[Vo]:LENR INFO, AUG 6, 2015
Please read it: http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2015/08/my-modest-lenr-info-for-aug-6-2015.html Best, Peter -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
Re: [Vo]:Rossi's 1 MW Thermal LENR plant trial. What's the current consensus?
Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: Yes. I suspect that Brian deduced this as being “likely,” rather than heard it. He has a wide network of well-placed associates. As you know, he has been highly critical of Lugano, and rightly so. Yes, I have been critical of Lugano too, and so has Mike McKubre. But as far as I know Rossi had no say in the design or execution of that test. That is what the researchers who conducted the test said, and what Rossi said. I think it is unlikely they are lying. I regard the notion that he magically masterminded it as yet another unfounded conspiracy theory. Rossi can be annoying. He riles people, including me. I think that triggers these unfounded attacks, weird conspiracy theories, and web sites such as shutdownrossi.com He brings out the worst in people. - Jed
RE: [Vo]:Rossi's 1 MW Thermal LENR plant trial. What's the current consensus?
First off, ashfield - it is next to impossible to libel Rossi. The judicial system of Italy has guaranteed that. His Wiki entry, read by millions, begins this way: Andrea Rossi (born 3 June 1950) is an Italian convicted fraudster and claimed inventor.[1][2][3] My remarks were more generous - since I agree that he is a skilled inventor. Secondly, you apparently cannot read and understand English very well, or do not understand the importance of scientific proof... maybe your coding problem goes deeper. Thirdly, a portion of what Gary Wright mentions on his blog is true, which still leaves open the possibility that scientific proof, if it exists, is the only outcome which will win the day for Rossi. Very simply put – proof of Rossi’s claims is absent. I will repeat it for your benefit - Rossi could be a skilled inventor, but there is actual proof that he is a fraud and thus he cannot be given benefit of the doubt as could others without his history … As for Vortex, we do not need your gullible, true-believer attitude here, and that is all you seem to have to offer. If you want to bolster Rossi, stick to facts and avoid criticizing other posters for stating facts. -Original Message- From: a.ashfield What you wrote, that Rossi is a liar and a fraud, is more suited to the muck in shutrossidown.com than Vortex.
Re: [Vo]:Rossi's 1 MW Thermal LENR plant trial. What's the current consensus?
a.ashfield a.ashfi...@verizon.net wrote: Jones Beene, It is little wonder why concerned LENR scientists (like Brian Ahern) now believe that IH has finally seen through Rossi’s BS and are on the verge of dumping him. Do you have a reference for this? I was going to ask the same thing. Where did you hear that? From Brian Ahern I suppose. I wonder where he heard it. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Rossi's 1 MW Thermal LENR plant trial. What's the current consensus?
Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: First off, ashfield - it is next to impossible to libel Rossi. The judicial system of Italy has guaranteed that. His Wiki entry, read by millions, begins this way: Andrea Rossi (born 3 June 1950) is an Italian convicted fraudster and claimed inventor.[1][2][3] I hope we are not going to Wikipedia be standard of truth here. Their article on cold fusion is terribly wrong. It is written by people who know nothing about cold fusion. . . . but there is actual proof that he is a fraud and thus he cannot be given benefit of the doubt as could others without his history … As far as I know there is no such proof. He was convicted, but the conviction was thrown out. Therefore he is not guilty. You cannot site a conviction in court as proof of guilt when that same conviction is later voided by the courts. Court judgments are binary: guilty or innocent. If you are first declared guilty but later declared innocent, that makes you innocent. As innocent as someone who was never found guilty in the first place. There is no left over guilt, or stain of guilt. Is there some other proof? - Jed
[Vo]:Lines of research related to the E-Cat: a review
Interesting report on LENR research here. http://www.ecat-thenewfire.com/blog/ Adrian
RE: [Vo]:Rossi's 1 MW Thermal LENR plant trial. What's the current consensus?
Jones beene, I asked for a reference to back up your claim. You failed to give it. Secondhand hearsay is hardly convincing. As for the Wikipedia piece, they seem as biased as you are.
Re: RV: [Vo]:Unsubscribe
To unsubscribe, send a *blank* message to: vortex-l-requ...@eskimo.com Put the single word unsubscribe in the subject line of the header. No quotes around unsubscribe, of course. http://www.amasci.com/weird/wvort.html
RE: [Vo]:Rossi's 1 MW Thermal LENR plant trial. What's the current consensus?
Jones Beene, You are prepared to libel Rossi because you haven't seen proof of what he claims. Should we assume the same for you without proof? What you wrote, that Rossi is a liar and a fraud, is more suited to the muck in shutrossidown.com than Vortex.
RE: [Vo]:Rossi's 1 MW Thermal LENR plant trial. What's the current consensus?
From: Jed Rothwell It is little wonder why concerned LENR scientists (like Brian Ahern) now believe that IH has finally seen through Rossi’s BS and are on the verge of dumping him. * I was going to ask the same thing. Where did you hear that? From Brian Ahern I suppose. I wonder where he heard it. Yes. I suspect that Brian deduced this as being “likely,” rather than heard it. He has a wide network of well-placed associates. As you know, he has been highly critical of Lugano, and rightly so.
Re: [Vo]:Rossi's 1 MW Thermal LENR plant trial. What's the current consensus?
Jones, it is not a trial. I understand that you have a negative opinion about Rossi. Right or wrong. The semi-connection between what you call him a scam artist and a conviction for tax eviction is stretching the argument way beyond reasons. Why so critical - ( really judgmental)? Why not let him show which material he is made of? Less than a year and you will need no gossip to base your opinion on. I probably know less than you do. However, I can see that he is the only one that has opened up to a third party replication. I see no other player that have anything they even claim is close to be commercial. His theoretical skills or his capacity as an experimenter is not up for judgment. The result will be. If he has what he says then he is protecting his findings and I assume he does what he thinks is best and not what he thinks is best for people trying to second guess his know how. I think your judgement is based on a personal opinion, gossip and evidence not relevant and deserve no attention. Best Regards , Lennart Thornros www.StrategicLeadershipSac.com lenn...@thornros.com +1 916 436 1899 202 Granite Park Court, Lincoln CA 95648 “Productivity is never an accident. It is always the result of a commitment to excellence, intelligent planning, and focused effort.” PJM On Thu, Aug 6, 2015 at 2:53 PM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: *From:* Jed Rothwell Ø He was convicted, but the conviction was thrown out. Therefore he is not guilty. You cannot site a conviction in court as proof of guilt when that same conviction is later voided by the courts. Wait a minute. You act like there was only the one Petrodragon conviction. Did you not read Rossi’s own account? It is pretty hard to whitewash all 56 of his legal troubles with the same brush. Rossi himself admitted that there were 56 prosecutions in all, during those years - mostly for tax fraud, or retrials – of which three from Petro-dragon led to imprisonment, and those three apparently ended with reversal after the fact. So this does not come from Gary Wright but from Rossi. Five of the Italian prosecutions for tax evasion ended with convictions (custody imprisonments) and those were not reversed, and Rossi never claimed they were. OK – you can say that tax crimes are not in the same class, and maybe not, but they are still called “tax fraud” and they were not reversed – so you cannot say that Wiki is wrong about Rossi, despite what they say about LENR. It is probably not a good idea to merge the two.
RE: [Vo]:Rossi's 1 MW Thermal LENR plant trial. What's the current consensus?
Jones Beene, Rossi was convicted for tax evasion, not tax fraud, decades ago. It has nothing to do with you libeling him about the E-Cat. This discussion is pointless. Adrian
RE: [Vo]:Rossi's 1 MW Thermal LENR plant trial. What's the current consensus?
From: Jed Rothwell I believe tax evasion is the national pastime in Italy…. And that makes it ok? Heck, just blame the prosecutor… somebody had it in for him, right? The point is that Rossi cheated when a lot of money was at stake. Not once, but many times. Would he do it again with scientific data, if lots of money was at stake? The important thing which matters to many scientists who are trying to understand this very important reaction, is that it is extremely likely that Rossi deliberately added a pure isotope to the ash of the Lugano testing. His motive for that is not clear, but someone did it (with the same probability of a DNA match). I’m sure his many supporters rationalize a way for Rossi to avoid blame for that as well…. after all, he doesn’t owe anyone a duty to provide honest data, so why not cheat?
Re: [Vo]:Rossi's 1 MW Thermal LENR plant trial. What's the current consensus?
Jed, My understanding was that after some 60 indictments were thrown out Rossi was convicted of tax evasion. This most popular sport in Italy is not the same was fraud. Wikipedia uses a lot of poor, dated references in Cold Fusion and the editor Andythegrump spends his life preventing others from updating it. He seems to think that if he believes something that is proof enough. Reminiscent? Adrian
RE: [Vo]:Rossi's 1 MW Thermal LENR plant trial. What's the current consensus?
One thing I've learned about Jones over the years is that when someone is gullible enough to attack his personal assessments on LENR subjects I can pretty much expect that instead of defending his positions he will immediately launch a strong offense. Doing so, Jones is more than capable of skewering the opposition, leaving many visibly injured in some way. It can be particularly entertaining when Jed and Jones go at it since both I'd say are pretty evenly matched. Another Jed Jones debate can occasionally be educational too. It's been a while since the Collective has seen another rematch between these two veteran Vort titans. Perhaps I'm getting bored. Jones, personally, I think your assessment of Rossi comes off as a bit too cynical for me. However, I can understand why many remain deeply cynical of the man. It's not as if this mercurial Italian hasn't contributed to his own undoing, from all the confusion and disillusion he has strewn about across net. As you might know I was recently kicked off Dr. Mills' Society of Classical Physics discussion group. I became too persistent in suggesting that BLP might want to perform another public black box SunCell demonstration that gives the audience (the Peanut Gallery) some kind of evidence (however minute it might be) as to why they have now apparently converted over to a new no-moving-parts or solid state-like technology. Dr. Mills, the CEO of a private company, disagreed that he needed to offer-up any type of a demonstration, as was his right to do so. I gather my persistence eventually got his ire. There's that old saying: (1) The boss is always right. (2) If you think the boss is wrong, see rule (1). One would think I ought to feel irate and angry about having been defrocked. As best as I can tell, I'm not. Ya gotta do what ya gotta do, and so did Dr. Mills. It's not easy being a CEO. I can see how just trying to manage the politics of a start-up company day in and day out can be without a doubt the worst part of the job. IMHO, I suspect I don't know any more about the veracity of Dr. Mills' claims any more than you might know about Rossi's. I try not to predict what Rossi or Dr. Mills will attempt to accomplish, or fail at next. I just try my best to keep on watching these two enigmas with as little judgment as possible. That way I end up feeling less inclined to constantly end up having to defend myself when someone feels personally offended that my opinions don' coincide with theirs. I saw a lot of that kind of defensive behavior over at the SCP discussion group coming from the cheerleading section. Constantly defending myself, I've found it to be a huge waste of my precious time. Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson OrionWorks.com zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]:Rossi's 1 MW Thermal LENR plant trial. What's the current consensus?
Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: Five of the Italian prosecutions for tax evasion ended with convictions (custody imprisonments) and those were not reversed, and Rossi never claimed they were. Is that so? I admit I have not followed the story closely, so I'll take your word for it. I believe tax evasion is the national pastime in Italy. If someone threw 56 charges at him and only 5 minor ones stuck, I suspect someone had it in for him. That sounds like prosecutorial misconduct. Perhaps not; I do not know the details. - Jed
RE: [Vo]:Rossi's 1 MW Thermal LENR plant trial. What's the current consensus?
From: Jed Rothwell Ø He was convicted, but the conviction was thrown out. Therefore he is not guilty. You cannot site a conviction in court as proof of guilt when that same conviction is later voided by the courts. Wait a minute. You act like there was only the one Petrodragon conviction. Did you not read Rossi’s own account? It is pretty hard to whitewash all 56 of his legal troubles with the same brush. Rossi himself admitted that there were 56 prosecutions in all, during those years - mostly for tax fraud, or retrials – of which three from Petro-dragon led to imprisonment, and those three apparently ended with reversal after the fact. So this does not come from Gary Wright but from Rossi. Five of the Italian prosecutions for tax evasion ended with convictions (custody imprisonments) and those were not reversed, and Rossi never claimed they were. OK – you can say that tax crimes are not in the same class, and maybe not, but they are still called “tax fraud” and they were not reversed – so you cannot say that Wiki is wrong about Rossi, despite what they say about LENR. It is probably not a good idea to merge the two.
Re: [Vo]:A 21st Century Case for Gold: A New Information Theory of Money.
On Wed, Aug 5, 2015 at 9:19 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote: True the SPLC could not have acted as a legal person as it did not exist, but its antecedents certainly did exist in the form of the natural person who comprised it and then proceeded . . . You said they had hundreds of millions of dollars. I said they have, in the present tense, hundreds of millions of dollars. But they did not have any money in 1968, when you allege they masterminded an assassination. They had no money or influence, except among a small group of people working in civil rights. They were just a couple of threadbare lawyers and a book publisher. Such people do not mastermind the assassination of a world famous Nobel Prize winner. Or, if they do, the police catch them. I suspect a wide range of parties that had the means (not necessarily financial), motive (possibly including financial) and opportunity (insiders/infiltrators of MLK's Poor People's Campaign https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poor_People%27s_Campaign). Aside from the antecedents of the SPLC, there is Nixon, who briefly promoted a debilitated form of a citizen's dividend but then instituted affirmative action instead, is a suspect in this regard. I alleged only that SPLC and other organizations that took over MLK's _true_ legacy of promoting a race-neutral citizens' dividend, assassinated that legacy by promoting, instead, Title VII. That assassination was far worse than putting a bullet through MLK's head. That the SPLC then went on to collect hundreds of millions in endowments paying their executives hundreds of thousands a year would not only be forgivable but laudable if they had, instead, actually denounced Title VII and instead gotten MLK's citizen's dividend passed as the solution to southern poverty. That true legacy of MLK would have addressed the ills not only of capitalism, but the ills of communism that was responsible for an order of magnitude more deaths than Jews that died at the hands of the Nazis. There is no word for the people who assassinated the legacy of MLK in the DSM, because it has removed the word psychopath and replaced it with the mere sociopath.
RV: [Vo]:Unsubscribe
-Mensaje original- Desde: Hauke Hein hhe...@hotmail.com Enviado: 6 de agosto de 2015 00:21 Para: vortex-l@eskimo.com Asunto: [Vo]:Unsubscribe --- Enviado con Outlook.com, Real Life Real Timeª Mobile ---
Re: [Vo]:Rossi's 1 MW Thermal LENR plant trial. What's the current consensus?
On Thu, Aug 6, 2015 at 10:27 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: reticence Jones you might be right but why make a judgment before fact is in? His reports are positive and if he fabricate all his anecdotes, as you call his reports. then we can agree he is good at that. However, LENR has been in the progress for 25 plus years. Why not let him show the reality of his claim or fail - it is only 2/3 of a year. Do you know that IH are backing out of the deal? Do you know that AR is distancing himself from IH? I think to compare him to Madoff is unfair. I can see no real motive besides that he wants more funding for a project you believe he has no believe in. Would it not be better to have a low key attitude. His personality is real hard to judge from a distance. (You might have better knowledge . . .). Experience and expertise - I assume you mean of LENR. If as you say One can believe strongly in the reality of LENR technology – as most of do on this forum, then don't you need to support the efforts to find an answer? You say that it might work partially. Well I would say that the first flight of the Wright brothers were 'partial' flights. Don't your final conclusion start with an If. How can IH be ripped off? Whatever investment they have done with open eyes and with a lot of negative 'press' about AR, which I am sure they have access to or tehy did not handle this investment very well. Best Regards , Lennart Thornros www.StrategicLeadershipSac.com lenn...@thornros.com +1 916 436 1899 202 Granite Park Court, Lincoln CA 95648 “Productivity is never an accident. It is always the result of a commitment to excellence, intelligent planning, and focused effort.” PJM
RE: [Vo]:Rossi's 1 MW Thermal LENR plant trial. What's the current consensus?
Steven, Would components from the Vort Collective continuum care to comment? Unfortunately I can't read Frank Acland's reply, who knows all about it. I'm again getting a message saying there is a coding error and the page won't display. From where I sit, the news is that the plant is really 2 MW capacity. It has been running on four 250kW E-Cats and has the ~100 original small E-Cats held in reserve. There are now several independent reports that the plant is running well, apart from what Rossi says. Not proof positive but certainly grounds for optimism. The time running should have been 150 days not 160 where it is now. It IS essentially a commercial installation supplying steam to a real customer. Rossi is apparently working on a new Hot Cat and has stated this has a higher inherent COP than the original low temperature E-Cats. He has also stated that regulations/agreements will make permission to retrofit coal fired power plants next to impossible. The relationship of Rossi with Industrial heat has become clouded. It is not clear that he has sold the his IP to them or is just sharing them. Adrian
RE: [Vo]:Rossi's 1 MW Thermal LENR plant trial. What's the current consensus?
From: Frank Acland Ø Ø From what we have been told, what is being tested now IS a commercial product, providing heat to a factory and saving the factory owner a significant amount of money in heating costs. “Been told” is the operative phrase. The plant owner is silent and is no doubt being subsidized by a negotiated price, so his present cost is meaningless. Until an independent expert, with no financial connection, is willing to take ownership of an actual visitation report – this is second or third hand anecdote. And most importantly, why is IH (a company which has some credibility, unlike Leonardo) not involved? It is little wonder why concerned LENR scientists (like Brian Ahern) now believe that IH has finally seen through Rossi’s BS and are on the verge of dumping him. Given Rossi’s history, his past dishonesty, the anecdotal nature of reports coming from his camp, the junk science from Lugano, the reticence of IH, the fact Rossi is now trying to distance himself from IH, the lack of valid independent proof - and everything else … it is arguable that there is no “commercial product” at all. The Blue box could be an elaborate prop at worst, or an expensive last ditch diversion to buy time (for finding another investor if IH has backed out of the deal). The most likely scenario is that the Blue-box does work part time but does not compete with natural gas in the final accounting (maybe in the EU but not in the USA). One can believe strongly in the reality of LENR technology – as most of do on this forum, and even agree that Rossi has seen significant excess heat - but still appreciate that Andrea Rossi could be BOTH a skilled inventor and an even more skilled scam artist – the two are not mutually exclusive. Think of Rossi in the context of a “Bernie Madoff of LENR.” He has the motive, the experience, the expertise, and the personality to play both roles: genius inventor and financial scam artist. As a personal matter, I am upset that a Rossi rip-off of IH, and especially one where he is sued, could result in drying up future funding for the entire field. Jones
RE: [Vo]:Rossi's 1 MW Thermal LENR plant trial. What's the current consensus?
Jones Beene, It is little wonder why concerned LENR scientists (like Brian Ahern) now believe that IH has finally seen through Rossi’s BS and are on the verge of dumping him. Do you have a reference for this? Your comment then tails off into gobbledegook so there still seems to be a coding error. �Rossi’s BS0dto disup fuof refuanothefrd hae) uttus?r, rgind pbeinass clul=contenon tfspan rel=conteny uttusIpe iref=contenbuttus buttusleft l veat key h=msg104071.html li rel=conteny uttusIpe i f a to gthe/a ref=contenbuttusl veat key c=index.html#104079 li rel=conteny uttusIpe i f a to gthe/a ref=contenbuttusl veat key i=maillist.html#104079 etc. Adrian
[Vo]:Re: LENR on a Chip
RE: [Vo]:LENR on a Chip Jones-- The following is a link to a description of a nucleus-electron spin couple. http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2014-02/uob-hea021114.php Bob Cook From: Jones Beene Sent: Wednesday, August 05, 2015 6:16 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: [Vo]:LENR on a Chip From: Bob Cook Ø ØIMHO, the changing B field creates the coupling associated with the coherent system’s spin state, all during the small time increment the appropriate resonances occur, to allow the transition of mass energy to phonic energy and/or low frequency EM energy… Bob … not necessarily low frequency (or how low is low?) … if the spin energy could be resonantly tuned to microwave frequencies, then direct conversion to DC is easier (has been demonstrated at acceptable efficiency at 900 MHz) http://scitation.aip.org/content/aip/journal/apl/103/16/10.1063/1.4824473 A planar “package” of 3-4 components: SPP chip, Ni-H target, and microwave collector is arguably possible as a self-powered “battery” for a smart phone or other small electronics which operates at room temperature, since SPP creation no longer requires incandescence. If we can operate without a thermal cycle, we can maximize spin conversion to electrical current with a minimal size. To do this, the parameters can possibly be tied into the Overhauser effect and DNP and operate somewhat as an analogy to the Mossbauer effect. I think Axil may have speculated on the type of spin coupling which would be necessary to bypass the thermal cycle altogether. Here is some Wiki-wisdom. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynamic_nuclear_polarisation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_Overhauser_effect Note the blip on “Magic Angle Spinning DNP (MAS-DNP)”… J
RE: [Vo]:Re: LENR on a Chip
From: Bob Cook * * The following is a link to a description of a nucleus-electron spin couple. http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2014-02/uob-hea021114.php Bob, It is nice to know that this kind of coupling is proved, but don’t you hate studies where the desired effect is only possible at extremely low temperatures - so low in fact, that there is little hope of pushing it higher: “At temperatures above 10 kelvin, the quantum wires … were not ordered. However, when the researchers used liquid helium to cool the wires to a temperature below 100 millikelvin….” Whoa. There are only a handful of Labs in the world that can do this. Since – to make the spin coupling effect useful as a portable power supply – which essentially means: to bypass the thermal cycle - we are looking for something which can happen at 300-500 kelvin, is there any chance of getting ordered spin under far different circumstances ? Maybe. I think it depends on whether an extreme magnetic field would substitute for low temperature. There are reasons to suggest a high field (multi-T) would substitute. When you think about it, either cryogenics or high field would “lock-in” polarization, which is what we want. But to make magnetism work in a small portable device, it would need to be a high field from a permanent magnet instead of an electromagnet and these only go to about 1 T today using NIB. And also, to make that 5 T field useful in a smart phone, it would have to be shielded … wow … daunting challenge. Lot of work to be done … but the one “enabling technology” which would make portable LENR (1 watt level) possible within a short time horizon, and at the same time could make the process independent of the thermal cycle, is HTSC. High Temperature Superconductivity. This could be the enabler allowing one to go from nuclear spin anomalies – all the way to useful electrical current, without the problems of heat conversion. HTSC – at least for use in a commercial setting, is a goal which has proved almost as elusive as LENR. Jones
Re: [Vo]:Rossi's 1 MW Thermal LENR plant trial. What's the current consensus?
From what we have been told, what is being tested now IS a commercial product, providing heat to a factory and saving the factory owner a significant amount of money in heating costs. On Thu, Aug 6, 2015 at 10:45 AM, Orionworks - Steven Vincent Johnson orionwo...@charter.net wrote: From Ashfield, ... The good news is that Aftenposten, Norway's largest newspaper , has reported they have expert third party confirmation that Rossi's 1 MW thermal LENR plant is working well. It is now at about 168 days of the 350 day trial. If, as now looks likely, LENR works, it should solve a lot of problems. I must confess that I have been remiss in keeping track of Rossi's 350 day 1 MW thermal LENR plant trial. Assuming this latest trial completes and the data looks good... what happens next? I don't know enough about this latest trial experiment to grok whether the engineering technology involved would be considered reliable enough or even sufficiently understood such that the components currently be used could presumably be re-engineered into the design of an actual commercial product. I may be mistaken on this point, but I'm assuming an attempt to design an actual commercial product would be the next logical step - perhaps not to private individuals but for some kind of industrial use, perhaps for heating large factory buildings cheaply. I'm assuming industrial oriented safety restrictions could be better enforced in ways that could not easily be done if sold to the private sector. Would components from the Vort Collective continuum care to comment? Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson OrionWorks.com zazzle.com/orionworks -- Frank Acland Publisher, E-Cat World http://www.e-catworld.com
[Vo]:Rossi's 1 MW Thermal LENR plant trial. What's the current consensus?
From Ashfield, ... The good news is that Aftenposten, Norway's largest newspaper , has reported they have expert third party confirmation that Rossi's 1 MW thermal LENR plant is working well. It is now at about 168 days of the 350 day trial. If, as now looks likely, LENR works, it should solve a lot of problems. I must confess that I have been remiss in keeping track of Rossi's 350 day 1 MW thermal LENR plant trial. Assuming this latest trial completes and the data looks good... what happens next? I don't know enough about this latest trial experiment to grok whether the engineering technology involved would be considered reliable enough or even sufficiently understood such that the components currently be used could presumably be re-engineered into the design of an actual commercial product. I may be mistaken on this point, but I'm assuming an attempt to design an actual commercial product would be the next logical step - perhaps not to private individuals but for some kind of industrial use, perhaps for heating large factory buildings cheaply. I'm assuming industrial oriented safety restrictions could be better enforced in ways that could not easily be done if sold to the private sector. Would components from the Vort Collective continuum care to comment? Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson OrionWorks.com zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]:Re: LENR on a Chip
RE: [Vo]:LENR on a ChipJones-- Thanks for the links. The large magnetic fields associated with the SSP’S may facilitate better alignment and and many body spin coupling with resonances to allow larger energy shifts and releases of potential energy—mass energy. It seems that such a release would be consistent with the second law of T-D. Bob Cook From: Bob Cook Sent: Thursday, August 06, 2015 7:14 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]:Re: LENR on a Chip Jones-- The following is a link to a description of a nucleus-electron spin couple. http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2014-02/uob-hea021114.php Bob Cook From: Jones Beene Sent: Wednesday, August 05, 2015 6:16 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: [Vo]:LENR on a Chip From: Bob Cook Ø ØIMHO, the changing B field creates the coupling associated with the coherent system’s spin state, all during the small time increment the appropriate resonances occur, to allow the transition of mass energy to phonic energy and/or low frequency EM energy… Bob … not necessarily low frequency (or how low is low?) … if the spin energy could be resonantly tuned to microwave frequencies, then direct conversion to DC is easier (has been demonstrated at acceptable efficiency at 900 MHz) http://scitation.aip.org/content/aip/journal/apl/103/16/10.1063/1.4824473 A planar “package” of 3-4 components: SPP chip, Ni-H target, and microwave collector is arguably possible as a self-powered “battery” for a smart phone or other small electronics which operates at room temperature, since SPP creation no longer requires incandescence. If we can operate without a thermal cycle, we can maximize spin conversion to electrical current with a minimal size. To do this, the parameters can possibly be tied into the Overhauser effect and DNP and operate somewhat as an analogy to the Mossbauer effect. I think Axil may have speculated on the type of spin coupling which would be necessary to bypass the thermal cycle altogether. Here is some Wiki-wisdom. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynamic_nuclear_polarisation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_Overhauser_effect Note the blip on “Magic Angle Spinning DNP (MAS-DNP)”… J
Re: [Vo]:Re: LENR on a Chip
RE: [Vo]:Re: LENR on a ChipJones-- An additional idea regarding control is the use of temperature to create phonic resonances, necessary for the coupling to the electron orbital spin. If this were so, a negative temperature coeff. would be present to stop a runaway reaction, although not as quickly as a loss of the intense B field associated with SSP decay. A ssm Rossi talks about may be consistent with a positive feed back mechanism from the SSP population with overlapping B fields which manage to allow new SSP’s to form before all SSP’s have decayed. The negative temperature coeff. of the system maintains a maximum population of SSP’s and hence a maximum energy conversion rate. A good dynamics and control program used by fission reactor designers could be useful in LENR design (LENR+ per Peter’s terminology I think). Bob Cook From: Bob Cook Sent: Thursday, August 06, 2015 8:57 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]:Re: LENR on a Chip Jones- I have had the same concern about the higher temperature coupling. However, I have always thought that the B field was the key—particularly in the Pd system with its high magnetic susceptibility. As you point out it may be that the ordering that comes about at low temperatures can occur at higher temperatures in big magnetic fields—the local B field resulting from a SSP or induced by an H field on a highly magnetic material. The MFMP experiments included such an H field on the Pd electrode. The problem with a permanent magnet as the source of the driving magnetic field is the lack of control. It may be that a variable B field is necessary to create the necessary resonances for spin coupling—and to kill the resonance for controlling the reaction rate. The many explosive reactions that have been reported in LENR experiments may have happened as a result of sustained resonant conditions. The transient nature of SSP’s may be what is necessary to stop a reaction, and a modest B field is what is necessary to let a SSP develop in the first place. Thus, the time constant for a LENR reaction would be associated with the lifetime of a SSP. This sounds a little like Rossi’s cat and mouse relationship. Bob Cook From: Jones Beene Sent: Thursday, August 06, 2015 8:17 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: [Vo]:Re: LENR on a Chip From: Bob Cook Ø Ø The following is a link to a description of a nucleus-electron spin couple. http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2014-02/uob-hea021114.php Bob, It is nice to know that this kind of coupling is proved, but don’t you hate studies where the desired effect is only possible at extremely low temperatures - so low in fact, that there is little hope of pushing it higher: “At temperatures above 10 kelvin, the quantum wires … were not ordered. However, when the researchers used liquid helium to cool the wires to a temperature below 100 millikelvin….” Whoa. There are only a handful of Labs in the world that can do this. Since – to make the spin coupling effect useful as a portable power supply – which essentially means: to bypass the thermal cycle - we are looking for something which can happen at 300-500 kelvin, is there any chance of getting ordered spin under far different circumstances ? Maybe. I think it depends on whether an extreme magnetic field would substitute for low temperature. There are reasons to suggest a high field (multi-T) would substitute. When you think about it, either cryogenics or high field would “lock-in” polarization, which is what we want. But to make magnetism work in a small portable device, it would need to be a high field from a permanent magnet instead of an electromagnet and these only go to about 1 T today using NIB. And also, to make that 5 T field useful in a smart phone, it would have to be shielded … wow … daunting challenge. Lot of work to be done … but the one “enabling technology” which would make portable LENR (1 watt level) possible within a short time horizon, and at the same time could make the process independent of the thermal cycle, is HTSC. High Temperature Superconductivity. This could be the enabler allowing one to go from nuclear spin anomalies – all the way to useful electrical current, without the problems of heat conversion. HTSC – at least for use in a commercial setting, is a goal which has proved almost as elusive as LENR. Jones
[Vo]:coding error
I started getting coding error message with some of the posts on the piece posted by Mats Lewan. Late this morning I can't even open Vortex. Content Encoding Error The page you are trying to view cannot be shown because it uses an invalid or unsupported form of compression. Please contact the website owners to inform them of this problem. Adrian Ashfield
RE: [Vo]:Rossi's 1 MW Thermal LENR plant trial. What's the current consensus?
Thanks Frank, Due to numerous personal distractions that are constantly invading my life I sort of got out of the habit of keeping tabs of e-Cat world. Perhaps I should try to remedy that. Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson OrionWorks.com zazzle.com/orionworks
[Vo]:Re: LENR on a Chip
RE: [Vo]:Re: LENR on a ChipJones- I have had the same concern about the higher temperature coupling. However, I have always thought that the B field was the key—particularly in the Pd system with its high magnetic susceptibility. As you point out it may be that the ordering that comes about at low temperatures can occur at higher temperatures in big magnetic fields—the local B field resulting from a SSP or induced by an H field on a highly magnetic material. The MFMP experiments included such an H field on the Pd electrode. The problem with a permanent magnet as the source of the driving magnetic field is the lack of control. It may be that a variable B field is necessary to create the necessary resonances for spin coupling—and to kill the resonance for controlling the reaction rate. The many explosive reactions that have been reported in LENR experiments may have happened as a result of sustained resonant conditions. The transient nature of SSP’s may be what is necessary to stop a reaction, and a modest B field is what is necessary to let a SSP develop in the first place. Thus, the time constant for a LENR reaction would be associated with the lifetime of a SSP. This sounds a little like Rossi’s cat and mouse relationship. Bob Cook From: Jones Beene Sent: Thursday, August 06, 2015 8:17 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: [Vo]:Re: LENR on a Chip From: Bob Cook Ø Ø The following is a link to a description of a nucleus-electron spin couple. http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2014-02/uob-hea021114.php Bob, It is nice to know that this kind of coupling is proved, but don’t you hate studies where the desired effect is only possible at extremely low temperatures - so low in fact, that there is little hope of pushing it higher: “At temperatures above 10 kelvin, the quantum wires … were not ordered. However, when the researchers used liquid helium to cool the wires to a temperature below 100 millikelvin….” Whoa. There are only a handful of Labs in the world that can do this. Since – to make the spin coupling effect useful as a portable power supply – which essentially means: to bypass the thermal cycle - we are looking for something which can happen at 300-500 kelvin, is there any chance of getting ordered spin under far different circumstances ? Maybe. I think it depends on whether an extreme magnetic field would substitute for low temperature. There are reasons to suggest a high field (multi-T) would substitute. When you think about it, either cryogenics or high field would “lock-in” polarization, which is what we want. But to make magnetism work in a small portable device, it would need to be a high field from a permanent magnet instead of an electromagnet and these only go to about 1 T today using NIB. And also, to make that 5 T field useful in a smart phone, it would have to be shielded … wow … daunting challenge. Lot of work to be done … but the one “enabling technology” which would make portable LENR (1 watt level) possible within a short time horizon, and at the same time could make the process independent of the thermal cycle, is HTSC. High Temperature Superconductivity. This could be the enabler allowing one to go from nuclear spin anomalies – all the way to useful electrical current, without the problems of heat conversion. HTSC – at least for use in a commercial setting, is a goal which has proved almost as elusive as LENR. Jones
Re: [Vo]:coding error
That may explain how you managed to achieve including an attachment of the 6 page Word doc in a Vortex-l email message. Bob Cook -Original Message- From: a.ashfield Sent: Thursday, August 06, 2015 8:33 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]:coding error I started getting coding error message with some of the posts on the piece posted by Mats Lewan. Late this morning I can't even open Vortex. Content Encoding Error The page you are trying to view cannot be shown because it uses an invalid or unsupported form of compression. Please contact the website owners to inform them of this problem. Adrian Ashfield
RE: [Vo]:A 21st Century Case for Gold: A New Information Theory of Money.
The Plutocrats of the day wanted a march on Washington to overthrow FDR as secretly led by them. Congress held hearings and supposedly investigated but as with modern day TBTJ banks (suggesting snipers for the Occupy movement and paying for police ‘charities’ in appreciation of their future work) it went nowhere. Smedley Butler was a credible patriot who got tired of being a gangster for Wall Street. Inflation of services has been reported on National Public Radio and education is most noticeable. There is huge inflation in investments/assets as money desperately chases yield. The zero interest rate phenomena makes it worse as well as fears about banks (add ‘bail in’s to the list). The positive potential here is that a solid crash could eliminate many of the 1% and their power. Few seem to realize that the millennials situation may doom any future economy – there are homes not being bought, families not being started and crushing college debt for many who now live with their parents. At some point, it isn’t reversible. This may be an overlooked factor in why ending the Great Depression was so difficult – damaging the ‘handover’ of an economy to the next generation.
