Re: [Vo]:The dark side of dense hydrogen

[Jed Rothwell]

Eric Walker  wrote:


> In addition to the possibilities that have been mentioned, there is
> another that comes to mind should at some point LENR be harnessed as a
> practical source of energy.  Consider small, quiet drones the size of
> hummingbirds, which are able to linger in an area for months on end.  With
> such devices a state player could quietly assassinate anyone who was not
> deep in some bunker.
>

Yes. I described this in chapter 11 of my book. Along with several other
nasty weapons. I heard about these things from people in the military such
as Adm. Griffin. Military experts are well aware of how cold fusion might
be used to enhance conventional weapons.

New energy sources have played a key role in military technology since
1600, especially in naval warfare after 1800. Ironclad ships (and later
steel ships) and big guns would not be possible without steam engines.
Sailing ships would never be able to support them. Steam power had to come
first.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:The dark side of dense hydrogen

[Eric Walker]

On Wed, Jan 4, 2017 at 12:40 PM, Bob Higgins 
wrote:

I think the real concern for weaponization is not the first thought
> everyone jumps to, which is explosive magnifier.
>

In addition to the possibilities that have been mentioned, there is another
that comes to mind should at some point LENR be harnessed as a practical
source of energy.  Consider small, quiet drones the size of hummingbirds,
which are able to linger in an area for months on end.  With such devices a
state player could quietly assassinate anyone who was not deep in some
bunker.  Before long this technology would be available not only to
militaries, but to organized crime and terrorism as well.  There might be
little that could be done to protect from such a threat.

Eric

Re: [Vo]:The SunCell is a LENR system

[Brian Ahern]

LENR folks are giving way too much adulation to:

Andrea Rossi

Randall Mills

Robert Godes


All three have succeeded with no independent data.  They all refuse simple 
obvious testing. Mills is perhaps the biggest show of all. His SunCell has 
never been tested. It would be child's play to hook up a water flow calorimeter 
to

demonstrate a COP above 1.0


He will not do it. Have you heard his reasoning?


He explained the lack of testing with the simple solution:'Shut up'!!!



From: bobcook39...@gmail.com 
Sent: Wednesday, January 4, 2017 3:45 PM
To: Axil Axil; vortex-l
Subject: RE: [Vo]:The SunCell is a LENR system


http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/LochakGlowenergyn.pdf

Low-energy nuclear reactions and the leptonic monopole 
...
lenr-canr.org
1 Low-energy nuclear reactions and the leptonic monopole Georges Lochak*, 
Leonid Urutskoev** *Fondation Louis de Broglie, Paris, France **RECOM, 
Kurchatov Institute ...





This report addresses Higgins comment regarding the #1 issue.  It would appear 
neutrons are not involved in the LENR reactions reported using Ti foils.  See 
the discussion on page 7&8 of the report.



Russ- That was a good find.



Bob Cook









From: Axil Axil
Sent: Wednesday, January 4, 2017 12:11 PM
To: vortex-l
Subject: [Vo]:The SunCell is a LENR system



As the SunCell R moves forward over the coming months, certain hard to 
understand problems will develop in that effort that will show that the SunCell 
is really a LENR based system. As a foreshadowing of these development 
problems, I will make a prediction about how the SunCell works as a LENR system 
which if realized will disprove the Hydrino theory as a central mover in the 
way the SunCell functions. This production and its expansion will demonstrate 
how LENR works in the plasma state as a process centered on transition metal 
nanowire production as a condensate from the vapor state.

As background to develop and explain this issue, the boiling point of silver is 
2435 K (2162 °C, 3924 °F). If the high temperature of the plasma inside the 
SunCell keeps the silver vapor from condensing into nanoparticles than the 
dusty plasma based LENR reaction will stop. The SunCell will flicker around the 
boiling point of silver and the plasma temperature will stabilize and hover at 
the 2162C boiling point of silver.

R. Mills has shown two SunCell distinct architectures that have demonstrated 
two separate capiblities, first: high power density, second: long duration and 
self-sustained ignition.

There is a major differences between the full power SunCell unit that has used 
a tungsten electrode and the lower temperature long reaction endurance unit 
used to show self-sustained mode.

In the full power test, Mills used tungsten whose boiling point is 6203 K (5930 
°C, 10,706 °F). There is no temperature limitation problem with nanoparticle 
formation here. In the low power endurance test, the temperature of the plasma 
produced was far below the full power test because the test reactor containment 
structure was stainless steel.

I predict that the Mills SunCell will not work at full power where the 
temperature needs to reach 3000C using the silver liquid electrodes because the 
plasma at that temperature requirement will get far too hot for silver 
condensation. The temperature cap is 2162 °C using silver, its vaporization 
temperature.

As a goldilocks solution, Mills might try a possible high temperature 
replacement for silver: Titanium, boiling point 3560 K (3287 °C, 5949 °F).

I also believe that the shape of the nanoparticle is important. The 
nanoparticle in dusty plasma might need to be reformed into nanowires. Silver 
can produce nanowires and so can titanium.

Titanium has been shown the capability to do this dusty plasma LENR reaction 
function nicely in the exploding foil experiments described here:

Low-energy nuclear reactions and the leptonic monopole
Georges Lochak, Leonid Urutskoev

lenr-canr.org/acrobat/LochakGlowenergyn.pdf

These exploding foil experiments vaporize titanium and then produce LENR 
reactions such as fusion, fission and transmutation. This type of experiment 
provides support from my belief that the SunCell is really based on the LENR 
reaction rather than this hydrino myth.

The number exploding wire experiments done in Russia has been extensive, so 
much so that a computer program has been written based on these experimental 
results that predict what the transmutation results will be based on the type 
of material used in the exploding wire or foil.

There are other SunCell like LENR experiments that have demonstrated solid 
transmutation results. Proton 21 is one.

rexresearch.com/adamenko/adamenko.htm

This bring up and 

[Vo]:Fw: [teslafy] 127% efficiency shown on xenon-krypton discharges.

[Harvey Norris]

 Pioneering the Applications of Interphasal Resonances 
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/teslafy/

 On Wednesday, January 4, 2017 6:15 PM, "harv...@yahoo.com [teslafy]" 
 wrote:
 

     Comments added to Stabilized Xenon- Krypton Discharges What was not noted 
in this video was the ~6 ma amperage level measured at identical levels from 
both ends of the twin series discharges and also the important fact that a 
short measurement of the sources showed about double this amount. According to 
the maximum energy transfer theorem this means the amount of energy on the 
sources of emf and the loads are also ~ equal. This becomes crucial in order to 
demonstrate the TRUE efficiency of the primary energy input vs the secondary 
energy output. Equally relevant is the fact that according to max energy 
theorem the combined secondary vibrations should be halved when powering a max 
energy load @ 50% efficiency. In a nutshell it is the delivery of power to a 
load that in turn reduces the efficiency of delivery to that load. It should 
then be interpreted that when we measure the differences in energy oscillation 
between the primary and secondary systems, that further losses are ensued by 
that secondary vibration itself in the reflection of that energy to another 
element designated as the load. Thus since the ordinary efficiency measurement 
between primary and secondary has shown some 127% efficiency; we can not 
specify that same amount of efficiency of delivery to the actual load; UNLESS 
the secondary transfer of energy occurs at max energy transfer in which case 
the efficiency measurements are then identical for both secondary and load 
observations. Thus we can state that the xenon and krypton discharges can be 
advertised as having a 127% efficiency as shown on flicker and taking from this 
source video; now widely advertised as follows
4.2 nf ballasted xenon discharge. 
||
||||   4.2 nf ballasted xenon discharge.  127% efficiency 
measured with 4.2 nf air capacity interposed between open circuit tower-globe 
connections. ~6 ma obtained from a 12 ma supply indicating range o...||
|  View on www.flickr.com  |Preview by Yahoo|
||

 
https://www.flickr.com/photos/harvich/31423431985/in/dateposted-public/

  __._,_.___ Posted by: harv...@yahoo.com 
|  Reply via web post  | • |   Reply to sender   | • |   Reply to group   | • | 
 Start a New Topic  | • |  Messages in this topic (1)  |

Have you tried the highest rated email app? With 4.5 stars in iTunes, 
the Yahoo Mail app is the highest rated email app on the market. What are you 
waiting for? Now you can access all your inboxes (Gmail, Outlook, AOL and more) 
in one place. Never delete an email again with 1000GB of free cloud storage.
   Visit Your Group
• Privacy • Unsubscribe • Terms of Use 
 .  
 __,_._,___#yiv0903090164 #yiv0903090164 -- #yiv0903090164ygrp-mkp {border:1px 
solid #d8d8d8;font-family:Arial;margin:10px 0;padding:0 10px;}#yiv0903090164 
#yiv0903090164ygrp-mkp hr {border:1px solid #d8d8d8;}#yiv0903090164 
#yiv0903090164ygrp-mkp #yiv0903090164hd 
{color:#628c2a;font-size:85%;font-weight:700;line-height:122%;margin:10px 
0;}#yiv0903090164 #yiv0903090164ygrp-mkp #yiv0903090164ads 
{margin-bottom:10px;}#yiv0903090164 #yiv0903090164ygrp-mkp .yiv0903090164ad 
{padding:0 0;}#yiv0903090164 #yiv0903090164ygrp-mkp .yiv0903090164ad p 
{margin:0;}#yiv0903090164 #yiv0903090164ygrp-mkp .yiv0903090164ad a 
{color:#ff;text-decoration:none;}#yiv0903090164 #yiv0903090164ygrp-sponsor 
#yiv0903090164ygrp-lc {font-family:Arial;}#yiv0903090164 
#yiv0903090164ygrp-sponsor #yiv0903090164ygrp-lc #yiv0903090164hd {margin:10px 
0px;font-weight:700;font-size:78%;line-height:122%;}#yiv0903090164 
#yiv0903090164ygrp-sponsor #yiv0903090164ygrp-lc .yiv0903090164ad 
{margin-bottom:10px;padding:0 0;}#yiv0903090164 #yiv0903090164actions 
{font-family:Verdana;font-size:11px;padding:10px 0;}#yiv0903090164 
#yiv0903090164activity 
{background-color:#e0ecee;float:left;font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;padding:10px;}#yiv0903090164
 #yiv0903090164activity span {font-weight:700;}#yiv0903090164 
#yiv0903090164activity span:first-child 
{text-transform:uppercase;}#yiv0903090164 #yiv0903090164activity span a 
{color:#5085b6;text-decoration:none;}#yiv0903090164 #yiv0903090164activity span 
span {color:#ff7900;}#yiv0903090164 #yiv0903090164activity span 
.yiv0903090164underline {text-decoration:underline;}#yiv0903090164 
.yiv0903090164attach 
{clear:both;display:table;font-family:Arial;font-size:12px;padding:10px 
0;width:400px;}#yiv0903090164 .yiv0903090164attach div a 
{text-decoration:none;}#yiv0903090164 .yiv0903090164attach img 
{border:none;padding-right:5px;}#yiv0903090164 .yiv0903090164attach label 
{display:block;margin-bottom:5px;}#yiv0903090164 .yiv0903090164attach label a 
{text-decoration:none;}#yiv0903090164 blockquote {margin:0 0 0 
4px;}#yiv0903090164 

Re: [Vo]:The dark side of dense hydrogen

[Axil Axil]

The detonation of a fission device includes the compression of the pit to
1/3 of its original  volume. This compression is done using systemic
explosives shockwaves. There is also neutron reflectors/amplifiers involved
to keep neutrons inside the pit.

In LENR, by their very nature, the lack of confinement of muons makes a
rapid chain reaction impossible because the speed of the chain reaction
cannot be confined and therefore be accelerated.

On Wed, Jan 4, 2017 at 5:31 PM, Jones Beene  wrote:

>  Russ George wrote:
>
> Whoa indeed, nanoseconds are way to slow for fission!
>
>
> So what? Who needs fission when you can achieve complete nuclear
> disintegration - as Holmlid claims to do with a small laser.
>
> With fission of U, the energy release per nucleon is in the range of
> 200MeV. With laser implosion of UDD, the energy available is 2 GeV. Given
> that the mass of the U is 120 times more to start with but the energy
> release of fission is 10 times less, there is a great advantage to the
> Holmlid effect. The energy density favors UDD by three orders of magnitude
> but it is not a direct competition. Muons are weakly interacting, but this
> is not important, since in the big picture - we already have overkill with
> our fission/fusion arsenal. That arsenal will not be replaced. It is a sunk
> cost.
>
> The use of LENR as a weapon will probably emerge in other novel ways which
> are not even considered now - on the small scale instead of the large. A
> laser pointer engineered to ignite a milligram of UDD - that is the nature
> of the new threat. It can be delivered by drone.
>

Re: [Vo]:The dark side of dense hydrogen

[Jones Beene]

 Russ George wrote:


Whoa indeed, nanoseconds are way to slow for fission!



So what? Who needs fission when you can achieve complete nuclear 
disintegration - as Holmlid claims to do with a small laser.


With fission of U, the energy release per nucleon is in the range of 
200MeV. With laser implosion of UDD, the energy available is 2 GeV. 
Given that the mass of the U is 120 times more to start with but the 
energy release of fission is 10 times less, there is a great advantage 
to the Holmlid effect. The energy density favors UDD by three orders of 
magnitude but it is not a direct competition. Muons are weakly 
interacting, but this is not important, since in the big picture - we 
already have overkill with our fission/fusion arsenal. That arsenal will 
not be replaced. It is a sunk cost.


The use of LENR as a weapon will probably emerge in other novel ways 
which are not even considered now - on the small scale instead of the 
large. A laser pointer engineered to ignite a milligram of UDD - that is 
the nature of the new threat. It can be delivered by drone.

RE: [Vo]:The dark side of dense hydrogen

[Russ George]

Cold fusion is a piss poor cousin in the enrichment game with fissionable 
species to paths with abundant neutrons.

 

From: Axil Axil [mailto:janap...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, January 4, 2017 1:55 PM
To: vortex-l
Subject: Re: [Vo]:The dark side of dense hydrogen

 

The real problem with LENR is the LENR reaction's preference for the even 
isotopes U238, U232 of the odd isotopes. That make LENR a transuranic element  
enrichment risk.

 

>From my reference:

 

" It was found that the activity of both U isotopes decreased with respect to 
that of Cs. However, the activity of the 238U isotope decreases to a greater 
extent. Thus, the ratio of 235U to 238U becomes bigger than unity. Prior to 
these experiments, we made sure that the specific activity of 137Cs does not 
change noticeably. The real situation is more complicated [3] but this is a 
topic of a separate report. For us, it is important that the transformation can 
also take place outside the plasma channel. This is a rather “unpleasant 
surprise,” because, probably, within several years, when the low-temperature 
transmutation will be studied in more detail, it would be rather easy to devise 
a facile and inexpensive process to enrich uranium. In view of the growth of 
terrorism all over the world, this outcome seems deplorable."

 

It seen that muon fission likes even isotopes more that odd ones.

 

On Wed, Jan 4, 2017 at 4:14 PM, Jones Beene  > wrote:



Whoa -  an observer must possess a great deal of blind hope to imagine that 
weaponization of LENR is impossible simply because neutrons are lacking. In 
fact, dense hydrogen is physically similar to the neutron.

Most importantly, the number of documented runaway LENR reactions makes the 
statement of "impossibility" almost silly, based on experience. It has 
happened. As for slow ramp up - Holmlid shows us the gain can happen in 
nanoseconds.

Let's back track a bit. Neutrons are required for one kind of chain reaction, 
but the modality is broader. A chain reaction is any self-expanding sequence of 
reactions where a reactive product (by-product or emission) causes additional 
reactions to take place. 

The prototypical chain reaction is actually combustion in an internal 
combustion engine, initiated by a spark or by compression. Fission is another 
but there are more including, of course, the domino effect. The key to all 
chain reactions is positive feedback. Positive feedback leads to a 
self-amplifying chain of events. in a number of physical systems including 
these:

1) Chemical reactions of many kinds, esp. combustion
2) The neutron chain reaction of nuclear physics
3) The avalanche cascade - breakdown in gases
4) The avalanche breakdown in semiconductors
5) Population inversion - lasing
6) QM entangled systems of many kinds 
7) Domino effect and meme effect
8) Audio feedback loop
9) Mossbauer effect

Even if neutrons were required for the most energetic kind of weaponization, 
dense hydrogen is similar enough to the neutron that it could substitute -- and 
in the case of Holmlid - exceed by orders of magnitude the gain from the 
nuclear fission chain reaction. 



 Jed Rothwell wrote:

 

Most researchers think that a runaway reaction or explosion is impossible for 
three reasons:

 

1. Cold fusion only works with an intact metal lattice.

2. It ramps up relatively slowly, so it would destroy the lattice before it 
could increase to high levels.

3. It is not a chain reaction. In a uranium fission chain reaction, one event 
directly triggers two or more others, and the reaction can increase 
exponentially over a very short time (80 generations in 1 microsecond).

 

I hope that is right.

 

- Jed

 

 

 

RE: [Vo]:The SunCell is a LENR system

[Russ George]

Most assuredly definitive Ag transmutation isotope shift data is in hand, no 
dispute possible in that! One path is clearly the insertion of a deuteron into 
some relatively high Z nuclei. Surely that has a coherent pathway. As for prior 
art (rigged patent system nonsense) there is more than one way to skin that 
Mills-Cat. I am OK with sitting back to watch and learn from what Mill’s 
presents, (Rossi as well in that regard). With a few days of laying hands on 
materials (a few milligrams) from either M or E ‘cats’ the definitive isotope 
studies will be complete and reveal all! No question that we know how to do 
that work very well and have well worn paths to follow.  The real problem with 
cold fusion, aka lenr for those faint of heart or soul, is and always has been 
the twin problem of guarded inventors and god awful gawkers (both with innocent 
and avaricious intent).  

 

From: Axil Axil [mailto:janap...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, January 4, 2017 1:34 PM
To: vortex-l
Subject: Re: [Vo]:The SunCell is a LENR system

 

If you patented your work, you may has a prior art claim on your technology 
over Mills. Transmutation occurring in your system will show that you have the 
goods in terms of theory(LENR) as opposed to Mills(hydrino) with no 
transmutation theoretical basis.

 

On Wed, Jan 4, 2017 at 3:24 PM, Russ George  > wrote:

Axil, The titanium experiment you suggest has been done, by me, while Ti is a 
useful cold fusion material it has a far lower NAE cross-section and while this 
is useful in limiting thermal destruction it works against the vitality of the 
technology. Lots of work required down that trail. I am with Mill’s, in my 
experience, silver is by far the most active material, thus it provides the 
most fruitful paths to technology development. Both Mill’s dusty plasma tech 
and my own dusty plasma ‘compact fluorescent simple kilowatt’ tech offer a 
clear path to producing readily and inexpensive to produce and harvestable 
useful cold fusion energy. While theoretical thinking can be useful nothing 
substitutes for real world experimentation!

 

From: Axil Axil [mailto:  janap...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, January 4, 2017 12:06 PM
To: vortex-l
Subject: [Vo]:The SunCell is a LENR system

 

As the SunCell R moves forward over the coming months, certain hard to 
understand problems will develop in that effort that will show that the SunCell 
is really a LENR based system. As a foreshadowing of these development 
problems, I will make a prediction about how the SunCell works as a LENR system 
which if realized will disprove the Hydrino theory as a central mover in the 
way the SunCell functions. This production and its expansion will demonstrate 
how LENR works in the plasma state as a process centered on transition metal 
nanowire production as a condensate from the vapor state.

As background to develop and explain this issue, the boiling point of silver is 
2435 K (2162 °C, 3924 °F). If the high temperature of the plasma inside the 
SunCell keeps the silver vapor from condensing into nanoparticles than the 
dusty plasma based LENR reaction will stop. The SunCell will flicker around the 
boiling point of silver and the plasma temperature will stabilize and hover at 
the 2162C boiling point of silver.

R. Mills has shown two SunCell distinct architectures that have demonstrated 
two separate capiblities, first: high power density, second: long duration and 
self-sustained ignition.

There is a major differences between the full power SunCell unit that has used 
a tungsten electrode and the lower temperature long reaction endurance unit 
used to show self-sustained mode.

In the full power test, Mills used tungsten whose boiling point is 6203 K (5930 
°C, 10,706 °F). There is no temperature limitation problem with nanoparticle 
formation here. In the low power endurance test, the temperature of the plasma 
produced was far below the full power test because the test reactor containment 
structure was stainless steel.

I predict that the Mills SunCell will not work at full power where the 
temperature needs to reach 3000C using the silver liquid electrodes because the 
plasma at that temperature requirement will get far too hot for silver 
condensation. The temperature cap is 2162 °C using silver, its vaporization 
temperature.

As a goldilocks solution, Mills might try a possible high temperature 
replacement for silver: Titanium, boiling point 3560 K (3287 °C, 5949 °F).

I also believe that the shape of the nanoparticle is important. The 
nanoparticle in dusty plasma might need to be reformed into nanowires. Silver 
can produce nanowires and so can titanium.

Titanium has been shown the capability to do this dusty plasma LENR reaction 
function nicely in the exploding foil experiments described here:

Low-energy nuclear reactions and the leptonic monopole
Georges Lochak, Leonid Urutskoev 

 

Re: [Vo]:The dark side of dense hydrogen

[Axil Axil]

The real problem with LENR is the LENR reaction's preference for the even
isotopes U238, U232 of the odd isotopes. That make LENR a transuranic
element  enrichment risk.

>From my reference:

" It was found that the activity of both U isotopes decreased with respect
to that of Cs. However, the activity of the 238U isotope decreases to a
greater extent. Thus, the ratio of 235U to 238U becomes bigger than unity.
Prior to these experiments, we made sure that the specific activity of
137Cs does not change noticeably. The real situation is more complicated
[3] but this is a topic of a separate report. For us, it is important that
the transformation can also take place outside the plasma channel. This is
a rather “unpleasant surprise,” because, probably, within several years,
when the low-temperature transmutation will be studied in more detail, it
would be rather easy to devise a facile and inexpensive process to enrich
uranium. In view of the growth of terrorism all over the world, this
outcome seems deplorable."

It seen that muon fission likes even isotopes more that odd ones.

On Wed, Jan 4, 2017 at 4:14 PM, Jones Beene  wrote:

>
>
> Whoa -  an observer must possess a great deal of blind hope to imagine
> that weaponization of LENR is impossible simply because neutrons are
> lacking. In fact, dense hydrogen is physically similar to the neutron.
>
> Most importantly, the number of documented runaway LENR reactions makes
> the statement of "impossibility" almost silly, based on experience. It
> has happened. As for slow ramp up - Holmlid shows us the gain can happen in
> nanoseconds.
>
> Let's back track a bit. Neutrons are required for one kind of chain
> reaction, but the modality is broader. A chain reaction is any
> self-expanding sequence of reactions where a reactive product (by-product
> or emission) causes additional reactions to take place.
>
> The prototypical chain reaction is actually combustion in an internal
> combustion engine, initiated by a spark or by compression. Fission is
> another but there are more including, of course, the domino effect. The key
> to all chain reactions is *positive feedback.* Positive feedback leads to
> a self-amplifying chain of events. in a number of physical systems
> including these:
>
> 1) Chemical reactions of many kinds, esp. combustion
> 2) The neutron chain reaction of nuclear physics
> 3) The avalanche cascade - breakdown in gases
> 4) The avalanche breakdown in semiconductors
> 5) Population inversion - lasing
> 6) QM entangled systems of many kinds
> 7) Domino effect and meme effect
> 8) Audio feedback loop
> 9) Mossbauer effect
>
> Even if neutrons were required for the most energetic kind of
> weaponization, dense hydrogen is similar enough to the neutron that it
> could substitute -- and in the case of Holmlid - exceed by orders of
> magnitude the gain from the nuclear fission chain reaction.
>
>
>  Jed Rothwell wrote:
>
> Most researchers think that a runaway reaction or explosion is impossible
> for three reasons:
>
> 1. Cold fusion only works with an intact metal lattice.
> 2. It ramps up relatively slowly, so it would destroy the lattice before
> it could increase to high levels.
> 3. It is not a chain reaction. In a uranium fission chain reaction, one
> event directly triggers two or more others, and the reaction can increase
> exponentially over a very short time (80 generations in 1 microsecond).
>
>
> I hope that is right.
>
> - Jed
>
>
>

Re: [Vo]:The SunCell is a LENR system

[Axil Axil]

If you patented your work, you may has a prior art claim on your technology
over Mills. Transmutation occurring in your system will show that you have
the goods in terms of theory(LENR) as opposed to Mills(hydrino) with no
transmutation theoretical basis.

On Wed, Jan 4, 2017 at 3:24 PM, Russ George  wrote:

> Axil, The titanium experiment you suggest has been done, by me, while Ti
> is a useful cold fusion material it has a far lower NAE cross-section and
> while this is useful in limiting thermal destruction it works against the
> vitality of the technology. Lots of work required down that trail. I am
> with Mill’s, in my experience, silver is by far the most active material,
> thus it provides the most fruitful paths to technology development. Both
> Mill’s dusty plasma tech and my own dusty plasma ‘compact fluorescent
> simple kilowatt’ tech offer a clear path to producing readily and
> inexpensive to produce and harvestable useful cold fusion energy. While
> theoretical thinking can be useful nothing substitutes for real world
> experimentation!
>
>
>
> *From:* Axil Axil [mailto:janap...@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Wednesday, January 4, 2017 12:06 PM
> *To:* vortex-l
> *Subject:* [Vo]:The SunCell is a LENR system
>
>
>
> As the SunCell R moves forward over the coming months, certain hard to
> understand problems will develop in that effort that will show that the
> SunCell is really a LENR based system. As a foreshadowing of these
> development problems, I will make a prediction about how the SunCell works
> as a LENR system which if realized will disprove the Hydrino theory as a
> central mover in the way the SunCell functions. This production and its
> expansion will demonstrate how LENR works in the plasma state as a process
> centered on transition metal nanowire production as a condensate from the
> vapor state.
>
> As background to develop and explain this issue, the boiling point of
> silver is 2435 K (2162 °C, 3924 °F). If the high temperature of the plasma
> inside the SunCell keeps the silver vapor from condensing into
> nanoparticles than the dusty plasma based LENR reaction will stop. The
> SunCell will flicker around the boiling point of silver and the plasma
> temperature will stabilize and hover at the 2162C boiling point of silver.
>
> R. Mills has shown two SunCell distinct architectures that have
> demonstrated two separate capiblities, first: high power density, second:
> long duration and self-sustained ignition.
>
> There is a major differences between the full power SunCell unit that has
> used a tungsten electrode and the lower temperature long reaction endurance
> unit used to show self-sustained mode.
>
> In the full power test, Mills used tungsten whose boiling point is 6203 K
> (5930 °C, 10,706 °F). There is no temperature limitation problem with
> nanoparticle formation here. In the low power endurance test, the
> temperature of the plasma produced was far below the full power test
> because the test reactor containment structure was stainless steel.
>
> I predict that the Mills SunCell will not work at full power where the
> temperature needs to reach 3000C using the silver liquid electrodes because
> the plasma at that temperature requirement will get far too hot for silver
> condensation. The temperature cap is 2162 °C using silver, its vaporization
> temperature.
>
> As a goldilocks solution, Mills might try a possible high temperature
> replacement for silver: Titanium, boiling point 3560 K (3287 °C, 5949 °F).
>
> I also believe that the shape of the nanoparticle is important. The
> nanoparticle in dusty plasma might need to be reformed into nanowires.
> Silver can produce nanowires and so can titanium.
>
> Titanium has been shown the capability to do this dusty plasma LENR
> reaction function nicely in the exploding foil experiments described here:
>
> Low-energy nuclear reactions and the leptonic monopole
> Georges Lochak, Leonid Urutskoev
>
> lenr-canr.org/acrobat/LochakGlowenergyn.pdf
>
> These exploding foil experiments vaporize titanium and then produce LENR
> reactions such as fusion, fission and transmutation. This type of
> experiment provides support from my belief that the SunCell is really based
> on the LENR reaction rather than this hydrino myth.
>
> The number exploding wire experiments done in Russia has been extensive,
> so much so that a computer program has been written based on these
> experimental results that predict what the transmutation results will be
> based on the type of material used in the exploding wire or foil.
>
> There are other SunCell like LENR experiments that have demonstrated solid
> transmutation results. Proton 21 is one.
>
> rexresearch.com/adamenko/adamenko.htm
> 
>
> This bring up and interesting question. Is the Proton 21 patent
> application prior art that supersedes the SunCell patent application?
>
> The bottom line, the SunCell is just a variant of these 

RE: [Vo]:The dark side of dense hydrogen

[Russ George]

Whoa indeed, nanoseconds are way to slow for fission!

 

From: Jones Beene [mailto:jone...@pacbell.net] 
Sent: Wednesday, January 4, 2017 1:14 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:The dark side of dense hydrogen

 



Whoa -  an observer must possess a great deal of blind hope to imagine that 
weaponization of LENR is impossible simply because neutrons are lacking. In 
fact, dense hydrogen is physically similar to the neutron.

Most importantly, the number of documented runaway LENR reactions makes the 
statement of "impossibility" almost silly, based on experience. It has 
happened. As for slow ramp up - Holmlid shows us the gain can happen in 
nanoseconds.

Let's back track a bit. Neutrons are required for one kind of chain reaction, 
but the modality is broader. A chain reaction is any self-expanding sequence of 
reactions where a reactive product (by-product or emission) causes additional 
reactions to take place. 

The prototypical chain reaction is actually combustion in an internal 
combustion engine, initiated by a spark or by compression. Fission is another 
but there are more including, of course, the domino effect. The key to all 
chain reactions is positive feedback. Positive feedback leads to a 
self-amplifying chain of events. in a number of physical systems including 
these:

1) Chemical reactions of many kinds, esp. combustion
2) The neutron chain reaction of nuclear physics
3) The avalanche cascade - breakdown in gases
4) The avalanche breakdown in semiconductors
5) Population inversion - lasing
6) QM entangled systems of many kinds 
7) Domino effect and meme effect
8) Audio feedback loop
9) Mossbauer effect

Even if neutrons were required for the most energetic kind of weaponization, 
dense hydrogen is similar enough to the neutron that it could substitute -- and 
in the case of Holmlid - exceed by orders of magnitude the gain from the 
nuclear fission chain reaction. 



 Jed Rothwell wrote:

 

Most researchers think that a runaway reaction or explosion is impossible for 
three reasons:

 

1. Cold fusion only works with an intact metal lattice.

2. It ramps up relatively slowly, so it would destroy the lattice before it 
could increase to high levels.

3. It is not a chain reaction. In a uranium fission chain reaction, one event 
directly triggers two or more others, and the reaction can increase 
exponentially over a very short time (80 generations in 1 microsecond).

 

I hope that is right.

 

- Jed

 

 

Re: [Vo]:The dark side of dense hydrogen

[Jones Beene]

Whoa -  an observer must possess a great deal of blind hope to imagine 
that weaponization of LENR is impossible simply because neutrons are 
lacking. In fact, dense hydrogen is physically similar to the neutron.


Most importantly, the number of documented runaway LENR reactions makes 
the statement of "impossibility" almost silly, based on experience.It 
has happened. As for slow ramp up - Holmlid shows us the gain can happen 
in nanoseconds.


Let's back track a bit. Neutrons are required for one kind of chain 
reaction, but the modality is broader. A chain reaction is any 
self-expanding sequence of reactions where a reactive product 
(by-product or emission) causes additional reactions to take place.


The prototypical chain reaction is actually combustion in an internal 
combustion engine, initiated by a spark or by compression. Fission is 
another but there are more including, of course, the domino effect. The 
key to all chain reactions is *positive feedback.* Positive 
feedback**leads to a self-amplifying chain of events. in a number of 
physical systems including these:


1) Chemical reactions of many kinds, esp. combustion
2) The neutron chain reaction of nuclear physics
3) The avalanche cascade - breakdown in gases
4) The avalanche breakdown in semiconductors
5) Population inversion - lasing
6) QM entangled systems of many kinds
7) Domino effect and meme effect
8) Audio feedback loop
9) Mossbauer effect

Even if neutrons were required for the most energetic kind of 
weaponization, dense hydrogen is similar enough to the neutron that it 
could substitute -- and in the case of Holmlid - exceed by orders of 
magnitude the gain from the nuclear fission chain reaction.



 Jed Rothwell wrote:


Most researchers think that a runaway reaction or explosion is
impossible for three reasons:

1. Cold fusion only works with an intact metal lattice.
2. It ramps up relatively slowly, so it would destroy the lattice
before it could increase to high levels.
3. It is not a chain reaction. In a uranium fission chain
reaction, one event directly triggers two or more others, and the
reaction can increase exponentially over a very short time (80
generations in 1 microsecond).


I hope that is right.

- Jed

RE: [Vo]:The SunCell is a LENR system

[bobcook39923]

http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/LochakGlowenergyn.pdf

This report addresses Higgins comment regarding the #1 issue.  It would appear 
neutrons are not involved in the LENR reactions reported using Ti foils.  See 
the discussion on page 7&8 of the report.

Russ- That was a good find.

Bob Cook




From: Axil Axil
Sent: Wednesday, January 4, 2017 12:11 PM
To: vortex-l
Subject: [Vo]:The SunCell is a LENR system

As the SunCell R moves forward over the coming months, certain hard to 
understand problems will develop in that effort that will show that the SunCell 
is really a LENR based system. As a foreshadowing of these development 
problems, I will make a prediction about how the SunCell works as a LENR system 
which if realized will disprove the Hydrino theory as a central mover in the 
way the SunCell functions. This production and its expansion will demonstrate 
how LENR works in the plasma state as a process centered on transition metal 
nanowire production as a condensate from the vapor state.

As background to develop and explain this issue, the boiling point of silver is 
2435 K (2162 °C, 3924 °F). If the high temperature of the plasma inside the 
SunCell keeps the silver vapor from condensing into nanoparticles than the 
dusty plasma based LENR reaction will stop. The SunCell will flicker around the 
boiling point of silver and the plasma temperature will stabilize and hover at 
the 2162C boiling point of silver.

R. Mills has shown two SunCell distinct architectures that have demonstrated 
two separate capiblities, first: high power density, second: long duration and 
self-sustained ignition.

There is a major differences between the full power SunCell unit that has used 
a tungsten electrode and the lower temperature long reaction endurance unit 
used to show self-sustained mode.

In the full power test, Mills used tungsten whose boiling point is 6203 K (5930 
°C, 10,706 °F). There is no temperature limitation problem with nanoparticle 
formation here. In the low power endurance test, the temperature of the plasma 
produced was far below the full power test because the test reactor containment 
structure was stainless steel.

I predict that the Mills SunCell will not work at full power where the 
temperature needs to reach 3000C using the silver liquid electrodes because the 
plasma at that temperature requirement will get far too hot for silver 
condensation. The temperature cap is 2162 °C using silver, its vaporization 
temperature.

As a goldilocks solution, Mills might try a possible high temperature 
replacement for silver: Titanium, boiling point 3560 K (3287 °C, 5949 °F).

I also believe that the shape of the nanoparticle is important. The 
nanoparticle in dusty plasma might need to be reformed into nanowires. Silver 
can produce nanowires and so can titanium.

Titanium has been shown the capability to do this dusty plasma LENR reaction 
function nicely in the exploding foil experiments described here:

Low-energy nuclear reactions and the leptonic monopole
Georges Lochak, Leonid Urutskoev 

lenr-canr.org/acrobat/LochakGlowenergyn.pdf

These exploding foil experiments vaporize titanium and then produce LENR 
reactions such as fusion, fission and transmutation. This type of experiment 
provides support from my belief that the SunCell is really based on the LENR 
reaction rather than this hydrino myth.

The number exploding wire experiments done in Russia has been extensive, so 
much so that a computer program has been written based on these experimental 
results that predict what the transmutation results will be based on the type 
of material used in the exploding wire or foil. 

There are other SunCell like LENR experiments that have demonstrated solid 
transmutation results. Proton 21 is one.

rexresearch.com/adamenko/adamenko.htm

This bring up and interesting question. Is the Proton 21 patent application 
prior art that supersedes the SunCell patent application?

The bottom line, the SunCell is just a variant of these exploding foil dusty 
plasma based experiments.



Silver nanowire

RE: [Vo]:The SunCell is a LENR system

[Russ George]

Axil, The titanium experiment you suggest has been done, by me, while Ti is a 
useful cold fusion material it has a far lower NAE cross-section and while this 
is useful in limiting thermal destruction it works against the vitality of the 
technology. Lots of work required down that trail. I am with Mill’s, in my 
experience, silver is by far the most active material, thus it provides the 
most fruitful paths to technology development. Both Mill’s dusty plasma tech 
and my own dusty plasma ‘compact fluorescent simple kilowatt’ tech offer a 
clear path to producing readily and inexpensive to produce and harvestable 
useful cold fusion energy. While theoretical thinking can be useful nothing 
substitutes for real world experimentation!

 

From: Axil Axil [mailto:janap...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, January 4, 2017 12:06 PM
To: vortex-l
Subject: [Vo]:The SunCell is a LENR system

 

As the SunCell R moves forward over the coming months, certain hard to 
understand problems will develop in that effort that will show that the SunCell 
is really a LENR based system. As a foreshadowing of these development 
problems, I will make a prediction about how the SunCell works as a LENR system 
which if realized will disprove the Hydrino theory as a central mover in the 
way the SunCell functions. This production and its expansion will demonstrate 
how LENR works in the plasma state as a process centered on transition metal 
nanowire production as a condensate from the vapor state.

As background to develop and explain this issue, the boiling point of silver is 
2435 K (2162 °C, 3924 °F). If the high temperature of the plasma inside the 
SunCell keeps the silver vapor from condensing into nanoparticles than the 
dusty plasma based LENR reaction will stop. The SunCell will flicker around the 
boiling point of silver and the plasma temperature will stabilize and hover at 
the 2162C boiling point of silver.

R. Mills has shown two SunCell distinct architectures that have demonstrated 
two separate capiblities, first: high power density, second: long duration and 
self-sustained ignition.

There is a major differences between the full power SunCell unit that has used 
a tungsten electrode and the lower temperature long reaction endurance unit 
used to show self-sustained mode.

In the full power test, Mills used tungsten whose boiling point is 6203 K (5930 
°C, 10,706 °F). There is no temperature limitation problem with nanoparticle 
formation here. In the low power endurance test, the temperature of the plasma 
produced was far below the full power test because the test reactor containment 
structure was stainless steel.

I predict that the Mills SunCell will not work at full power where the 
temperature needs to reach 3000C using the silver liquid electrodes because the 
plasma at that temperature requirement will get far too hot for silver 
condensation. The temperature cap is 2162 °C using silver, its vaporization 
temperature.

As a goldilocks solution, Mills might try a possible high temperature 
replacement for silver: Titanium, boiling point 3560 K (3287 °C, 5949 °F).

I also believe that the shape of the nanoparticle is important. The 
nanoparticle in dusty plasma might need to be reformed into nanowires. Silver 
can produce nanowires and so can titanium.

Titanium has been shown the capability to do this dusty plasma LENR reaction 
function nicely in the exploding foil experiments described here:

Low-energy nuclear reactions and the leptonic monopole
Georges Lochak, Leonid Urutskoev 

lenr-canr.org/acrobat/LochakGlowenergyn.pdf 
 

These exploding foil experiments vaporize titanium and then produce LENR 
reactions such as fusion, fission and transmutation. This type of experiment 
provides support from my belief that the SunCell is really based on the LENR 
reaction rather than this hydrino myth.

The number exploding wire experiments done in Russia has been extensive, so 
much so that a computer program has been written based on these experimental 
results that predict what the transmutation results will be based on the type 
of material used in the exploding wire or foil. 

There are other SunCell like LENR experiments that have demonstrated solid 
transmutation results. Proton 21 is one.

  
rexresearch.com/adamenko/adamenko.htm

This bring up and interesting question. Is the Proton 21 patent application 
prior art that supersedes the SunCell patent application?

The bottom line, the SunCell is just a variant of these exploding foil dusty 
plasma based experiments.



Silver nanowire

[Vo]:LENR INFO

[Peter Gluck]

http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2017/01/jan-04-2017-lenr-info.html
 peter
-- 
Dr. Peter Gluck
Cluj, Romania
http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com

[Vo]:The SunCell is a LENR system

[Axil Axil]

As the SunCell R moves forward over the coming months, certain hard to
understand problems will develop in that effort that will show that the
SunCell is really a LENR based system. As a foreshadowing of these
development problems, I will make a prediction about how the SunCell works
as a LENR system which if realized will disprove the Hydrino theory as a
central mover in the way the SunCell functions. This production and its
expansion will demonstrate how LENR works in the plasma state as a process
centered on transition metal nanowire production as a condensate from the
vapor state.

As background to develop and explain this issue, the boiling point of
silver is 2435 K (2162 °C, 3924 °F). If the high temperature of the plasma
inside the SunCell keeps the silver vapor from condensing into
nanoparticles than the dusty plasma based LENR reaction will stop. The
SunCell will flicker around the boiling point of silver and the plasma
temperature will stabilize and hover at the 2162C boiling point of silver.

R. Mills has shown two SunCell distinct architectures that have
demonstrated two separate capiblities, first: high power density, second:
long duration and self-sustained ignition.

There is a major differences between the full power SunCell unit that has
used a tungsten electrode and the lower temperature long reaction endurance
unit used to show self-sustained mode.

In the full power test, Mills used tungsten whose boiling point is 6203 K
(5930 °C, 10,706 °F). There is no temperature limitation problem with
nanoparticle formation here. In the low power endurance test, the
temperature of the plasma produced was far below the full power test
because the test reactor containment structure was stainless steel.

I predict that the Mills SunCell will not work at full power where the
temperature needs to reach 3000C using the silver liquid electrodes because
the plasma at that temperature requirement will get far too hot for silver
condensation. The temperature cap is 2162 °C using silver, its vaporization
temperature.

As a goldilocks solution, Mills might try a possible high temperature
replacement for silver: Titanium, boiling point 3560 K (3287 °C, 5949 °F).

I also believe that the shape of the nanoparticle is important. The
nanoparticle in dusty plasma might need to be reformed into nanowires.
Silver can produce nanowires and so can titanium.

Titanium has been shown the capability to do this dusty plasma LENR
reaction function nicely in the exploding foil experiments described here:

Low-energy nuclear reactions and the leptonic monopole
Georges Lochak, Leonid Urutskoev

lenr-canr.org/acrobat/LochakGlowenergyn.pdf

These exploding foil experiments vaporize titanium and then produce LENR
reactions such as fusion, fission and transmutation. This type of
experiment provides support from my belief that the SunCell is really based
on the LENR reaction rather than this hydrino myth.

The number exploding wire experiments done in Russia has been extensive, so
much so that a computer program has been written based on these
experimental results that predict what the transmutation results will be
based on the type of material used in the exploding wire or foil.

There are other SunCell like LENR experiments that have demonstrated solid
transmutation results. Proton 21 is one.

rexresearch.com/adamenko/adamenko.htm


This bring up and interesting question. Is the Proton 21 patent application
prior art that supersedes the SunCell patent application?

The bottom line, the SunCell is just a variant of these exploding foil
dusty plasma based experiments.



Silver nanowire

RE: [Vo]:The dark side of dense hydrogen

[bobcook39923]

Higgins—

If neutrons are involved in making fissile isotopes, I would imagine that it 
may be tough to keep the newly created fissile material from fissionning right 
after its creation. 

I can imagine metastable isomers having a role.

Bob

From: Bob Higgins
Sent: Wednesday, January 4, 2017 10:40 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:The dark side of dense hydrogen

I brought up the issue of weaponization of LENR in the panel session at 
ILENR-12.  The general consensus was, "the cat is out of the bag"; I.E. too 
late for that concern.
I think the real concern for weaponization is not the first thought everyone 
jumps to, which is explosive magnifier.  For this, the same thing that makes 
LENR desirable for power usage (no radioactive ash) is the same thing that 
limits its danger in explosives.  You can always make big explosions even 
without LENR.  Still, I have heard stories of military testing of LENR systems 
for explosive potential.
I think there are 2 bigger weapon dangers that LENR processes expose:  1) to 
transmute/isotopically shift non-fissionable materials into fissionable 
materials, and 2) to create metastable isomers (long regarded as a key to 4th 
generation nuclear weapons).  We could speculate that the military is already 
using LENR undercover for these purposes, or is doing LENR research with these 
intended outcomes.  If so, it would be natural for them to exercise government 
influence to slow down commercial development of LENR.  

On Wed, Jan 4, 2017 at 11:19 AM, Russ George  wrote:
Conflating nuclear chain reaction energy release with cold fusion mechanisms is 
what leads to silly speculation, aka trolling, over weaponization of cold 
fusion. It is the far reaching neutron chain reaction process that is common to 
fission/fusion weapons that makes them so potent. In cold fusion this long 
range stimulated chain reaction mechanism does not exist! In fact cold fusion 
reactions are inherently clearly self-limited as when the reaction condition 
becomes more and more prevalent the heat released promptly destroys the NAE 
through rather mundane melting and vapourization of the active matrix and 
surroundings. The challenge in cold fusion is producing materials that contain 
NAE’s where those NAE’s are small enough to limit the number of adjacent cold 
fusion reactions so as to limit the amount of heating. Cold fusion heat is 
produced in incredibly fast nuclear time frames but as heat it only moves away 
from its’ birthplace at the speed of chemistry. There are only a few of we 
experimentalists who have had the good fortune to struggle with this heat 
transfer/melting problem. I believe most of us who remain active are making 
good progress in developing technological skills to manage it.  That there is a 
perfect linkage/control in effect due to the commonly known chemical/thermal 
properties of matter is very well established.  
 
From: Axil Axil [mailto:janap...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, January 4, 2017 8:44 AM
To: vortex-l
Subject: Re: [Vo]:The dark side of dense hydrogen
 
The explosive potential of the cold fusion reaction is centered on the 
percentage of energy that is produce by the LENR reaction in the various energy 
releases format. 
 
By energy formats I mean the place where the output energy goes such as sub 
atomic particle production, heat, light, and/or RF.
 
If a large percentage of the energy format goes toward muon production, then 
the muons might catalyze a large amount of fusion and fission. 
 
I have a fear that a runaway LENR reaction might generate a huge amount of 
muons where only a small fraction of the output energy goes toward the 
production of EMF such as heat and light.
 
On Wed, Jan 4, 2017 at 10:28 AM, Jones Beene  wrote:
This is not a repeat of the suggestion that dense hydrogen is the same species 
as "dark matter" ... but there is a good case for that proposition.

It is about "dark" as in evil. If there is a foreseeable downside to LENR, it 
is the possibility of weaponization. Not just that - it is the easy 
weaponization of commonly available materials, which makes it much scarier than 
nukes.

In the past, observers of the LENR scene - who delve into almost every remote 
possibility for anomalous energy - have not wanted to talk about the 
possibility of a cold-fusion bomb. Even when P reported their amazing 
meltdown, the implications were minimized. It is an uncomfortable topic since 
for one thing, weaponization could provide Federal regulators with a ready made 
excuse, should they want to limit research into the field at the behest of the 
fossil fuel industry, for instance.

However, the reality of our technological world - which is fed by the WWW and 
knows no boundaries - is that there is no field of human endeavor which 
benefits from intentional neglect: the ostrich meme - buying one's head in the 
sand. The worst possible approach for any Nation is to look the other way 

Re: [Vo]:The dark side of dense hydrogen

[Jed Rothwell]

Russ George  wrote:

Conflating nuclear chain reaction energy release with cold fusion
> mechanisms is what leads to silly speculation, aka trolling, over
> weaponization of cold fusion. It is the far reaching neutron chain reaction
> process that is common to fission/fusion weapons that makes them so potent.
> In cold fusion this long range stimulated chain reaction mechanism does not
> exist! In fact cold fusion reactions are inherently clearly self-limited as
> when the reaction condition becomes more and more prevalent . . .
>

I agree. That's what I said in the book, where I summarized the majority
view:

Most researchers think that a runaway reaction or explosion is impossible
for three reasons:

1. Cold fusion only works with an intact metal lattice.
2. It ramps up relatively slowly, so it would destroy the lattice before it
could increase to high levels.
3. It is not a chain reaction. In a uranium fission chain reaction, one
event directly triggers two or more others, and the reaction can increase
exponentially over a very short time (80 generations in 1 microsecond).


I hope that is right.

- Jed

RE: [Vo]:The dark side of dense hydrogen

[bobcook39923]

I can guess a large coherent—QM  entangled—system could host a large reaction 
throughout that system, but not beyond it boundaries.  Beyond the initial 
coherent  system would have to be other coherent systems which would require 
resonant conditions, possibly provided by the thermal pulse or other energy 
output of the initial reaction, to LENR. 

However, it may be that each coherent system would have to have the same 
resonant parameters associated with its structure as the already reacted system 
to accomplish its LENR. 

I think that with the Ni-H system using nano particles is limited to single 
LENR’s at a time, since the particles are apparently not destroyed.  The self 
sustaining nature of the Ni-H system would seem to depend upon a relatively 
slow creation of resonant conditions in the various nano particles making up 
the reactor.  If the reactor gets to hot, the resonant conditions cease to 
happen very often  and LENR stops.  

The Pd-D system seems much closer to a system that has the potential for much 
larger number of reactions within a single large grain or crystal that 
constitutes a coherent system.  I have been of the opinion that a number of 
cells of the Pd crystal could be involved in a resonant condition that would 
result in the fusion of 2 D in each cell at the same time.  This is what would 
cause the melting of the PD crystal and destruction of the grain.  Helium was 
correlated with heat as would be expected with the D fusion.  I consider the 
P description of the reaction as cold fusion was accurate.  

Bob Cook






from: Russ George
Sent: Wednesday, January 4, 2017 10:19 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: RE: [Vo]:The dark side of dense hydrogen

Conflating nuclear chain reaction energy release with cold fusion mechanisms is 
what leads to silly speculation, aka trolling, over weaponization of cold 
fusion. It is the far reaching neutron chain reaction process that is common to 
fission/fusion weapons that makes them so potent. In cold fusion this long 
range stimulated chain reaction mechanism does not exist! In fact cold fusion 
reactions are inherently clearly self-limited as when the reaction condition 
becomes more and more prevalent the heat released promptly destroys the NAE 
through rather mundane melting and vapourization of the active matrix and 
surroundings. The challenge in cold fusion is producing materials that contain 
NAE’s where those NAE’s are small enough to limit the number of adjacent cold 
fusion reactions so as to limit the amount of heating. Cold fusion heat is 
produced in incredibly fast nuclear time frames but as heat it only moves away 
from its’ birthplace at the speed of chemistry. There are only a few of we 
experimentalists who have had the good fortune to struggle with this heat 
transfer/melting problem. I believe most of us who remain active are making 
good progress in developing technological skills to manage it.  That there is a 
perfect linkage/control in effect due to the commonly known chemical/thermal 
properties of matter is very well established.  

From: Axil Axil [mailto:janap...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, January 4, 2017 8:44 AM
To: vortex-l
Subject: Re: [Vo]:The dark side of dense hydrogen

The explosive potential of the cold fusion reaction is centered on the 
percentage of energy that is produce by the LENR reaction in the various energy 
releases format. 

By energy formats I mean the place where the output energy goes such as sub 
atomic particle production, heat, light, and/or RF.

If a large percentage of the energy format goes toward muon production, then 
the muons might catalyze a large amount of fusion and fission. 

I have a fear that a runaway LENR reaction might generate a huge amount of 
muons where only a small fraction of the output energy goes toward the 
production of EMF such as heat and light.

On Wed, Jan 4, 2017 at 10:28 AM, Jones Beene  wrote:
This is not a repeat of the suggestion that dense hydrogen is the same species 
as "dark matter" ... but there is a good case for that proposition.

It is about "dark" as in evil. If there is a foreseeable downside to LENR, it 
is the possibility of weaponization. Not just that - it is the easy 
weaponization of commonly available materials, which makes it much scarier than 
nukes.

In the past, observers of the LENR scene - who delve into almost every remote 
possibility for anomalous energy - have not wanted to talk about the 
possibility of a cold-fusion bomb. Even when P reported their amazing 
meltdown, the implications were minimized. It is an uncomfortable topic since 
for one thing, weaponization could provide Federal regulators with a ready made 
excuse, should they want to limit research into the field at the behest of the 
fossil fuel industry, for instance.

However, the reality of our technological world - which is fed by the WWW and 
knows no boundaries - is that there is no field of human endeavor which 
benefits from 

Re: [Vo]:The dark side of dense hydrogen

[Bob Higgins]

I brought up the issue of weaponization of LENR in the panel session at
ILENR-12.  The general consensus was, "the cat is out of the bag"; I.E. too
late for that concern.

I think the real concern for weaponization is not the first thought
everyone jumps to, which is explosive magnifier.  For this, the same thing
that makes LENR desirable for power usage (no radioactive ash) is the same
thing that limits its danger in explosives.  You can always make big
explosions even without LENR.  Still, I have heard stories of military
testing of LENR systems for explosive potential.

I think there are 2 bigger weapon dangers that LENR processes expose:  1)
to transmute/isotopically shift non-fissionable materials into fissionable
materials, and 2) to create metastable isomers (long regarded as a key to
4th generation nuclear weapons).  We could speculate that the military is
already using LENR undercover for these purposes, or is doing LENR research
with these intended outcomes.  If so, it would be natural for them to
exercise government influence to slow down commercial development of LENR.

On Wed, Jan 4, 2017 at 11:19 AM, Russ George  wrote:

> Conflating nuclear chain reaction energy release with cold fusion
> mechanisms is what leads to silly speculation, aka trolling, over
> weaponization of cold fusion. It is the far reaching neutron chain reaction
> process that is common to fission/fusion weapons that makes them so potent.
> In cold fusion this long range stimulated chain reaction mechanism does not
> exist! In fact cold fusion reactions are inherently clearly self-limited as
> when the reaction condition becomes more and more prevalent the heat
> released promptly destroys the NAE through rather mundane melting and
> vapourization of the active matrix and surroundings. The challenge in cold
> fusion is producing materials that contain NAE’s where those NAE’s are
> small enough to limit the number of adjacent cold fusion reactions so as to
> limit the amount of heating. Cold fusion heat is produced in incredibly
> fast nuclear time frames but as heat it only moves away from its’
> birthplace at the speed of chemistry. There are only a few of we
> experimentalists who have had the good fortune to struggle with this heat
> transfer/melting problem. I believe most of us who remain active are making
> good progress in developing technological skills to manage it.  That there
> is a perfect linkage/control in effect due to the commonly known
> chemical/thermal properties of matter is very well established.
>
>
>
> *From:* Axil Axil [mailto:janap...@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Wednesday, January 4, 2017 8:44 AM
> *To:* vortex-l
> *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:The dark side of dense hydrogen
>
>
>
> The explosive potential of the cold fusion reaction is centered on the
> percentage of energy that is produce by the LENR reaction in the various
> energy releases format.
>
>
>
> By energy formats I mean the place where the output energy goes such as
> sub atomic particle production, heat, light, and/or RF.
>
>
>
> If a large percentage of the energy format goes toward muon production,
> then the muons might catalyze a large amount of fusion and fission.
>
>
>
> I have a fear that a runaway LENR reaction might generate a huge amount of
> muons where only a small fraction of the output energy goes toward the
> production of EMF such as heat and light.
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 4, 2017 at 10:28 AM, Jones Beene  wrote:
>
> This is not a repeat of the suggestion that dense hydrogen is the same
> species as "dark matter" ... but there is a good case for that proposition.
>
> It is about "dark" as in evil. If there is a foreseeable downside to LENR,
> it is the possibility of weaponization. Not just that - it is the easy
> weaponization of commonly available materials, which makes it much scarier
> than nukes.
>
> In the past, observers of the LENR scene - who delve into almost every
> remote possibility for anomalous energy - have not wanted to talk about the
> possibility of a cold-fusion bomb. Even when P reported their amazing
> meltdown, the implications were minimized. It is an uncomfortable topic
> since for one thing, weaponization could provide Federal regulators with a
> ready made excuse, should they want to limit research into the field at the
> behest of the fossil fuel industry, for instance.
>
> However, the reality of our technological world - which is fed by the WWW
> and knows no boundaries - is that there is no field of human endeavor which
> benefits from intentional neglect: the ostrich meme - buying one's head in
> the sand. The worst possible approach for any Nation is to look the other
> way and ignore the dark side. If there is any likelihood that LENR can do
> harm, it is better that we (e.g. the free world) discover it first - so as
> to better prepare for the eventual situation where our enemies, or former
> friends, will consider the NiH bomb to be a golden opportunity for 

RE: [Vo]:The dark side of dense hydrogen

[Russ George]

Conflating nuclear chain reaction energy release with cold fusion mechanisms
is what leads to silly speculation, aka trolling, over weaponization of cold
fusion. It is the far reaching neutron chain reaction process that is common
to fission/fusion weapons that makes them so potent. In cold fusion this
long range stimulated chain reaction mechanism does not exist! In fact cold
fusion reactions are inherently clearly self-limited as when the reaction
condition becomes more and more prevalent the heat released promptly
destroys the NAE through rather mundane melting and vapourization of the
active matrix and surroundings. The challenge in cold fusion is producing
materials that contain NAE's where those NAE's are small enough to limit the
number of adjacent cold fusion reactions so as to limit the amount of
heating. Cold fusion heat is produced in incredibly fast nuclear time frames
but as heat it only moves away from its' birthplace at the speed of
chemistry. There are only a few of we experimentalists who have had the good
fortune to struggle with this heat transfer/melting problem. I believe most
of us who remain active are making good progress in developing technological
skills to manage it.  That there is a perfect linkage/control in effect due
to the commonly known chemical/thermal properties of matter is very well
established.  

 

From: Axil Axil [mailto:janap...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, January 4, 2017 8:44 AM
To: vortex-l
Subject: Re: [Vo]:The dark side of dense hydrogen

 

The explosive potential of the cold fusion reaction is centered on the
percentage of energy that is produce by the LENR reaction in the various
energy releases format. 

 

By energy formats I mean the place where the output energy goes such as sub
atomic particle production, heat, light, and/or RF.

 

If a large percentage of the energy format goes toward muon production, then
the muons might catalyze a large amount of fusion and fission. 

 

I have a fear that a runaway LENR reaction might generate a huge amount of
muons where only a small fraction of the output energy goes toward the
production of EMF such as heat and light.

 

On Wed, Jan 4, 2017 at 10:28 AM, Jones Beene  > wrote:

This is not a repeat of the suggestion that dense hydrogen is the same
species as "dark matter" ... but there is a good case for that proposition.

It is about "dark" as in evil. If there is a foreseeable downside to LENR,
it is the possibility of weaponization. Not just that - it is the easy
weaponization of commonly available materials, which makes it much scarier
than nukes.

In the past, observers of the LENR scene - who delve into almost every
remote possibility for anomalous energy - have not wanted to talk about the
possibility of a cold-fusion bomb. Even when P reported their amazing
meltdown, the implications were minimized. It is an uncomfortable topic
since for one thing, weaponization could provide Federal regulators with a
ready made excuse, should they want to limit research into the field at the
behest of the fossil fuel industry, for instance.

However, the reality of our technological world - which is fed by the WWW
and knows no boundaries - is that there is no field of human endeavor which
benefits from intentional neglect: the ostrich meme - buying one's head in
the sand. The worst possible approach for any Nation is to look the other
way and ignore the dark side. If there is any likelihood that LENR can do
harm, it is better that we (e.g. the free world) discover it first - so as
to better prepare for the eventual situation where our enemies, or former
friends, will consider the NiH bomb to be a golden opportunity for their own
purposes.

If Holmlid is correct to the extent that irradiating the dense allotrope of
deuterium - UDD - using a small laser - can result in the "quark soup"
disintegration of the target particle into muons, in addition to nuclear
fusion, then the potential to do immense harm cannot be over-estimated. The
destructiveness of the small laser reaction increases by orders of magnitude
over the fissionable nukes - from MeV to GeV. The same situation exists if a
"critical mass" level exists.

Over the years, at least 6 more reports and likely more, have emerged of a
runaway reaction in LENR like the one P reported, or in one case even more
impressive. Any runaway reaction would point to the existence of a
critical-mass parameter.

The suitcase nuke, scary enough but achievable, then evolves into the
water-bottle size, or pen size (laser pointer size) - which is deliverable
by drone and feasible to the wealthy investor of almost any country.



 

Re: [Vo]:The dark side of dense hydrogen

[Axil Axil]

The explosive potential of the cold fusion reaction is centered on the
percentage of energy that is produce by the LENR reaction in the various
energy releases format.

By energy formats I mean the place where the output energy goes such as sub
atomic particle production, heat, light, and/or RF.

If a large percentage of the energy format goes toward muon production,
then the muons might catalyze a large amount of fusion and fission.

I have a fear that a runaway LENR reaction might generate a huge amount of
muons where only a small fraction of the output energy goes toward the
production of EMF such as heat and light.

On Wed, Jan 4, 2017 at 10:28 AM, Jones Beene  wrote:

> This is not a repeat of the suggestion that dense hydrogen is the same
> species as "dark matter" ... but there is a good case for that proposition.
>
> It is about "dark" as in evil. If there is a foreseeable downside to LENR,
> it is the possibility of weaponization. Not just that - it is the easy
> weaponization of commonly available materials, which makes it much scarier
> than nukes.
>
> In the past, observers of the LENR scene - who delve into almost every
> remote possibility for anomalous energy - have not wanted to talk about the
> possibility of a cold-fusion bomb. Even when P reported their amazing
> meltdown, the implications were minimized. It is an uncomfortable topic
> since for one thing, weaponization could provide Federal regulators with a
> ready made excuse, should they want to limit research into the field at the
> behest of the fossil fuel industry, for instance.
>
> However, the reality of our technological world - which is fed by the WWW
> and knows no boundaries - is that there is no field of human endeavor which
> benefits from intentional neglect: the ostrich meme - buying one's head in
> the sand. The worst possible approach for any Nation is to look the other
> way and ignore the dark side. If there is any likelihood that LENR can do
> harm, it is better that we (e.g. the free world) discover it first - so as
> to better prepare for the eventual situation where our enemies, or former
> friends, will consider the NiH bomb to be a golden opportunity for their
> own purposes.
>
> If Holmlid is correct to the extent that irradiating the dense allotrope
> of deuterium - UDD - using a small laser - can result in the "quark soup"
> disintegration of the target particle into muons, in addition to nuclear
> fusion, then the potential to do immense harm cannot be over-estimated. The
> destructiveness of the small laser reaction increases by orders of
> magnitude over the fissionable nukes - from MeV to GeV. The same situation
> exists if a "critical mass" level exists.
>
> Over the years, at least 6 more reports and likely more, have emerged of a
> runaway reaction in LENR like the one P reported, or in one case even
> more impressive. Any runaway reaction would point to the existence of a
> critical-mass parameter.
>
> The suitcase nuke, scary enough but achievable, then evolves into the
> water-bottle size, or pen size (laser pointer size) - which is deliverable
> by drone and feasible to the wealthy investor of almost any country.
>
>
>

RE: [Vo]:The dark side of dense hydrogen

[Chris Zell]

It is said he had a stroke and awoke in a hospital.

A nurse asked, “Are you the famous Dr.
Edward Teller?”

He said, “No…….I am the infamous Dr. Edward Teller”.

From: Jed Rothwell [mailto:jedrothw...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, January 04, 2017 11:01 AM
To: Vortex 
Subject: Re: [Vo]:The dark side of dense hydrogen

Edward Teller! For goodness sake.

- Jed

RE: [Vo]:ICIN-G

[bobcook39923]

The concept of temperature is a classical physics concept as far as I know.  
This reflects my own brain dribbles.  I try to avoid brain dribbles about 
zero-point energy being the result of Heisenberg’s  brain dribbles spun as 
principle.

Bob Cook

  

From: Brian Ahern
Sent: Wednesday, January 4, 2017 4:13 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:ICIN-G

I would like to add some brain dribble to this issue.  In solid matter the 
nuclei exist in a lattice and undergo oscillations. Adding heat increases the 
frequency and amplitude of these motions.

At absolute zero these oscillations continue as a zero oscillation condition is 
prohibited by the essence of the Heisenberg Principle..

When a system interacts with these QM required modes unanticipated energetic 
reactions can arise.  For example, the magnetocaloric cooling of the Manelas 
system comes from magnetic spins interaction with the lowest oscillation modes 
(zero-point)


From: bobcook39...@gmail.com 
Sent: Tuesday, January 3, 2017 7:57 PM
To: Stephen Cooke
Cc: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: RE: [Vo]:ICIN-G 
 
Stephen—
 
Cold has to due with temperature.  Thus, you must have a careful, precise 
definition of temperature to understand what you are asking.
 
There is a lowest temperature called absolute zero.  It refers to a 
hypothetical condition of a closed 3-D space system where there is no motion 
between the particles making up the system, a classical physics concept.
 
Another term is no phonic energy exists in the system.  It means no motion 
between atoms.  From a QM concept it means all electrons are in their lowest 
kinetic energy state possible of the closed system in question.  There are no 
ambient electric fields or magnetic fields or gravitational fields that change 
with time within the system.  (As far as I know this condition does not exist 
within the Universe.)
 
On a cosmic scale the Universe is thought to be an adiabatic system with an 
expanding boundary near which there is nothing but space—no matter or any type 
of energy field—magnetic, electric or gravitational.  Even the micro wave back 
ground radiation left over from the big bang does not exist there  That 
radiation—photons—has only been able to move since the bang at the speed of 
light and thus cannot reach the boundary. The existing micro radiation  only 
reduces its energy and on average changes its frequency to lower energy.
 
Thus, there is a micro wave bath of energy, including outside any defined 3-D 
boundary.  This makes a real closed system impossible and only a fictional 
creation.  
 
IMHO since quarks and gluons are not real particles—only virtual particles,  I 
do not consider they fit within the concept of temperature I have described—a 
classical physics concept.  If a nuclei is considered a closed system, then 
there may be an analogy of temperature in some peoples mind that involves 
vibrational states of those virtual particles.  I have no idea how it would be 
measured—it would be a virtual idea—fictional and only an empirical model to 
explain observable phenomena.
 
As you can deduce from my discussion above I do not consider quarks exist. 
 
I consider that the theories that indicate a combination of electrons and 
positrons as the constituents of heavy particles—neutrons and protons, muons 
etc., are better founded based on observable real time phenomena. 
 
William Stubbs’s and Philippe Hatt’s theories are pertinent, since they allow 
accurate prediction of measurable nuclear parameters—charge, rest mass, 
magnetic moment, spin, electron scattering results etc. 
 
I do consider that there are minimum quanta of angular momentum that exist 
associated with particles including photons.  This stems from Planck’s theory 
and his empirical constant “h”.   And I consider that any form of 
energy--potential or kinetic--can be interchanged with other forms of energy.  
The energy associated with spin is a key intrinsic  characteristic of matter 
and radiation whose coupling between a nuclei and electrons of a atom or system 
of atoms is not well defined by math.  However this coupling  provides a 
mechanism for transfer of energy from a nucleus  in the form of spin energy to 
orbital spin of a metal lattice of atoms, for example.  
 
The whole system of nuclei and electrons conserves energy and angular momentum, 
but realizes a large change in the form of energy from a potential energy of a 
nucleus to kinetic (phonic vibrational energy)—temperature—of the entireI 
lattice of atoms.  Conservation of energy via energetic single particles 
(opposite electric centers of charge) does not happen.  This is the crux of 
LENR where there is no energetic radiation (particles or EM) happening in the 
exchange.
 
It does seem to lead to a “cooling” of the system of atoms which then in 
subsequent SLOW interactions with other matter systems radiates infrared EM 
photons to the universe.
 
This may provide some answer to your inquiry 

Re: [Vo]:The dark side of dense hydrogen

[Jed Rothwell]

Edward Teller! For goodness sake.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:The dark side of dense hydrogen

[Jed Rothwell]

Jones Beene  wrote:


> In the past, observers of the LENR scene - who delve into almost every
> remote possibility for anomalous energy - have not wanted to talk about the
> possibility of a cold-fusion bomb.


People have talked about this from time to time, albeit reluctantly. Martin
Fleischmann wanted to keep cold fusion secret partly because he was afraid
of weapons applications. He said that Edmund Teller agreed with him that
might be a concern.

See chapter 12 of my book, p. 103:

http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/RothwellJcoldfusiona.pdf

- Jed

[Vo]:The dark side of dense hydrogen

[Jones Beene]

This is not a repeat of the suggestion that dense hydrogen is the same 
species as "dark matter" ... but there is a good case for that proposition.


It is about "dark" as in evil. If there is a foreseeable downside to 
LENR, it is the possibility of weaponization. Not just that - it is the 
easy weaponization of commonly available materials, which makes it much 
scarier than nukes.


In the past, observers of the LENR scene - who delve into almost every 
remote possibility for anomalous energy - have not wanted to talk about 
the possibility of a cold-fusion bomb. Even when P reported their 
amazing meltdown, the implications were minimized. It is an 
uncomfortable topic since for one thing, weaponization could provide 
Federal regulators with a ready made excuse, should they want to limit 
research into the field at the behest of the fossil fuel industry, for 
instance.


However, the reality of our technological world - which is fed by the 
WWW and knows no boundaries - is that there is no field of human 
endeavor which benefits from intentional neglect: the ostrich meme - 
buying one's head in the sand. The worst possible approach for any 
Nation is to look the other way and ignore the dark side. If there is 
any likelihood that LENR can do harm, it is better that we (e.g. the 
free world) discover it first - so as to better prepare for the eventual 
situation where our enemies, or former friends, will consider the NiH 
bomb to be a golden opportunity for their own purposes.


If Holmlid is correct to the extent that irradiating the dense allotrope 
of deuterium - UDD - using a small laser - can result in the "quark 
soup" disintegration of the target particle into muons, in addition to 
nuclear fusion, then the potential to do immense harm cannot be 
over-estimated. The destructiveness of the small laser reaction 
increases by orders of magnitude over the fissionable nukes - from MeV 
to GeV. The same situation exists if a "critical mass" level exists.


Over the years, at least 6 more reports and likely more, have emerged of 
a runaway reaction in LENR like the one P reported, or in one case 
even more impressive. Any runaway reaction would point to the existence 
of a critical-mass parameter.


The suitcase nuke, scary enough but achievable, then evolves into the 
water-bottle size, or pen size (laser pointer size) - which is 
deliverable by drone and feasible to the wealthy investor of almost any 
country.

Re: [Vo]:ICIN-G

[Brian Ahern]

I would like to add some brain dribble to this issue.  In solid matter the 
nuclei exist in a lattice and undergo oscillations. Adding heat increases the 
frequency and amplitude of these motions.


At absolute zero these oscillations continue as a zero oscillation condition is 
prohibited by the essence of the Heisenberg Principle..


When a system interacts with these QM required modes unanticipated energetic 
reactions can arise.  For example, the magnetocaloric cooling of the Manelas 
system comes from magnetic spins interaction with the lowest oscillation modes 
(zero-point)



From: bobcook39...@gmail.com 
Sent: Tuesday, January 3, 2017 7:57 PM
To: Stephen Cooke
Cc: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: RE: [Vo]:ICIN-G


Stephen—



Cold has to due with temperature.  Thus, you must have a careful, precise 
definition of temperature to understand what you are asking.



There is a lowest temperature called absolute zero.  It refers to a 
hypothetical condition of a closed 3-D space system where there is no motion 
between the particles making up the system, a classical physics concept.



Another term is no phonic energy exists in the system.  It means no motion 
between atoms.  From a QM concept it means all electrons are in their lowest 
kinetic energy state possible of the closed system in question.  There are no 
ambient electric fields or magnetic fields or gravitational fields that change 
with time within the system.  (As far as I know this condition does not exist 
within the Universe.)



On a cosmic scale the Universe is thought to be an adiabatic system with an 
expanding boundary near which there is nothing but space—no matter or any type 
of energy field—magnetic, electric or gravitational.  Even the micro wave back 
ground radiation left over from the big bang does not exist there  That 
radiation—photons—has only been able to move since the bang at the speed of 
light and thus cannot reach the boundary. The existing micro radiation  only 
reduces its energy and on average changes its frequency to lower energy.



Thus, there is a micro wave bath of energy, including outside any defined 3-D 
boundary.  This makes a real closed system impossible and only a fictional 
creation.



IMHO since quarks and gluons are not real particles—only virtual particles,  I 
do not consider they fit within the concept of temperature I have described—a 
classical physics concept.  If a nuclei is considered a closed system, then 
there may be an analogy of temperature in some peoples mind that involves 
vibrational states of those virtual particles.  I have no idea how it would be 
measured—it would be a virtual idea—fictional and only an empirical model to 
explain observable phenomena.



As you can deduce from my discussion above I do not consider quarks exist.



I consider that the theories that indicate a combination of electrons and 
positrons as the constituents of heavy particles—neutrons and protons, muons 
etc., are better founded based on observable real time phenomena.



William Stubbs’s and Philippe Hatt’s theories are pertinent, since they allow 
accurate prediction of measurable nuclear parameters—charge, rest mass, 
magnetic moment, spin, electron scattering results etc.



I do consider that there are minimum quanta of angular momentum that exist 
associated with particles including photons.  This stems from Planck’s theory 
and his empirical constant “h”.   And I consider that any form of 
energy--potential or kinetic--can be interchanged with other forms of energy.  
The energy associated with spin is a key intrinsic  characteristic of matter 
and radiation whose coupling between a nuclei and electrons of a atom or system 
of atoms is not well defined by math.  However this coupling  provides a 
mechanism for transfer of energy from a nucleus  in the form of spin energy to 
orbital spin of a metal lattice of atoms, for example.



The whole system of nuclei and electrons conserves energy and angular momentum, 
but realizes a large change in the form of energy from a potential energy of a 
nucleus to kinetic (phonic vibrational energy)—temperature—of the entireI 
lattice of atoms.  Conservation of energy via energetic single particles 
(opposite electric centers of charge) does not happen.  This is the crux of 
LENR where there is no energetic radiation (particles or EM) happening in the 
exchange.



It does seem to lead to a “cooling” of the system of atoms which then in 
subsequent SLOW interactions with other matter systems radiates infrared EM 
photons to the universe.



This may provide some answer to your inquiry of good questions IMHO.



Bob Cook





From: Stephen Cooke
Sent: Tuesday, January 3, 2017 6:17 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: [Vo]:ICIN-G



The following thoughts are purely conceptual and speculative and lack the 
deeper understanding and critical