Re: [Vo]:ecatnews.com closes

[Daniel Rocha]

Let's foucs now on QuarkX.

RE: [Vo]:Is Particle Physics About to Crack?

[Jones Beene]

Imagine the basic 13 atom FCC quantum dot made of the isotope nickel 62. It 
would have mass-energy of 751 GeV. This crystal is composed of atomic and 
nuclear bosons (pure 62Ni).

Let’s assume that this particle has two potential identities – one being the 
particle described above and the other being the unexpected new particle 
discovered at the LHC which can be described as the superset of the Higgs – 6 
Higgs bosons as a unit of 750 GeV mass-energy.

Finally, how much of a stretch is it to assume strong supersymmetry such that 
at cryogenic conditions in a multi-T magnetic field, the quantum dot of the 
first paragraph can transition into a new identity as the super-Higgs, possibly 
benefitting from a laser pulse - and decay in the same fashion as seen at LHC.

Whoa. There are major implications of that possibility.

RE: [Vo]:ecatnews.com closes

[Jones Beene]

From: Craig Brown 

 

Agreed.  The eCat is as dead as a short-sighted mouse who's just mistakenly 
walked into a cats only nightclub during a time of extreme famine.

 

 

That much is true. Nevertheless, at least a portion of the broader range of 
metal-hydride technology remains valid – which would be the Ni-H work as 
demonstrated by Thermacore, Mills, Haldeman, Piantelli and others, as well as 
decades of successful Pd-D work. 

 

This leaves open the slight possibility that Rossi-gate has not yet run its 
full course, and some drama remains. 

RE: [Vo]:ecatnews.com closes

[Craig Brown]

"ecatnews.com closes".Agreed.  The eCat is as dead as a short-sighted mouse who's just mistakenly walked into a cats only nightclub during a time of extreme famine.


 Original Message 
Subject: [Vo]:ecatnews.com closes
From: Jed Rothwell 
Date: Wed, June 15, 2016 11:30 am
To: "vortex-l@eskimo.com" 

See:http://ecatnews.com/?p=2702 

[Vo]:ecatnews.com closes

[Jed Rothwell]

See:

http://ecatnews.com/?p=2702

Re: [Vo]:The Rossi Saga Part 2

[a.ashfield]

This is the best explanation I have seen so far.  From MFMP
https://www.facebook.com/MartinFleischmannMemorialProject/posts/1199701140060583

E-Cat X operating parameters claimed following recent test.

Whilst there is very little credible data shared in the 'report' on the 
E-Cat X, information has been released all the same which you can read 
about here:


http://goo.gl/qNQioI

This is what MFMP volunteer Bob Greenyer had to say...

"From my half-formed understanding...

Photons emitted can be

1. Thermal (IR /THz)
2. Visible (The stuff you can see from red up to blue light)
3. Invisible (UV, EUV, Soft X-Rays, X-Rays, 'Gammas')

The proportion of the type of photon will depend on the transition 
elements used, their relative geometry / crystalline structure / cluster 
size, their level of thermal excitement and the drive signal applied.


The mix of Group 1 alkaline metal will help determine the activity as 
would control field strength. Group 1 metals can also influence the 
yield of electrons.


The direct electricity generation would come from charged particles, 
possibly from Alphas from p + 7Li reaction (that is the principal 
thermal photon generator), but I believe, direct electricity comes 
principally from Auger electrons - the stimulation photons of which I 
have described in previous videos come from two processes. If these 
processes are driven to emit photons of high enough energy to create 
Auger electrons, there will be less visible light and more electrons 
that will allow direct production of electricity. The rate of 
electricity production will be directly limited by the geometry and 
internal structure of the emitter and the proportional amounts of metal 
types in it.


Given the reported operating temperature and hard limit of Auger 
electron yield from a particular element, I would expect that the 
principle transition metal used is NOT nickel in the claimed device - 
since Nickel could possibly yield approximately 60% electrons, 40% X-Rays.


Even if the principal element was Palladium, I would expect it to be 
approximately 80% electrons, 40% X-Rays


Therefore, I conclude that the principle transition metal used is 
Platinum and this sets the upper limit of approximately 10% direct 
electric yield. It would also mean that when driven to produce direct 
electricity in preference to heat/visible light, it would yield more 
high energy photons and it would create a 'bluer' light output. 
Essentially it would produce more X-Rays and so this author re-iterates 
his assertion that this is why it is called E-Cat X. In addition, the 
melting point of Platinum at 1,768ºC is favourable to a wide range of 
operating temperatures. The size of the device would be appropriate if 
working with such an expensive material.


This will help you get the concept. https://goo.gl/jSsqYQ 

(Note Lithium is the smallest element that will yield Auger electrons 
and will yield essentially 100% and no x-rays.)


I would suggest that the claimed device is a surface modified platinum 
wire or other substrate as the high temperature conductor. This provides 
incredibly efficient direct, controllable heating and field. The surface 
would contain platinum - perhaps as open cell rhombic dodecahedron 
clusters (if stable at the desired temperature). The rhombic 
dodecahedron clusters could be formed by the previously described 
nickel/platinum synthesis process and rapid fused to the substrate wire 
through joule heat pulse when the wire is immersed in the powder. I 
would suggest that there is added Lithium, and additional Caesium in 
very small quantities and Protium. This together would constitute the 
reaction matrix.


The reaction matrix so described above would be stimulated directly in 
the same basic fashion as a Celani wire, allowing for precise control 
over the system and direct monitoring of temperature through a substrate 
conductor resistance function. Additionally, an external metallic shell 
in combination with the internal conductor could provide HT differential 
for both accelerating the yield of electrons(-)/protons(+)/alphas(+) and 
thermalising photons away from the generator - if coated on the inside 
with an appropriate nano material, it could downshift incident high 
energy photons into photons with more suitable energies. There could be 
a light transparent material between the main reaction matrix and the 
metal sheath to contain the reaction environment or the outer metal 
could provide this function. The geometry would need to be such that 
converting nano particles are stable at the required operating temperature.


Bob Greenyer"

Re: [Vo]:NEWS: HOUSE COMMITTEE REQUIRES LENR BRIEFING FROM SECRETARY OF DEFENSE

[Ruby]

Jed, Why do you say this?  I am curious.

Ruby

On 6/14/16 11:27 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote:

See:

https://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/index.php/Thread/3350-NEWS-HOUSE-COMMITTEE-REQUIRES-LENR-BRIEFING-FROM-SECRETARY-OF-DEFENSE/

This couldn't come at a worse time.

- Jed




--
Ruby Carat
Eureka, CA USA

r...@coldfusionnow.org
www.coldfusionnow.org
lenrexplained.com

RE: [Vo]:Is Particle Physics About to Crack?

[Jones Beene]

Here is something worth thinking about in the context of why nickel could be 
effective for creating a thermal anomaly (as seen in LENR) in the context of 
supersymmetry and the 750 GeV “big-god” particle. (let’s call it the “BG” so as 
not to offend). Admittedly, this takes SUSY to the extreme.

The simplest quantum dot is the FCC crystal, which is composed of 12 atoms in a 
cage around a single core atom – 13 in all. This is the FCC close-packed 
“cubohexahedron” which is the most common ideal crystal structure for 
transition metals. This stable geometry was the inspiration of Buckminster 
Fuller’s dymaxion.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuboctahedron

Nickel has an average molecular weight of 58.7 so 13 atoms in the most basic 
possible quantum dot of nickel weigh 763 amu and 1 amu = 931.49 MeV so the 
nickel quantum dot would be 711 GeV equivalent, which is a bit too light for 
the BG particle… 

… but if that quantum dot was made of the isotope nickel 62, it would be 
right-on for the BG  – 751 Gev… most interesting, no? 

Wow, not only is it the correct value for BG cross-identity, this crystal is 
also a molecular boson composted of atomic bosons, composed of nuclear bosons.

Heck, for all we know, the hydrogen in Ni-H reaction itself is superfluous, or 
merely helps to isolate the FCC crystal, and the nickel itself is the active 
ingredient  :-)

That would be a big paradigm shift for Ni-H –since the former catalyst becomes 
the active fuel and the former active fuel becomes the catalyst.

---
I should have explained that SUSY is short for supersymmetry.

Supersymmetry is a proposed type of spacetime symmetry that relates the basic 
classes of elementary particles: bosons and fermions… thus the speculation that 
there could be a fermion “relative” to the new boson which has special 
properties. Obviously, it would be unlikely to appear as a single particle.

BTW – nickel could be a near fit … say, in a crystal of 12 atoms…[make that 13]

[Vo]:NEWS: HOUSE COMMITTEE REQUIRES LENR BRIEFING FROM SECRETARY OF DEFENSE

[Jed Rothwell]

See:

https://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/index.php/Thread/3350-NEWS-HOUSE-COMMITTEE-REQUIRES-LENR-BRIEFING-FROM-SECRETARY-OF-DEFENSE/

This couldn't come at a worse time.

- Jed

RE: [Vo]:Is Particle Physics About to Crack?

[Jones Beene]

I should have explained that SUSY is short for supersymmetry.

 

Supersymmetry is a proposed type of spacetime symmetry that relates the basic 
classes of elementary particles: bosons and fermions… thus the speculation that 
there could be a fermion “relative” to the new boson which has special 
properties. Obviously, it would be unlikely to appear as a single particle.

 

BTW – nickel could be a near fit … say, in a crystal of 12 atoms…

 

From: Axil Axil

 

"If the new kid’s name is SUSY, does that mean the her partner will be a 750 
GEV fermion?"

 

I saw in an explanation that the particle must be a boson with spin 1 because 
it produces 2 photons with spin 1.

 

This means that the 750 particle is a force carrier, This particle could be the 
particle that produces LENR, a monopole force carrier and/or a tachyon. 

Fwd: [Vo]:Is Particle Physics About to Crack?

[Axil Axil]

"If the new kid’s name is SUSY, does that mean the her partner will be a
750 GEV fermion?"

I saw in an explanation that the particle must be a boson with spin 1
because it produces 2 photons with spin 1.

This means that the 750 particle is a force carrier, This particle could be
the particle that produces LENR, a monopole force carrier and/or a tachyon.

RE: [Vo]:Is Particle Physics About to Crack?

[Jones Beene]

Then there is SUSY. 

 

If the new particle-x (and/or 5th force)  and the LHC 750 GeV boson are
validated in some way, along with the Higgs, is the agglomeration of all of
these new findings the real 5th force, and not any constituent particle?
(and is it  coincidental that the mass of 6 Higgs particles = the new kid on
the block. 

 

If the new kid's name is SUSY, does that mean the her partner will be a 750
GEV fermion?

 

What about a molecular analog at 750 GeV? Would it have unusual or special
properties. something like deuterated antimony Sb6D6 or tin/lithium Sn6Li6
or even a crystal phase of Tellurium ?

 

Is Particle Physics About to Crack?

This story appeared today on the Sci-Am blog.

 

http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/is-particle-physics-about-to-
crack-wide-open/

. but it can be (should be) read in the context of two other recent stories
in particle physics, all from last week - and which are not mentioned. Those
other two are the "fifth force" and "particle-x" discoveries.  Those later
two stories both relate to a putative new particle with mass-energy around
17 MeV, which could be the same particle, whereas the LHC story is about a
massive particle of 750 GeV.

There is the off-chance that all of these stories could be involved in LENR,
especially the two which talk about a lower energy particle - but even the
last one is not ruled out, especially in regard to the Holmlid effect -
where the goal is to explain a very large (apparent) appearance of muons. 

Since a cluster of deuterons, the so-called UDD, which is irradiated by a
laser pulse in Holmlid's work can easily supply a 750 GeV burst, this large
amount of mass-energy cannot be ruled out, even in a small LENR experiment .
which could manifest itself as muons in the decay process! After all, it's
not really much in macro terms- the ten microjoule range, aka the proverbial
flea-fart.

Together with the ludicrous Rossi Quark-x report, this convergence of the
highly improbable with the remotely possible has to crack you up, particle
fizzicyst or not. 

It actually makes me wonder if we are not seeing a crack in the Sim. J

[Vo]:LENR's little Lighthouse, we are learning the plurals of energy excess

[Peter Gluck]

It is just the first report, imagine what will you know on June 14,
2017

there are news too and the end of a never-ending toxic thread

http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2016/06/june-14-2016-quark-x-little-lighthouse.html
-- 
Dr. Peter Gluck
Cluj, Romania
http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com

[Vo]:Is Particle Physics About to Crack?

[Jones Beene]

Is Particle Physics About to Crack?

This story appeared today on the Sci-Am blog.
http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/is-particle-physics-about-to-
crack-wide-open/

. but it can be (should be) read in the context of two other recent stories
in particle physics, all from last week - and which are not mentioned. Those
other two are the "fifth force" and "particle-x" discoveries.  Those later
two stories both relate to a putative new particle with mass-energy around
17 MeV, which could be the same particle, whereas the LHC story is about a
massive particle of 750 GeV.

There is the off-chance that all of these stories could be involved in LENR,
especially the two which talk about a lower energy particle - but even the
last one is not ruled out, especially in regard to the Holmlid effect -
where the goal is to explain a very large (apparent) appearance of muons. 

Since a cluster of deuterons, the so-called UDD, which is irradiated by a
laser pulse in Holmlid's work can easily supply a 750 GeV burst, this large
amount of mass-energy cannot be ruled out, even in a small LENR experiment .
which could manifest itself as muons in the decay process! After all, it's
not really much in macro terms- the ten microjoule range, aka the proverbial
flea-fart.

Together with the ludicrous Rossi Quark-x report, this convergence of the
highly improbable with the remotely possible has to crack you up, particle
fizzicyst or not. 

It actually makes me wonder if we are not seeing a crack in the Sim. :-)

Re: [Vo]:great stuff for you

[Jed Rothwell]

Stephen A. Lawrence  wrote:

Can we get this Kowalski guy banned?  This is pretty clearly spam.
>

It isn't Kowalski himself. It is a spam-bot sending spam with his return
address. We told him to change his e-mail address. That can be difficult as
you know.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:The Rossi Saga Part 2

[Daniel Rocha]

I think finally Rossi is ready for a COP of infinity! Just collect the
visible part with energy cells and input.

Re: [Vo]:The Rossi Saga Part 2

[Daniel Rocha]

*solar collectors

Re: [Vo]:The Rossi Saga Part 2

[a.ashfield]

ECAT QuarkX preliminary report
Report Disclaimer:

THIS IS NOT A THIRD PARTY REPORT AND ALL THE MEASUREMENTS HAVE BEEN MADE 
BY ANDREA ROSSI AND HIS TEAM. THEREFORE THESE RESULTS CANNOT BE 
CONSIDERED AT ANY EFFECT OTHER THAN AN INTERNAL PROCESS CONTROL, NOTHING 
MORE.


DESCRIPTION OF THE QUARK X:

Cylinder made with proper material:

Dimensions:
length 30 mm
diam  1 mm
Energy produced: 100 Wh/h
Energy consumed: 0.5 Wh/h
Light produced (percentage of the energy produced): 0-50%
Electric energy produced: 0-10%
Heat produced: 0- 100%

Light, energy and heat can be modulated to modulate the percentages 
within the limits above listed, provided the combined percentages must 
total 100%.


Extremely interesting is the blue light, the analysis of which has 
resolved theoretical problems related to the roots of the effect.


Temperature on the surface of the QuarkX: more than 1,500*C
Note: 2 other QuarkX put in analogous situation gave the same results.

Further disclaimer:

THIS IS NOT A THIRD PARTY REPORT. IT IS AN INTERNAL REPORT RELATED TO 
MEASURES MADE BY LEONARDO CORPORATION


End of the report.

Description of the photo:

Photo of the heat exchanger pipe that contains the QuarkX: the light 
spot is through a light eye holed in the pipe. The blue halo from the 
hole has been analyzed and has made possible to understand the 
theoretical roots of the effect: the QuarkX is inside the pipe .


http://ecat.com/news/ecat-quark-x-preliminary-report-findings