishment. Dr. Mills' own audacious CQM theory pretty much got him black balled. But as many of us realize: From today's clutch of labeled misfits, rebels, and outcasts sometimes are hatched the revered heroes of tomorrow. Baby birds seldom look attractive when freshly hatched... except perhaps to snakes. Clowns? I don't know. I believe there has been speculation that both Mills and the LENR field may have initially branched out from the trunk of the same tree. For example both parties experimented with nickel. Both still do today. Today, it seems to me that the same tree of knowledge has many more branches and leaves to pick from. Hopefully, the BLP branch may soon bear fruit. ...Perhaps a winter harvest if we're lucky, and if the fruit flies don't arrive first. /Sunday Sermon Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson svjart.orionworks.com zazzle.com/orionworks From: Peter Gluck [mailto:peter.gl...@gmail.com] Sent: Sunday, August 03, 2014 1:59 AM To: VORTEX Subject: Re: [Vo]:Can the Hydrino explain excess heat in NiH and PdD systems? Mills himself says NO, hydrinos have nothing to do with LENR. Peter On Sun, Aug 3, 2014 at 12:23 AM, Jojo Iznart jojoiznar...@gmail.com wrote: Folks, I am asking this question because I truly do not know the answer and clearly, I am not qualified to even begin to answer it. Maybe those who have actually studied Mills GUTCP book can help answer this question. (Mike and Robin? up for some calculations.) This is a bounce off the other thread Mills hydrinos is not LENR where people speculated that hydrinos is probably not LENR. But it seems to me that if we are not so blinded by our own pet theories, that we can properly evaluate if Hydrinos H1/4 state really can explain the excess anomalous heat we get with NiH and PdD systems. Specifically for now, I want to focus on the energy balance and reactions rates. Assuming for now, that hyrdinos are the causative factor, can it explain Rossi's high temp results with the Hotcat? Consider this scenario for now. Suppose Nickel nanopowder has a catalytic function like Titanium nanopowder. The Nickel nanopowder would catalyze transition to H1/4 state and explode like we've seen in Mills explosion. Some of the nanopowder explodes, scatters, melts but still able to catalyze further reactions, cause they are still nano powder, albeit a finer nano powder like Mills claims. Hence, you have a continuous recycling of nickel nanopowder capable of catalyzing H1/4 transitions. The Temperature controls (for some reason - this is the Miracle in this scenario) the catalyzation and reaction rates. When it reaches a certain point, the reaction rates overshoot, runs away and melts the reactor. The above scenario would explain a few stubborn facts we know about LENR reactions that can never be explained satisfactorily otherwise 1. This would explain the positive feedback and run away reaction in many experiments. Control the temps, otherwise too much hydrino transistions occur and KABOOM! 2. This would also explain why there is no hard radiation. 3. This would explain why the reactions continue even at extremely high temperatures, enough to melt whatever Nickel nanostructure NAEs and even possibly to sublimate some nanopowders of Nickel itself. 4. This is certainly a more satisfying explanation than the BEC soliton formation at extremely high temps and all the convoluted explanations on how to thermalize the gammas or other hard radiation. 5. This is certainly a more satisfying explanation than BEC metaphasic shielding protecting the nickel nanostructures from melting. (Metaphasic shielding is another miracle that is added to the repetoire of miracles that need to be explained. It seems our theories require more miracles to explain a miracle. We end up with more miracles to explain than what we began with.) 6. (This next point is speculation so may not be a valid point.) This is certainly a more satisfying explanation to the continued presence of NAE to cause reactions to continue up to the runaway melting point of the reactor. It seems to me that once the reactor has melted, the inside environment would have been exposed to outside air hence should
Re: [Vo]:Can the Hydrino explain excess heat in NiH and PdD systems?
Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com wrote: Mills himself says NO, hydrinos have nothing to do with LENR. It makes no difference what he says. Whether it does or it does not have a connection to LENR is a fact of nature, to be decided by experiment. Some researchers have the odd notion that what they discover belongs to them in a sense, and they have the privilege of deciding what is it is and how it works theoretically. - Jed
RE: [Vo]:Can the Hydrino explain excess heat in NiH and PdD systems?
Jed sez: Some researchers have the odd notion that what they discover belongs to them in a sense, and they have the privilege of deciding what is it is and how it works theoretically. Being afflicted with a God Complex is an equal opportunity employer. Doesn't seem to matter whether one is an atheist or not. Personally, I admire what Dr. Mills has been attempting to accomplish over the past 20+ years. I honestly hope he succeeds. It certainly would save me the embarrassment of having to eat crow for having allowed myself to be deluded. What can I say, who doesn't want disposable electricity? For an education of a different sort, I would urge many who are new to Vortex-l to browse Dr. Mill's Yahoo [SocietyforClassicalPhysics] group. There you will read posts from individuals trying their best to acquire a better grasp of Dr. Mills opus CQM theory. Meanwhile, other posters are earnestly trying to acquire a better understanding of how the SunCell technology might work out in the real world. They really want to help. They are actively looking for potential engineering weak points and how best to strengthen them. But these aren't the posts I'm interested in pointing out here. You will also notice a plethora of posts from numerous well-wishers and Dr. Mills admirers who have already, in their own minds, divided the bear before it has actually been killed. Many are also frothing at the bit, wanting to go after all the critics, debunkers, and naysayers who made business difficult for BLP for the past couple of decades. This, of course, includes skewering Wikipedia. They taste revenge. Take no prisoners. The insanity here is that this attitude is essentially built on a tenuous foundation of sand. It's all based on technological engineering assumptions (backed by an audacious theory) that has not yet been fully verified in the form of a prototype that can be independently deployed out in the field. IMHO, this is folly of the worst sort. It shows the naivety of some of these posters. I wonder how many of them have personally experienced how grueling and difficult actual progress in this field has turned out to be. I suspect many of them are newcomers to the exotic alternate energy field, and as such have no true understanding or appreciation of how difficult and tedious it is to remain faithful to this field year after year without losing hope... dare I say, of losing faith. For heaven's sake, step back for a moment, and watch what's happening! Things are in motion. We really don't know what's going to happen next! There's plenty to watch for. But wait for the prototype. Wait for the findings that these field tested prototypes will hopefully reveal. You don't have that much longer to wait for a thumbs up or down. If positive, then you can give yourself permission to gloat... but NOT BEFORE! Meanwhile, I've read posts where Dr. Mills has personally opined that many observers and followers within the CF/LENR field behave as if they were a bunch of cult admirers hopelessly invested in their own deluded theoretical causes. Granted, there may be an element of truth to some of those perceptions, but... The irony here is that, IMO, The Doctor has already pretty much achieved an equivalent stature of cult-hood, of GodHood, given to him by his own growing cabal of admirers. The promotion was accomplished without any assistance or advise from the CANR-LENR group. Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson svjart.orionworks.com zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]:Can the Hydrino explain excess heat in NiH and PdD systems?
it is only one strange thing re the possible connection- it seems Randy is very silent about deuterinos and tritinos. these could tell about some link with classic LENR. In 2011 he rejected the work of Rossi and of Piantelli too. Not possible he said. Peter On Sun, Aug 3, 2014 at 7:40 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com wrote: Mills himself says NO, hydrinos have nothing to do with LENR. It makes no difference what he says. Whether it does or it does not have a connection to LENR is a fact of nature, to be decided by experiment. Some researchers have the odd notion that what they discover belongs to them in a sense, and they have the privilege of deciding what is it is and how it works theoretically. - Jed -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
Re: [Vo]:Can the Hydrino explain excess heat in NiH and PdD systems?
Is not the probable energy density of the TIP1 report, well above those numbers you get from the first hydrino states. Either Rossi is producing very small hydrinos, or it is nuclear, heck we don't know what can happen in these low energy nuclear reactions if so, total mass to energy transformation? Anyway we would know when TIP2 arrives, my bet is on nuclear origin which maybe is catalyzed by hydrino formations due to probably a very high energy density. On Sun, Aug 3, 2014 at 7:44 PM, Orionworks - Steven Vincent Johnson orionwo...@charter.net wrote: Jed sez: Some researchers have the odd notion that what they discover belongs to them in a sense, and they have the privilege of deciding what is it is and how it works theoretically. Being afflicted with a God Complex is an equal opportunity employer. Doesn't seem to matter whether one is an atheist or not. Personally, I admire what Dr. Mills has been attempting to accomplish over the past 20+ years. I honestly hope he succeeds. It certainly would save me the embarrassment of having to eat crow for having allowed myself to be deluded. What can I say, who doesn't want disposable electricity? For an education of a different sort, I would urge many who are new to Vortex-l to browse Dr. Mill's Yahoo [SocietyforClassicalPhysics] group. There you will read posts from individuals trying their best to acquire a better grasp of Dr. Mills opus CQM theory. Meanwhile, other posters are earnestly trying to acquire a better understanding of how the SunCell technology might work out in the real world. They really want to help. They are actively looking for potential engineering weak points and how best to strengthen them. But these aren't the posts I'm interested in pointing out here. You will also notice a plethora of posts from numerous well-wishers and Dr. Mills admirers who have already, in their own minds, divided the bear before it has actually been killed. Many are also frothing at the bit, wanting to go after all the critics, debunkers, and naysayers who made business difficult for BLP for the past couple of decades. This, of course, includes skewering Wikipedia. They taste revenge. Take no prisoners. The insanity here is that this attitude is essentially built on a tenuous foundation of sand. It's all based on technological engineering assumptions (backed by an audacious theory) that has not yet been fully verified in the form of a prototype that can be independently deployed out in the field. IMHO, this is folly of the worst sort. It shows the naivety of some of these posters. I wonder how many of them have personally experienced how grueling and difficult actual progress in this field has turned out to be. I suspect many of them are newcomers to the exotic alternate energy field, and as such have no true understanding or appreciation of how difficult and tedious it is to remain faithful to this field year after year without losing hope... dare I say, of losing faith. For heaven's sake, step back for a moment, and watch what's happening! Things are in motion. We really don't know what's going to happen next! There's plenty to watch for. But wait for the prototype. Wait for the findings that these field tested prototypes will hopefully reveal. You don't have that much longer to wait for a thumbs up or down. If positive, then you can give yourself permission to gloat... but NOT BEFORE! Meanwhile, I've read posts where Dr. Mills has personally opined that many observers and followers within the CF/LENR field behave as if they were a bunch of cult admirers hopelessly invested in their own deluded theoretical causes. Granted, there may be an element of truth to some of those perceptions, but... The irony here is that, IMO, The Doctor has already pretty much achieved an equivalent stature of cult-hood, of GodHood, given to him by his own growing cabal of admirers. The promotion was accomplished without any assistance or advise from the CANR-LENR group. Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson svjart.orionworks.com zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]:Can the Hydrino explain excess heat in NiH and PdD systems?
This insight into the man does not speak well for this man's desire to reveal ultimate truth. It sounds like his views of the laws of nature are skewed by the needs of his ego and his business. The ascetic truth seeker is most often grounded into dust by the demons of our nature. This man seeks to avoid those demons by trading off against the pursuit of truth. On Sun, Aug 3, 2014 at 10:35 AM, Orionworks - Steven Vincent Johnson orionwo...@charter.net wrote: Sunday Sermon Many years ago I think it had been speculated that very early in BLP's inception, Dr. Mills made both a conscious and strategic decision to distance the body of his work from the CF/LENR field as quickly as possible. After watching the public skewering of Pons and Fleischmann I could see how Dr. Mills would want to make sure nobody would possibly find any kind of similarities pertaining to what BLP is trying to accomplish and attempt to compare their due diligence with what's been going on within the much more federated CANR-LENR field. Of course, it didn't take long for BLP to run into its own unique form of banishment from the scientific establishment. Dr. Mills' own audacious CQM theory pretty much got him black balled. But as many of us realize: From today's clutch of labeled misfits, rebels, and outcasts sometimes are hatched the revered heroes of tomorrow. Baby birds seldom look attractive when freshly hatched... except perhaps to snakes. Clowns? I don't know. I believe there has been speculation that both Mills and the LENR field may have initially branched out from the trunk of the same tree. For example both parties experimented with nickel. Both still do today. Today, it seems to me that the same tree of knowledge has many more branches and leaves to pick from. Hopefully, the BLP branch may soon bear fruit. ...Perhaps a winter harvest if we're lucky, and if the fruit flies don't arrive first. /Sunday Sermon Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson svjart.orionworks.com zazzle.com/orionworks *From:* Peter Gluck [mailto:peter.gl...@gmail.com] *Sent:* Sunday, August 03, 2014 1:59 AM *To:* VORTEX *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:Can the Hydrino explain excess heat in NiH and PdD systems? Mills himself says NO, hydrinos have nothing to do with LENR. Peter On Sun, Aug 3, 2014 at 12:23 AM, Jojo Iznart jojoiznar...@gmail.com wrote: Folks, I am asking this question because I truly do not know the answer and clearly, I am not qualified to even begin to answer it. Maybe those who have actually studied Mills GUTCP book can help answer this question. (Mike and Robin? up for some calculations.) This is a bounce off the other thread Mills hydrinos is not LENR where people speculated that hydrinos is probably not LENR. But it seems to me that if we are not so blinded by our own pet theories, that we can properly evaluate if Hydrinos H1/4 state really can explain the excess anomalous heat we get with NiH and PdD systems. Specifically for now, I want to focus on the energy balance and reactions rates. Assuming for now, that hyrdinos are the causative factor, can it explain Rossi's high temp results with the Hotcat? Consider this scenario for now. Suppose Nickel nanopowder has a catalytic function like Titanium nanopowder. The Nickel nanopowder would catalyze transition to H1/4 state and explode like we've seen in Mills explosion. Some of the nanopowder explodes, scatters, melts but still able to catalyze further reactions, cause they are still nano powder, albeit a finer nano powder like Mills claims. Hence, you have a continuous recycling of nickel nanopowder capable of catalyzing H1/4 transitions. The Temperature controls (for some reason - this is the Miracle in this scenario) the catalyzation and reaction rates. When it reaches a certain point, the reaction rates overshoot, runs away and melts the reactor. The above scenario would explain a few stubborn facts we know about LENR reactions that can never be explained satisfactorily otherwise 1. This would explain the positive feedback and run away reaction in many experiments. Control the temps, otherwise too much hydrino transistions occur and KABOOM! 2. This would also explain why there is no hard radiation. 3. This would explain why the reactions continue even at extremely high temperatures, enough to melt whatever Nickel nanostructure NAEs and even possibly to sublimate some nanopowders of Nickel itself. 4. This is certainly a more satisfying explanation than the BEC soliton formation at extremely high temps and all the convoluted explanations on how to thermalize the gammas or other hard radiation. 5. This is certainly a more satisfying explanation than BEC metaphasic shielding protecting the nickel nanostructures from melting. (Metaphasic shielding is another miracle that is added to the repetoire of miracles that need to be explained. It seems our theories
Re: [Vo]:Important finding for nanomagnetism LENR
Dave-- Regarding questions about hydrogen nucleus tuning--I would say that the H in a strong magnetic field increases its spin energy in steps separated by multiples of spin quanta. I do not know if the increase in energy results in a mass increase or not--it may. The tuning is seen in the decreased wave length of the H wave function. An oscillating magnetic field can cause the H to jump to a energy state associated with the frequency of the magnetic field. I think the field oscillations, if only modulated around an average field strength, can also tune the H to absorb energy in quanta associated with the magnitude of the field. In a solid state the coupling between various spinners and the direction and magnitude of the field complicates the dynamics. I think the data was basically experimentally determined and that good analytical formula were not generally possible for any given system to specify frequencies or energy quanta. Things may have changed since the early 60’s when I was involved. NMR is a pretty refined field now with finely tuned equipment . The general theory my be different. My working feel for magnetic resonance is old. Bob Sent from Windows Mail From: David Roberson Sent: Friday, August 1, 2014 11:17 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Bob, you seem to have a good working knowledge of MRI devices so I have a few questions for you. Does the emission frequency of the hydrogen nucleus become tuned by the level of the external super magnetic field? How much tuning is seen during normal operation and in research? The reason I ask is that it is obvious that the energy levels would be very close together if they can be detected by variation in the RF frequencies emitted. Then one would ask how far upwards in frequency(energy quanta) does this effect translate? And finally, would you expect the spin coupling of this nature to exist at the much higher energy levels that are seen in LENR devices? It is not clear to me yet, perhaps due to some hang up, how far apart the various energy levels due to spin states are in nuclei. What would determine how close together each step would be to its neighbors? Is this a measurement determined quantity or calculated by a really good formula? Dave -Original Message- From: Bob Cook frobertc...@hotmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Fri, Aug 1, 2014 2:35 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Important finding for nanomagnetism LENR Jones and Axil-- As You may guess, I tend to agree with your considerations regarding spin coupling and magnetic resonances. The intense fields at small dimensions allowed by the nano size structures is an inference that I have long held. Keep up the good discovery work. I wonder if any of the Professors at the University of Strasbourg are in the group trying to determine the theory of Rossi’s TPT? I’m heading to the University of Bologna in 6 weeks and hope to talk with the folks there about their ideas. I will report back asap. Bob Cook Sent from Windows Mail From: Axil Axil Sent: Friday, August 1, 2014 8:21 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com If a magnetic force is produced by an atomic level cause whose dimensions are nanoscale, and the intensity of the magnetic force at 20 cm is 1 tesla. By the cube law relationship, the intensity of the magnetic source as produced on the nanoscale can be reckoned as 2*10^^8 cubed or something like 8*10^^24 tesla. On Fri, Aug 1, 2014 at 11:37 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: http://phys.org/news/2014-07-tiny-magnets-huge-fields-nanoscale.html#nwlt Doudin et al - at University of Strasbourg propose that nano ferromagnetic electrodes can create powerful localized force fields which are tuned by an external magnetic field. Localized field is a key. Inverse square power laws can make a large difference. Their finding can be understood as similar to a precondition for nanomagnetism in LENR. Of course, this paper is ostensibly not related to LENR, so it would also be a mistake to try to read too much into it. One must first understand the nuances of superparamagnetism, as the gateway to spin-coupling in LENR... then this cross-connection can become apparent. The authors construct nanonickel electrodes in a solution containing paramagnetic molecules and control the electrode's magnetization direction with an external magnetic field. In so doing, they created a conductive molecular-sized switching system which is the chemical equivalent of a spintronics spin valve. Spin coupling is implied. In LENR this molecular level switching would occur at Terahertz blackbody rate of the thermal system, and would act as a pump for extracting spin energy from protons, nickel atoms, or both (as magnons) - which show up as thermal gain in a system where superparamagnetism and superferromagnetism compete with each other. Magnon is another
RE: [Vo]:Can the Hydrino explain excess heat in NiH and PdD systems?
I should clarify a couple of things I recently posted: ...Dr. Mills has personally opined that many observers and followers within the CF/LENR field behave as if they were a bunch of cult admirers hopelessly invested in their own deluded theoretical causes. and The Doctor has already pretty much achieved an equivalent stature of cult-hood, of GodHood, given to him by his own growing cabal of admirers. The promotion was accomplished without any assistance or advise from the CANR-LENR group Let me clear on the point that nowhere in the above statements did I mean to imply that Dr. Mills is personally trying to build a cult following around himself. Quite frankly, he strikes me as being oblivious to the cult that I think is beginning to build around him. He doesn't care about cult worship. IMHO, what really drives Dr. Mills is vindicating his CQM theory. CQM is what Dr. Mills worships. Becoming a cult leader would only be a time-consuming distraction that would keep him from attending to his real mistress. Of equal interest to Dr. Mills is making sure his company, BLP, makes a ton of money for himself, his hard working staff, and his financial investors. Last of all, I think he is sincerely interested in improving the state of the planet. But in the end, it all comes down to whether the promised prototypes perform as promised. Regarding recent commentary concerning ultimate truth... right now I have little interest in anyone's particular brand of ultimate truth. The only truth I am currently interested in is verifying whether the recent BLP demonstrations reveal valid data. When I watch the recent BLP videos I see a lot of crude and awkward looking contraptions running for brief spells. Granted, they all intrigue the hell out of me, but none of them are ready for prime time. The crudeness of these contraptions doesn't bother me. All prototypes freshly hatched out their shells tend to look very ugly in the beginning. Actually, because of their crudeness, I'm less inclined to think I'm being fed a dog and pony show. I hope I'm right on that. Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson svjart.orionworks.com zazzle.com/orionworks From: Orionworks - Steven Vincent Johnson [mailto:orionwo...@charter.net] Sent: Sunday, August 03, 2014 12:44 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: [Vo]:Can the Hydrino explain excess heat in NiH and PdD systems? Jed sez: Some researchers have the odd notion that what they discover belongs to them in a sense, and they have the privilege of deciding what is it is and how it works theoretically. Being afflicted with a God Complex is an equal opportunity employer. Doesn't seem to matter whether one is an atheist or not. Personally, I admire what Dr. Mills has been attempting to accomplish over the past 20+ years. I honestly hope he succeeds. It certainly would save me the embarrassment of having to eat crow for having allowed myself to be deluded. What can I say, who doesn't want disposable electricity? For an education of a different sort, I would urge many who are new to Vortex-l to browse Dr. Mill's Yahoo [SocietyforClassicalPhysics] group. There you will read posts from individuals trying their best to acquire a better grasp of Dr. Mills opus CQM theory. Meanwhile, other posters are earnestly trying to acquire a better understanding of how the SunCell technology might work out in the real world. They really want to help. They are actively looking for potential engineering weak points and how best to strengthen them. But these aren't the posts I'm interested in pointing out here. You will also notice a plethora of posts from numerous well-wishers and Dr. Mills admirers who have already, in their own minds, divided the bear before it has actually been killed. Many are also frothing at the bit, wanting to go after all the critics, debunkers, and naysayers who made business difficult for BLP for the past couple of decades. This, of course, includes skewering Wikipedia. They taste revenge. Take no prisoners. The insanity here is that this attitude is essentially built on a tenuous foundation of sand. It's all based on technological engineering assumptions (backed by an audacious theory) that has not yet been fully verified in the form of a prototype that can be independently deployed out in the field. IMHO, this is folly of the worst sort. It shows the naivety of some of these posters. I wonder how many of them have personally experienced how grueling and difficult actual progress in this field has turned out to be. I suspect many of them are newcomers to the exotic alternate energy field, and as such have no true understanding or appreciation of how difficult and tedious it is to remain faithful to this field year after year without losing hope... dare I say, of losing faith. For heaven's sake, step back for a moment, and watch what's happening! Things are in motion. We
RE: [Vo]:Can the Hydrino explain excess heat in NiH and PdD systems?
Axil, This insight into the man does not speak well for this man's desire to reveal ultimate truth. It sounds like his views of the laws of nature are skewed by the needs of his ego and his business. I tend to disagree with this assumption. What do you mean when you play the ...ultimate truth card? What particular flavor of ultimate truth are you speaking of here. Mills? LENR's? Yours? Do any of these entities have a lock on the ultimate truth? The ascetic truth seeker is most often grounded into dust by the demons of our nature. This man seeks to avoid those demons by trading off against the pursuit of truth. Actually, I'm not quite sure what the point is you are trying to make here. Personally, I think it's remarkable that the Doctor has been able to keep BLP viable for more than 20 years. I see no demons in play here. I see very little dust either. What CEO when faced with the realities of a competitive environment, hasn't said the equivalent of: Accept no other false products other than our own. I think I read something like that in a book somewhere. Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson svjart.orionworks.com zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]:Can the Hydrino explain excess heat in NiH and PdD systems?
*I see no demons in play here. I see very little dust either. What CEO when faced with the realities of a competitive environment, hasn't said the equivalent of: Accept no other false products other than our own. I think I read something like that in a book somewhere. * In real world terms engineers are pathologically honest people. A colleague of mine told me as story: he told the customer for whom he was working the whole truth and nothing but the truth in his dealing with that customer in contravention to the direct orders that he received from his bean counter boss. My colleague thought that the customer should know the truth and not be eventually screwed over. In short order, my colleague lost his job, was banned, and was never rehired. As a real word prerogative and a practical life lessen, when staying in business and making money is more important than dispensing the truth, the pursuit of truth suffers. On Sun, Aug 3, 2014 at 4:14 PM, Orionworks - Steven Vincent Johnson orionwo...@charter.net wrote: Axil, This insight into the man does not speak well for this man's desire to reveal ultimate truth. It sounds like his views of the laws of nature are skewed by the needs of his ego and his business. I tend to disagree with this assumption. What do you mean when you play the ...ultimate truth card? What particular flavor of ultimate truth are you speaking of here. Mills? LENR's? Yours? Do any of these entities have a lock on the ultimate truth? The ascetic truth seeker is most often grounded into dust by the demons of our nature. This man seeks to avoid those demons by trading off against the pursuit of truth. Actually, I'm not quite sure what the point is you are trying to make here. Personally, I think it's remarkable that the Doctor has been able to keep BLP viable for more than 20 years. I see no demons in play here. I see very little dust either. What CEO when faced with the realities of a competitive environment, hasn't said the equivalent of: Accept no other false products other than our own. I think I read something like that in a book somewhere. Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson svjart.orionworks.com zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]:Important finding for nanomagnetism LENR
Bob, I am asking these questions in an attempt to determine the quantum step energy levels associated with spin coupling. Of course there may be a limiting frequency above which the same coupling no longer applies and that would negate my attempt to stretch the effect. If the quantum steps at UV and low X-Ray frequencies were as small as those apparently seen at RF, then I could justify my thoughts about magnetic spin coupling for LENR energy release. Would one consider it possible for the spin resonate frequency to be scaled up directly as the local magnetic field increases? If true, then some of the ideas being floated around about extreme magnetic fields associated with nano sized resonators might offer a solution. Is LENR the big brother of MRI? Dave -Original Message- From: Bob Cook frobertc...@hotmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Sun, Aug 3, 2014 3:08 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Important finding for nanomagnetism LENR Dave-- Regarding questions about hydrogen nucleus tuning--I would say that the H in a strong magnetic field increases its spin energy in steps separated by multiples of spin quanta. I do not know if the increase in energy results in a mass increase or not--it may. The tuning is seen in the decreased wave length of the H wave function. An oscillating magnetic field can cause the H to jump to a energy state associated with the frequency of the magnetic field. I think the field oscillations, if only modulated around an average field strength, can also tune the H to absorb energy in quanta associated with the magnitude of the field. In a solid state the coupling between various spinners and the direction and magnitude of the field complicates the dynamics. I think the data was basically experimentally determined and that good analytical formula were not generally possible for any given system to specify frequencies or energy quanta. Things may have changed since the early 60’s when I was involved. NMR is a pretty refined field now with finely tuned equipment . The general theory my be different. My working feel for magnetic resonance is old. Bob Sent from Windows Mail From: David Roberson Sent: Friday, August 1, 2014 11:17 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Bob, you seem to have a good working knowledge of MRI devices so I have a few questions for you. Does the emission frequency of the hydrogen nucleus become tuned by the level of the external super magnetic field? How much tuning is seen during normal operation and in research? The reason I ask is that it is obvious that the energy levels would be very close together if they can be detected by variation in the RF frequencies emitted. Then one would ask how far upwards in frequency(energy quanta) does this effect translate? And finally, would you expect the spin coupling of this nature to exist at the much higher energy levels that are seen in LENR devices? It is not clear to me yet, perhaps due to some hang up, how far apart the various energy levels due to spin states are in nuclei. What would determine how close together each step would be to its neighbors? Is this a measurement determined quantity or calculated by a really good formula? Dave -Original Message- From: Bob Cook frobertc...@hotmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Fri, Aug 1, 2014 2:35 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Important finding for nanomagnetism LENR Jones and Axil-- As You may guess, I tend to agree with your considerations regarding spin coupling and magnetic resonances. The intense fields at small dimensions allowed by the nano size structures is an inference that I have long held. Keep up the good discovery work. I wonder if any of the Professors at the University of Strasbourg are in the group trying to determine the theory of Rossi’s TPT? I’m heading to the University of Bologna in 6 weeks and hope to talk with the folks there about their ideas. I will report back asap. Bob Cook Sent from Windows Mail From: Axil Axil Sent: Friday, August 1, 2014 8:21 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com If a magnetic force is produced by an atomic levelcause whose dimensions are nanoscale, and the intensity of the magnetic force at20 cm is 1 tesla. By the cube law relationship, the intensity of the magneticsource as produced on the nanoscale can be reckoned as 2*10^^8 cubed or somethinglike 8*10^^24 tesla. On Fri, Aug 1, 2014 at 11:37 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: http://phys.org/news/2014-07-tiny-magnets-huge-fields-nanoscale.html#nwlt Doudin et al - at University of Strasbourg propose that nano ferromagnetic electrodes can create powerful localized force fields which are tuned by an external magnetic field. Localized field is a key. Inverse square power laws can make a large difference. Their finding can be understood as similar to a precondition for nanomagnetism in LENR. Of
Re: [Vo]:Important finding for nanomagnetism LENR
On Sun, Aug 3, 2014 at 2:29 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: I am asking these questions in an attempt to determine the quantum step energy levels associated with spin coupling. When I think of nuclear spin coupling, I think of a nucleus with different energy levels. Each level has a unique set of quantum numbers, including an angular momentum and a parity. There is a ground state, e.g., an angular momentum of 0 and a parity of +. Sometimes the ground state has an angular momentum different than 0+, e.g., 2+ or 1/2-. When the nucleus is excited to a different energy level, it's like pumping water up into a cistern. The water now has potential energy which, if a valve is opened, will be transformed into the kinetic energy of the water flowing downhill. The energy of the different nuclear excited states is often in the range of keV to MeV. So you can excite a nucleus to a higher energy level, and when it relaxes (often quite quickly, but sometimes it takes a bit of time), and a photon with energy equal to the difference in levels will be emitted -- e.g., a 193 keV gamma photon or a 1.7 MeV gamma photon. The transition, and therefore the photon energy, may not be directly to ground, and there may be a cascade of transitions as the nucleus relaxes. In this understanding, there is a transition from kinetic to potential energy and then from potential energy back to kinetic energy again, as the nucleus accepts energy (transitions to an excited state) and then emits it again (relaxes). Each transition will have its own half-life, but the half-lives are typically extremely short. In my limited understanding, in order for some kind of spin coupling to work as a means of fractionating the energy of a large gamma transition in a nearby compound nucleus following upon a fusion, I think the observer nucleus would need to relax only via transitions that are not far apart from one another, e.g., in the keV range rather than MeV range, in order to be consistent with the lack of gammas seen in LENR experiments. Sometimes a nucleus will have a large number of energy levels that are very close to one another, and in the relaxing of the excited state, there will be a series of photons emitted which do not go directly to ground. But all of this seems to leave a lot to chance, because a non-negligible portion of the time the nucleus will transition directly to ground, and thereby re-emitting a large photon. Sometimes a transition to ground will be forbidden; this is a detail that will depend upon the specific isotope, e.g., of nickel. Eric
RE: [Vo]:Important finding for nanomagnetism LENR
From: David Roberson I am asking these questions in an attempt to determine the quantum step energy levels associated with spin coupling. There seems to be cross-connection to the Mossbauer effect and some of the resonance levels may be the same. Nickel has Mossbauer isotopes. Here is a paper which helped me (mini-course) http://www.irm.umn.edu/Misc/Murad_MossbauerIRM08.doc Mossbauer, Larmor, NMR, fractional orbitals and superparamagnetism all seem to intersect with the Ni-H version of LENR in a way that is not easy to explain.
RE: [Vo]:Can the Hydrino explain excess heat in NiH and PdD systems?
From Axil: In short order, my colleague lost his job, was banned, and was never rehired. As a real word prerogative and a practical life lessen, when staying in business and making money is more important than dispensing the truth, the pursuit of truth suffers. FWIW: Late last year I was deeply involved in an attempt to upgrade our new high volume scanning equipment to a new software version. There had been endless delays that seemed to hamper our efforts to complete the upgrade process. The truth of the matter, the new software upgrade was a POS. At one meeting, a meeting which had not been attended by my new supervisor, a new supervisor who had been hired only a few months prior, I tried to dispense some truth of the matter to some of the users who used the scanning software. The users already knew the software was a POS. We ALL knew the software was a POS. Nevertheless, I asked the user supervisor to give us... give me additional time to work out the bugs in the upgrade process. However in order to accomplish this we needed to step back and continue using current software version for a little while longer. Unfortunately, the user supervisor, misinterpreted my suggestion as an attempt to stop the upgrade process altogether. No amount of effort on my part could convince this user that if we could just back off for a little while longer and continue to use the current software version, I would eventually get most of the worst bugs worked out. Then we could upgrade. At the end of that meeting I was both drained and frustrated. I felt I had failed in my efforts to ameliorate my user's quite justified frustrations over the on-going software upgrade issues we were all battling with. The meeting happened late Friday afternoon. I was glad it was the weekend. Monday morning I was called into the office of my new supervisor. He read me the riot act. He basically told me that the software conversion was going on schedule no matter what I had to say on the matter. What dumbfounded me was the fact that my new supervisor, a supervisor who was supposed to be in my ball court, had ended up misinterpreting what I had said to the user supervisor as well. He, too, thought I was trying to stop the upgrade process. He took what the user supervisor had claimed I had said and had never bother to ask me what I had actually said at that meeting. My supervisor essentially threatened my employment status if I didn't shape up very soon. During our little meeting, after I told my supervisor what I actually had said, I noticed he immediately pivoted. He then accused me of not communicating properly with my users. In other words, it was still all my fault. It was at that point in my 36+ years career working for the state of Wisconsin when I realized it was time for me to start seriously planning my exit strategy. When there is that amount of dysfunctional communication occurring at the management level, there is no point constantly trying to fix things when you, yourself, occasionally become the target of management's wrath. There is an epilogue to this story: The new software version was, in turn, upgraded to an even newer version about six months later. The upgrade was done so on urgent request from the software company. They too, knew the previous software version was a total POS. The next upgrade was just as much a harrowing experience as the previous upgrade had been... and in some cases even worse. I lost several sleepless nights. But in the end, after the proverbial sh#t had once again hit the fan, and boy did it smell, and the guilty parties were finally fingered out I noticed that the same supervisor now seemed to be much more pleased with my current job performance. Nevertheless, I continue to plan my exit strategy. I have no interest in finding out whether Dr. Jekyll might on a moment's notice revert back t o Mr. Hyde based on another miscommunication snafu. At least I'm lucky in that I still have my job. I can continue planning my eventual exit strategy in an orderly fashion. So, yes, I sympathize with the plight of your engineering colleague. In my experience software engineers can be just as pathologically honest. It's also been my experience that management can occasionally act like they don't know what they are doing. The means: the truth of the matter often gets shoved down the toilet. * * * But what does what you had to say about the unfortunate circumstances pertaining to your engineering colleague plus what I had to say about my own recent employment predicament have to do with Dr. Mills? You seem to be implying that Dr. Mills is deliberately behaving in a dishonest way. If so, please elaborate on what it is the doctor is deliberately doing that you feel is dishonest? It is at least obvious to me that the doctor truly believes in the truthfulness of CQM theory. Perhaps you don't. If so, it seems to me that what
Re: [Vo]:Wired: Nasa validates 'impossible' space drive
NASA's The PLASMA-BREACH Torus-Eye sub-singularity reactor is MACRO-QUANTUM ENTANGLEMENT. NASA's 'IMPOSSIBLE SPACE DRIVE merely proves Trans-Spectrum Einstein-Rosen TORUS EYE-BREACH bleed through from (PROVEN) AexoDarkEnergy Parallel-Adjacent hyperspace aka THE~Quantum~BACK OF THE TAPESTRY. . . Accessing HYPERFLUIDIC/HYPERSPEEDDENSE/Hyper-Gravionically Dynamic bleed through Aexo-Dark-Hyper-Space simply allows us to focus/control hyper-gravity POINT LEAD DRIVE ADVANCED PROPULSION SYSTEMS. . . Oh ye of little 'faith' aka TRANS-TORSION Einstein-Teslian IMAGING ABILITIES. PER EINSTEIN: Speed plus Density=Gravity CONTROLS TIME and surrounding AEXODARKHyperSPACE=equals SpookyAction/QuantumEntanglement HYPERSPEED @ VIRTUAL NO DISTANCE/VIRTUAL NO TIME hypergravion TACHYONIC-SUPER-FLUID speed/density hyperspace. EINSTEIN LEFT M=EC^2 on his desk. . . the key to UBIQUITOUS QUANTUM ENTANGLEMENT. . . . AE TachyonicSuper-Fluid Aexo HyperSpace's BAE//BaseAmbientEnergy level IS TACHYONIC-SUPER-FLUID. . . NASA's TESLA INDUCED Bose Einstein Super Conductor TORUS RING transspectrum TACHYONIC-SUPER-FLUID eye-bleed-through reactors GET THE JOB DONE NICELY. . . . * * * FOR EXAMPLE: Identicle Twins are QUANTUM-ENTANGLED. . . via Torsion-Wave TRANS HYPERSPACE Spooky Action the same as nano sub-atomic particles and our QUANTUM-ENTANGLED CEREBRAL CORTEX'S. . . . but to what The Tesla's, Einsteins, etc are Trans-Torsion CEREBRAL-NEURON Quantum Entangled to. . . . oh yea it's all obvious now. . . CROP CIRCLES. . . * * * And that's why they think on the Multi SIDES OF THE QUANTUM-AEXO-HYPERSPACE TransTorsion Matrix-Super-M-Brane. . . WHILE OTHER FLAT-NON-TORSION minds refusing to think-ponder-transtorsion DELVE/explore/CONCSCIOUSNESS BEYOND the veil of the 'tapestry 'HAVE MORE DIFFICULTY THINKING IN A TRANS-TORSION GESTALT. . . aka ludites. As my young daughter puts it: DUH//are we WAKING-UP GETTING THIS YET? ! ? * * * Just keep laughing while you break out the champagne. . . Einstein called TRANSDIMENSIONAL QUANTUM-ENTANGLEMENT RELATIVITY the final phase of General and Special Relativity. . . Prof. AE deserves another NOBEL at the very least. . . A sadly Steven Hawking Associates never quite MADE the NECCESSARY QUANTUM LEAP. Way too many 'lazy' minds happy to parrot and ride his coat-tails. . . EINSTEIN's TRANSDIMENSIONAL RELATIVITY successfull PREDICTED EVERYTHING THAT HUBBLE online would DISCOVER esp. the ACCELERATING GALAXIES to light speed to ALL be RE-ENVELOPED in surrounding AEXO-DARK-HYPER SPACE and SAUL PERLMUTTER discovered ALL OF THE MEGA-GAMMA RAY BURSTERS at the GALACTIC 'SKIN'-border to AEXOSPACE as @ LIGHT SPEED all the Proton eye SINGULARITIES and GALACTIC HUB SINGULARITES go BLACK-PHASE and RE-INGRESS all theire E nergy back into AEXODARK Parent Adjacent-Parallel HYPERSPACE. . . . SORRY PROF. HAWKING there is NO BIG CRUNCH. . . . THE BIG BANG PLASMA-BREACH WHITE HOLE Centre of our BUBBLE UNIVERSE remains open as a GRAND CENTRAL INGRESS AEXO-PLASMA FOUNTAIN. . . . EINSTEIN STILL GETS THE CREDITY from where he QUANTUM ENTANGLED/Trans-TORSION RELOCATED to for . . . .SUCCESSFULL ARTICULATION of the Unified Field Theory. . . ~:^D Give the Profs. Einstein Tesla a transtorsion-wave 'call' to verify. . . but probably JUST BELIEVING NASA will suffice. FOSTER GAMBLE'S THRIVE.COM DVE graphics are PRETTY GOOD along these lines aka ZPE/Feyman/Podkletnov/Evgengy Nickitin ANTONOV aka Russia's Aethyer-Transdimesional HYPER GRAVITY StarGate Project/Andy Yeong Wei.a.Wu-Boeing Phantom Works/R.A. Ned Allen-Lockheed Martin Skunk Words/John Brandenburg-Orbitic/John Beyster SAIC-CIAS etc. Etc. . ETC . . ! ! ! DUH. . . . Follow the money. JHO cuz $talks AND Right THEORY produces HARD SCIENCE produces HARD TECHNOLOGY and everything else. . . . WALKS. . . On Sat, Aug 2, 2014 at 11:17 AM, Alain Sepeda alain.sep...@gmail.com wrote: part of the current tragedy of science is all kind of mainstream media http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/RothwellJcoldfusion.pdf#page=4 first of all scientific journalists, then science tabloid (science, nature, Cells), then influential mainstream media (NYT)... don't look further, consensus is manufactured. see recent affairs... WMD is just de detail if you compare to current manufacture of consensus. cold fusion fiasco is an example of something I see recently and that CIA have well theorized, if you lie at the beginning of an affair, it became the consensus. for a mainstream story like a crash you have to lie for 24h and media follow... for science 2month is enough. then no evidence can change the truth of the journalists. NO EVIDENCE CAN! except the one that reach the heart of each citizen independently, and based on his selfish interest or concrete observation. the tea kettle fallacy is the only truth. 2014-08-02 17:23 GMT+02:00 Alan Fletcher a...@well.com: What a surprise : Jennifer Ouellette comes out against it Physics Week in Review: August
Re: [Vo]:Can the Hydrino explain excess heat in NiH and PdD systems?
You seem to be implying that Dr. Mills is deliberately behaving in a dishonest way. ***I didn't pay much attention to Dr. Mills because he had a long string of failures but a brilliant career as a theoretician and an ability to attract investors. He's a shyster who's smarter than me and can pull money out of my pocket. Then I ran into someone at my church who actually wrote a paper for him http://www.google.com/url?sa=trct=jq=esrc=ssource=webcd=1cad=rjauact=8ved=0CB8QFjAAurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.blacklightpower.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2Fpapers%2FPayneOHRadical.pdfei=vdbeU8aILKbiigL7vYGIBgusg=AFQjCNEN5eDr2ysFw2Umqm-JFk2oXHpeYAsig2=nG5qbX99YQZLTomGsu5YCg and another person at my church who was a Harvard PhD Physics candidate until he decided he wanted to make money and went into microprocessor architecture. He also thinks Mills's theory is coherent. But here on Vortex-L we have Jones Beene, who puts together a convincing case of failure after failure and now the gloom-gloom-gloomy prospect that anyone who attends one of Dr. Mills's demonstrations must sign an NDA. In particular, the NDA is aimed at not disclosing any indications of Nuclear Ash, which would be devastating to his theory. so I await the day when nuclear ash is associated with any of these CQM experiments tthat Dr. Mills puts together. I like the simplicity of Jones Beene's argument. On Sun, Aug 3, 2014 at 5:22 PM, Orionworks - Steven Vincent Johnson orionwo...@charter.net wrote: From Axil: In short order, my colleague lost his job, was banned, and was never rehired. As a real word prerogative and a practical life lessen, when staying in business and making money is more important than dispensing the truth, the pursuit of truth suffers. FWIW: Late last year I was deeply involved in an attempt to upgrade our new high volume scanning equipment to a new software version. There had been endless delays that seemed to hamper our efforts to complete the upgrade process. The truth of the matter, the new software upgrade was a POS. At one meeting, a meeting which had not been attended by my new supervisor, a new supervisor who had been hired only a few months prior, I tried to dispense some truth of the matter to some of the users who used the scanning software. The users already knew the software was a POS. We ALL knew the software was a POS. Nevertheless, I asked the user supervisor to give us... give me additional time to work out the bugs in the upgrade process. However in order to accomplish this we needed to step back and continue using current software version for a little while longer. Unfortunately, the user supervisor, misinterpreted my suggestion as an attempt to stop the upgrade process altogether. No amount of effort on my part could convince this user that if we could just back off for a little while longer and continue to use the current software version, I would eventually get most of the worst bugs worked out. Then we could upgrade. At the end of that meeting I was both drained and frustrated. I felt I had failed in my efforts to ameliorate my user's quite justified frustrations over the on-going software upgrade issues we were all battling with. The meeting happened late Friday afternoon. I was glad it was the weekend. Monday morning I was called into the office of my new supervisor. He read me the riot act. He basically told me that the software conversion was going on schedule no matter what I had to say on the matter. What dumbfounded me was the fact that my new supervisor, a supervisor who was supposed to be in my ball court, had ended up misinterpreting what I had said to the user supervisor as well. He, too, thought I was trying to stop the upgrade process. He took what the user supervisor had claimed I had said and had never bother to ask me what I had actually said at that meeting. My supervisor essentially threatened my employment status if I didn't shape up very soon. During our little meeting, after I told my supervisor what I actually had said, I noticed he immediately pivoted. He then accused me of not communicating properly with my users. In other words, it was still all my fault. It was at that point in my 36+ years career working for the state of Wisconsin when I realized it was time for me to start seriously planning my exit strategy. When there is that amount of dysfunctional communication occurring at the management level, there is no point constantly trying to fix things when you, yourself, occasionally become the target of management's wrath. There is an epilogue to this story: The new software version was, in turn, upgraded to an even newer version about six months later. The upgrade was done so on urgent request from the software company. They too, knew the previous software version was a total POS. The next upgrade was just as much a harrowing experience as the previous upgrade had been... and in some cases even worse. I
Re: [Vo]:Can the Hydrino explain excess heat in NiH and PdD systems?
I find it difficult to understand a situation where a multi-million dollar company can exist and prosper for a quarter century without the development of a single commercially viable product...unless it is the seat of a technological religion that takes on the guise of a company. Such a religion has its own bible, messiah, following of the faithful, evil angles, martyrs, apostles creed, and the road of grace to paradise. What is central to such an community of faith is the preservation of that faith and the proselytizing to enhance its membership. There is nothing wrong with religion, it is an ancient an long venerated tradition in human history, but it is not the function or the expectation of religion to advance the understanding of the objective universe. On Sun, Aug 3, 2014 at 8:22 PM, Orionworks - Steven Vincent Johnson orionwo...@charter.net wrote: From Axil: In short order, my colleague lost his job, was banned, and was never rehired. As a real word prerogative and a practical life lessen, when staying in business and making money is more important than dispensing the truth, the pursuit of truth suffers. FWIW: Late last year I was deeply involved in an attempt to upgrade our new high volume scanning equipment to a new software version. There had been endless delays that seemed to hamper our efforts to complete the upgrade process. The truth of the matter, the new software upgrade was a POS. At one meeting, a meeting which had not been attended by my new supervisor, a new supervisor who had been hired only a few months prior, I tried to dispense some truth of the matter to some of the users who used the scanning software. The users already knew the software was a POS. We ALL knew the software was a POS. Nevertheless, I asked the user supervisor to give us... give me additional time to work out the bugs in the upgrade process. However in order to accomplish this we needed to step back and continue using current software version for a little while longer. Unfortunately, the user supervisor, misinterpreted my suggestion as an attempt to stop the upgrade process altogether. No amount of effort on my part could convince this user that if we could just back off for a little while longer and continue to use the current software version, I would eventually get most of the worst bugs worked out. Then we could upgrade. At the end of that meeting I was both drained and frustrated. I felt I had failed in my efforts to ameliorate my user's quite justified frustrations over the on-going software upgrade issues we were all battling with. The meeting happened late Friday afternoon. I was glad it was the weekend. Monday morning I was called into the office of my new supervisor. He read me the riot act. He basically told me that the software conversion was going on schedule no matter what I had to say on the matter. What dumbfounded me was the fact that my new supervisor, a supervisor who was supposed to be in my ball court, had ended up misinterpreting what I had said to the user supervisor as well. He, too, thought I was trying to stop the upgrade process. He took what the user supervisor had claimed I had said and had never bother to ask me what I had actually said at that meeting. My supervisor essentially threatened my employment status if I didn't shape up very soon. During our little meeting, after I told my supervisor what I actually had said, I noticed he immediately pivoted. He then accused me of not communicating properly with my users. In other words, it was still all my fault. It was at that point in my 36+ years career working for the state of Wisconsin when I realized it was time for me to start seriously planning my exit strategy. When there is that amount of dysfunctional communication occurring at the management level, there is no point constantly trying to fix things when you, yourself, occasionally become the target of management's wrath. There is an epilogue to this story: The new software version was, in turn, upgraded to an even newer version about six months later. The upgrade was done so on urgent request from the software company. They too, knew the previous software version was a total POS. The next upgrade was just as much a harrowing experience as the previous upgrade had been... and in some cases even worse. I lost several sleepless nights. But in the end, after the proverbial sh#t had once again hit the fan, and boy did it smell, and the guilty parties were finally fingered out I noticed that the same supervisor now seemed to be much more pleased with my current job performance. Nevertheless, I continue to plan my exit strategy. I have no interest in finding out whether Dr. Jekyll might on a moment's notice revert back t o Mr. Hyde based on another miscommunication snafu. At least I'm lucky in that I still have my job. I can continue planning my eventual exit strategy in an orderly fashion.
RE: [Vo]:Can the Hydrino explain excess heat in NiH and PdD systems?
LOL. Mills is not a shyster per se, since he is a brilliant guy and has made a big impression on the theoretical end with many smart people. Mills’ problem is in taking an intuitive idea and making it work in the real world. I was a big fan for a while, but after a certain level of accumulated disappointment, you have to face the fact that he would be more productive as an advisor to Rossi or Mizuno. And BTW Kevin – you must attend a church near Stanford, given that at least three parishioners have heard of Randell Mills. Most unusual anywhere else outside of Joisey. Probably Condi’s favorite, Menlo Pres. I should add that some fool on one of the forums was bragging that he did not have to sign an NDA to attend the earlier demo, but it turns out on closer inspection that he had already signed one in the past which was still binding. And yes, there is no doubt that - especially the seam welder – if it were tested now with a radiation monitor after a few runs, will be shown to be activated. Doubt that we will see detail that published … due of course to the NDA. From: Kevin O'Malley You seem to be implying that Dr. Mills is deliberately behaving in a dishonest way. ***I didn't pay much attention to Dr. Mills because he had a long string of failures but a brilliant career as a theoretician and an ability to attract investors. He's a shyster who's smarter than me and can pull money out of my pocket. Then I ran into someone at my church who actually wrote a paper for him http://www.google.com/url?sa=t http://www.google.com/url?sa=trct=jq=esrc=ssource=webcd=1cad=rjauact=8ved=0CB8QFjAAurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.blacklightpower.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2Fpapers%2FPayneOHRadical.pdfei=vdbeU8aILKbiigL7vYGIBgusg=AFQjCNEN5eDr2ysFw2Umqm-JFk2oXHpeYAsig2=nG5qbX99YQZLTomGsu5YCg rct=jq=esrc=ssource=webcd=1cad=rjauact=8ved=0CB8QFjAAurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.blacklightpower.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2Fpapers%2FPayneOHRadical.pdfei=vdbeU8aILKbiigL7vYGIBgusg=AFQjCNEN5eDr2ysFw2Umqm-JFk2oXHpeYAsig2=nG5qbX99YQZLTomGsu5YCg and another person at my church who was a Harvard PhD Physics candidate until he decided he wanted to make money and went into microprocessor architecture. He also thinks Mills's theory is coherent. But here on Vortex-L we have Jones Beene, who puts together a convincing case of failure after failure and now the gloom-gloom-gloomy prospect that anyone who attends one of Dr. Mills's demonstrations must sign an NDA. In particular, the NDA is aimed at not disclosing any indications of Nuclear Ash, which would be devastating to his theory. so I await the day when nuclear ash is associated with any of these CQM experiments tthat Dr. Mills puts together. I like the simplicity of Jones Beene's argument. Orionworks - Steven Vincent Johnson wrote: In short order, my colleague lost his job, was banned, and was never rehired. As a real word
RE: [Vo]:Can the Hydrino explain excess heat in NiH and PdD systems?
Jones sez: And yes, there is no doubt that - especially the seam welder – if it were tested now with a radiation monitor after a few runs, will be shown to be activated. Doubt that we will see detail that published … due of course to the NDA. No doubt, you say. I admire the certainty of your conviction. But then... maybe not. ;-) I assume you mean radioactivity will be found emanating from the seam welders. How much radioactivity to you speculate has probably accumulated by now? To possibly dangerous levels? Feel free to use your imagination on this one. As I have previously stated, I prefer to stay agnostic on Mills BLP. My motto continues to be: Trust but verify. Nothing would please me more than to get to the bottom line on this hot trail. If radioactivity is verified - so be it. Maybe CQM will still survive after countless revisions are made, revisions which are sure to come regardless of what Mr. Spot Welder* has to say on the matter. Or maybe CQM will not survive. In either case, hasn't there been a string of revisions happening to standard QM for decades? Aren't we constantly tweaking it to help make the square pegs fit into round holes? If so, seems to me that CQM is in good company. * In no way am I attempt to infer that the distinguished Mr. Jones is Mr. Spot Welder disguised in a lab coat. Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson svjart.orionworks.com zazzle.com/orionworks
RE: [Vo]:Can the Hydrino explain excess heat in NiH and PdD systems?
Axil, You seem to be implying that CQM is essentially religion. You also seem to be implying that BLP is run by the equivalent of another L. Ron Hubbard. It seems to me that one might be able to imply that the same thing has already happened to how standard quantum mechanics seems to be both revered and protected by some of its own cult members. Look at what Wikipedia has had to say about BLP. I will grant you that I do see the beginnings of a cult following gestating nicely over at the SCP. And that worries me. But I wouldn't pin such idiocy at Dr. Mills foot. He strikes me as caring less about being perceived as a cult leader. I think the doctor is far more interested in vindicating his CQM theory. If one therefore wants to imply that CQM is Dr. Mills true religion... yes I will not argue the finer points of that, but only to a point. The last time I looked at Dr. Mills' bible ...My goodness, I've never seen so many mathematical equations. Long protracted equations. Hey! Where's all the knowing and all the begetting that should be happening within the pages of a real bible. I see no sacrifices nor any god fearing smoteing going on either. It's just a coincidence that Dr. Mills might seem to bare a slight resemblance to Charlton Heston! Actually, I think Dr. MIlls' text is rather dry. Quite boring if you ask me. Pin the folly of wanting to become a cult follower on the stupidity and naivety of the individuals who simply want to become cult follower. Look, I realize I'm not an expert on most matters pertaining to quantum physics. All I can say is that... well, let me put it this way: I find it tantalizing that a theory that some on this discussion group seem to feel is actually a religion attempting to be cloak its true nature under the camouflage of a laboratory coat was nevertheless capable of predicting the accelerated expansion of the universe before astronomy had proven this was actually happening. I'm under the impression that standard quantum mechanics, as it is currently understood, didn't seem have much to say on the matter, for or against. Ok... I'm done for the night. Back to the beehive tomorrow. Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson svjart.orionworks.com zazzle.com/orionworks
RE: [Vo]:Can the Hydrino explain excess heat in NiH and PdD systems?
From: Orionworks - Steven Vincent Johnson No doubt, you say. I admire the certainty of your conviction. But then... maybe not. ;-) Transmutation is turning up in arc welders at 140 amps, so why not 10,000? I would agree that the radioactivity could be incidental, but even incidental is a huge “cred” problem for Mills. Not that he has much left. He has backed himself into the “none” corner… and he is most likely wrong… yet again. http://www.aw-el.com/weld.htm attachment: winmail.dat
Re: [Vo]:Can the Hydrino explain excess heat in NiH and PdD systems?
On Sun, Aug 3, 2014 at 6:03 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: I find it difficult to understand a situation where a multi-million dollar company can exist and prosper for a quarter century without the development of a single commercially viable product... Here in California some startups will start out with a round of seed funding. They'll go along for a year, two or three and then do some soul searching, at which point they might pivot, i.e., take a different tack or even a new direction. Typically a startup will not pivot more than once; possibly they'll pivot twice over the years. In most cases, within four years, say, they'll either have established a viable business selling a real product, or at least have built a real product that is useful to people, even if it does not yet make money (e.g., Twitter). The fact that BLP have pivoted several times over a period of 25 years and keep on going strongly suggests that they're working under a different set of pressures than a typical startup, even one that is research-oriented. Eric
Re: [Vo]:Can the Hydrino explain excess heat in NiH and PdD systems?
Radiation will not be seen in the Mills' arc experiment because an arc that produces nanoparticles will always result in the formation of a SPP BEC that will neutralize the nuclear reactions that the spark may produce. One has to work very hard to avoid BEC formation in spark discharge so that radioactive isotopes are formed and gammas are made to appear. Ken Shoulders got a patent for the remediation of radioactive isotopes through spark discharge. This means that the remediation effect must both be real and must have been demonstrated to the satisfaction of the patent board. On Sun, Aug 3, 2014 at 10:34 PM, Orionworks - Steven Vincent Johnson orionwo...@charter.net wrote: Jones sez: And yes, there is no doubt that - especially the seam welder – if it were tested now with a radiation monitor after a few runs, will be shown to be activated. Doubt that we will see detail that published … due of course to the NDA. No doubt, you say. I admire the certainty of your conviction. But then... maybe not. ;-) I assume you mean radioactivity will be found emanating from the seam welders. How much radioactivity to you speculate has probably accumulated by now? To possibly dangerous levels? Feel free to use your imagination on this one. As I have previously stated, I prefer to stay agnostic on Mills BLP. My motto continues to be: Trust but verify. Nothing would please me more than to get to the bottom line on this hot trail. If radioactivity is verified - so be it. Maybe CQM will still survive after countless revisions are made, revisions which are sure to come regardless of what Mr. Spot Welder* has to say on the matter. Or maybe CQM will not survive. In either case, hasn't there been a string of revisions happening to standard QM for decades? Aren't we constantly tweaking it to help make the square pegs fit into round holes? If so, seems to me that CQM is in good company. * In no way am I attempt to infer that the distinguished Mr. Jones is Mr. Spot Welder disguised in a lab coat. Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson svjart.orionworks.com zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]:Can the Hydrino explain excess heat in NiH and PdD systems?
Quantum Mechanics is not well developed in relation to the explanations that it can provide to explain all the vast array of weird things that seem to be occurring at and below the atomic level. Once LENR is taken seriously, I expect it to be a gold mine for research into quantum weirdness in which LENR is so blessed. On Sun, Aug 3, 2014 at 10:34 PM, Orionworks - Steven Vincent Johnson orionwo...@charter.net wrote: Axil, You seem to be implying that CQM is essentially religion. You also seem to be implying that BLP is run by the equivalent of another L. Ron Hubbard. It seems to me that one might be able to imply that the same thing has already happened to how standard quantum mechanics seems to be both revered and protected by some of its own cult members. Look at what Wikipedia has had to say about BLP. I will grant you that I do see the beginnings of a cult following gestating nicely over at the SCP. And that worries me. But I wouldn't pin such idiocy at Dr. Mills foot. He strikes me as caring less about being perceived as a cult leader. I think the doctor is far more interested in vindicating his CQM theory. If one therefore wants to imply that CQM is Dr. Mills true religion... yes I will not argue the finer points of that, but only to a point. The last time I looked at Dr. Mills' bible ...My goodness, I've never seen so many mathematical equations. Long protracted equations. Hey! Where's all the knowing and all the begetting that should be happening within the pages of a real bible. I see no sacrifices nor any god fearing smoteing going on either. It's just a coincidence that Dr. Mills might seem to bare a slight resemblance to Charlton Heston! Actually, I think Dr. MIlls' text is rather dry. Quite boring if you ask me. Pin the folly of wanting to become a cult follower on the stupidity and naivety of the individuals who simply want to become cult follower. Look, I realize I'm not an expert on most matters pertaining to quantum physics. All I can say is that... well, let me put it this way: I find it tantalizing that a theory that some on this discussion group seem to feel is actually a religion attempting to be cloak its true nature under the camouflage of a laboratory coat was nevertheless capable of predicting the accelerated expansion of the universe before astronomy had proven this was actually happening. I'm under the impression that standard quantum mechanics, as it is currently understood, didn't seem have much to say on the matter, for or against. Ok... I'm done for the night. Back to the beehive tomorrow. Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson svjart.orionworks.com zazzle.com/orionworks
