RE: [Vo]:RE: [Vo]:Patent application by Lundin & Lidgren - nuclear spallation and resonance

[Russ George]

This explanation does not apply to the ‘moving particles’ that are clearly 
involved which though mostly remaining and reacting within the solid state 
matrix are also found as strange ‘particle emissions.’ A hydrino doesn’t bear 
the characteristics of a penetrating particle which clearly said particles are, 
I don’t see hydrinos being both not captured and captured when passing through 
various materials and especially I don’t see hydrinos behaving with such 
materials in accordance with neutron capture cross sections! 

 

From: Axil Axil [mailto:janap...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2017 8:19 PM
To: vortex-l
Subject: Re: [Vo]:RE: [Vo]:Patent application by Lundin & Lidgren - nuclear 
spallation and resonance

 

Gamma mitigation might lie in how nuclear reactions occur inside a Bose 
condinsate.

 

On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 10:11 PM, mailto:mix...@bigpond.com> > wrote:

In reply to  Russ George's message of Wed, 18 Jan 2017 18:50:44 -0800:
Hi Russ,
[snip]
>Mischugenons however unlike 'hydrinos' do produce irrefutable isotopic
>shifts in recipient nuclei,

During Hydrino fusion, two things can happen:-

1) A proton fuses with the target nucleus, resulting in a change of element.

or

2) A proton & an electron fuse concurrently with the target nucleus resulting in
an isotope shift in the original element, since essentially they combine to
create a new neutron. This is enhanced electron capture. Enhanced, because the
electron is severely shrunken, making it much easier to capture than a normal
atomic electron.

>though the quantity of shifted isotopes is much
>lower

lower or higher?


>than the apparent mischugenon flux as measured/inferred by the
>resulting weak emissions! Perhaps a 'third' miracle is needed, oh shit, will
>it ever all be revealed.
>
>-Original Message-
>From: mix...@bigpond.com   
>[mailto:mix...@bigpond.com  ]
>Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2017 6:36 PM
>To: vortex-l@eskimo.com  
>Subject: Re: [Vo]:RE: [Vo]:Patent application by Lundin & Lidgren - nuclear
>spallation and resonance
>
>In reply to  Russ George's message of Wed, 18 Jan 2017 17:53:41 -0800:
>Hi Russ,
>[snip]
>>Agreed that is the second miracle required! But is there any standing
>>reported evidence for strange mishugenonistic neutron resonance, aka
>>reflected neutrons, that subsequently behave in a manner effecting the
>>lack of 'energetic gamma'-less absorbing of neutrons save perhaps
>>invoking quasi-dark matter-like behavior, nah... ;) Perhaps said
>>resonant conditioned mischugenon/neutrons would behave somewhat like
>>normal neutrons and be captured preferentially by nuclei according to
>>their neutron capture cross-section resulting in only rather weak
>>emissions. Such beasties would be revealed by the pattern of measurable
>>though weak emissions increasing as they passed through thin foils of
>>metals with increasing neutron capture cross sections, I can live with that
>:) That's a neat experiment and result!
>>http://atom-ecology.russgeorge.net/2013/05/04/edward-teller/
>
>Are you the "I" in this tale?
>
>As for "mischugenons" they sound a lot like well shrunken Hydrinos. Not as
>small as neutrons, so they penetrate the electron shells of atoms less
>easily, and need to tunnel into the target nucleus, reducing the reaction
>rate. When they merge with a target nucleus, the resultant energy can be
>carried by the accompanying electron, or by the other proton if the initial
>particle was a Hydrino molecule. The latter possibility in particular might
>account for a considerable reduction in emitted gammas (by many orders of
>magnitude).
>
>Regards,
>
>Robin van Spaandonk
>
>http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
>
Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html

 

RE: [Vo]:[Vo]Microwave innduced ransmutation

[Russ George]

I don’t think anyone is really speaking of “target” nuclei in cold fusion. 
That’s been off the table since the beginning. It’s just semantics as to how to 
describe the ‘many bodies.’  Most assuredly there are moving reactive/fusing 
‘particles’ the evidence for that is clear. Those particles are moving in as 
yet an ill-defined fashion. 

 

From: bobcook39...@gmail.com [mailto:bobcook39...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2017 7:24 PM
To: mix...@bigpond.com; vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: RE: [Vo]:[Vo]Microwave innduced ransmutation

 

Robin—

 

I think it’s a mistake to consider a coherent system with target nuclei.

 

Target nuclei make sense in two or three body reactions, but not in a solid 
state coherent system with many bodies coupled together with a single energy 
and spin state at any given instant.  

 

Bob Cook

 

  

Sent from Mail   for Windows 10

 

From: mix...@bigpond.com  
Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2017 7:00 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com  
Subject: Re: [Vo]:[Vo]Microwave innduced ransmutation

 

In reply to  Russ George's message of Wed, 18 Jan 2017 18:22:23 -0800:

Hi,

>Something smelts here.

 

:) 

 

Yes, I guess Al might have been lost through vaporization, but K increased 3

fold.

 

Since they used two separate bulbs, any differences could also be a simple

result of variance in manufacture.

Also creation of a plasma in the bulb could result in migration of elements due

to temperature gradients, resulting in localized concentrations.

 

> 

>-Original Message-

>From: mix...@bigpond.com   
>[mailto:mix...@bigpond.com] 

>Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2017 6:12 PM

>To: vortex-l@eskimo.com  

>Subject: Re: [Vo]:[Vo]Microwave innduced ransmutation

> 

>In reply to  a.ashfield's message of Wed, 18 Jan 2017 14:15:42 -0500:

>Hi,

>[snip]

>>Microwave Induced Nuclear Transmutation in Compact Flourescent Lamps 

>>https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bz7lTfqkED9WUlh4c3dJWlh5Rjg/view

>> 

>> From MFMP facebook.

> 

>They talk a lot about the minor changes in P, Si, S, but make no mention of

>the large change in K, Al.

> 

>Regards,

> 

>Robin van Spaandonk

> 

>http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html

> 

Regards,

 

Robin van Spaandonk

 

http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html

 

 

[Vo]:Fw: [teslafy] Posted Reply to Tesla Tech, Infinite Energy and Weird Science! Facebook Group.

[Harvey Norris]

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

 On Wednesday, January 18, 2017 11:21 PM, "harv...@yahoo.com [teslafy]" 
 wrote:
 

     Harvey D Norris's answer to How efficient is air-core transformer? How can 
this be improved? - Quora 
||
||||   Harvey D Norris's answer to How efficient is 
air-cor...  I actually find this question as being humorous in light of the 
fact that there exists a humor when insiders with inside knowledge see the 
questions that out...||
|  View on www.quora.com  |Preview by Yahoo|
||

   After posting the above quora reply to the facebook group someone asked 
about this; If the bulb produces 125% more than put in it why can't we take it 
and turn it into power again? Continueing the cycle!My Reply;It would take too 
long to go into my efforts here in that regard and to cite the many videos I 
made showing the principles involved, and why I quit pursuing them as a sort of 
blind alley investigation. I like to call the following demonstration where a 
portion of the output is recycled back into the input an electrical jet engine, 
or at least an electrical turbocharger. What we find is that even though a 
portion of energy is removed from the output to accomplish the effect; the 
amount of energy gained from the effect is far greater then the amount lost in 
pursuing the effect; and because of all of this it becomes easy to demonstrate 
processes showing over 100% efficiency, the way that efficiency is currently 
defined. Basically yes even if the circuit was not delivering over a 100% 
efficiency to loads; if enough copper mass is being used on the primary system, 
a portion of that energy being outputted prior to the field being energized 
(either directly by wire connection from the primary system or by obtaining 
that energy from magnetic fields emitted by the primary system as done here) 
can be used in a field self feedback loop so that the machine "self magnetizes" 
the rotating electromagnet known as the field. ( the field is already self 
magnetized to a limited degree by the rotation alone which is why a self 
feedback loop to field without field energization being employed is possible in 
the first place) Essentially this becomes very similar to the terminology used 
in nuclear energy; we need a critical mass of copper to begin with and we are 
dealing with controlling a magnetic chain reaction made by hooking the 
alternator(rectified)output back into the alternator DC field input where this 
chain reaction (if not regulated) can go into overload state which will 
eventually destroy the machine by excess heat generated by operation far past 
the normal voltage level. Essentially the secondary coils above this self 
feedback circuit to field can accomplish the same effect that the graphite 
control rods in a nuclear reactor do in keeping the nuclear chain reaction from 
going overload. NOW when both an external AND internal field source are used 
these things can interact in a peculiar way so that negative resistance 
circuits may be demonstrated. In the following video the open circuit 
conditions are shown @ 7.7 volts and when the positive resistance loads are 
added to show discharge of a small 4 inch neon from the secondary system, all 
of the 3 voltage supplies drop over a volt. The measurements of efficiency are 
based on the ratio of open circuit voltages compared to the voltage drops 
encountered with the loads of these so called "positive" resistances. So what 
do you think a negative resistance will do: it does the exact opposite effect 
that a ordinary positive resistance does. Instead of the voltage going down 
when the loads are added; it goes up! In this video it almost doubles the value 
of voltage of 7.7 volts initially found with open circuit. This is shown in the 
video where the positive resistance circuit will barely discharge a 12 inch 
xenon bulb but the negative resistance circuit easily discharges the xenon 
bulb. I knew I had to make a video showing open load/positive resistance load/ 
and a negative resistance load to show the differences of operation for all 
three of these cases. Essentially here then I discovered a method of 
constructing a circuit using an alternator that could demonstrate circuits that 
would appear to be over 100% efficiency; ACCORDING TO THE ESTABLISHED METHOD OF 
MEASURING EFFICIENCY. In a certain sense it may be said that I was cheating to 
demonstrate this, making it a hokey demonstration. I realize this and why what 
is being done here is a sort of blind alley that will lead nowhere. As Holmes 
may say to Watson; other game is afoot for the taking here sir! I may later 
show the circuit being used for the self feedback loop to field, and the 
complications involved there. Xenon bulb operation from negative resistance 
circuit. Published on Jun 9, 2015 https://youtu.be/70AA-4PsWTM  __._,_.___ 
Posted by

Re: [Vo]:RE: [Vo]:Patent application by Lundin & Lidgren - nuclear spallation and resonance

[Axil Axil]

Gamma mitigation might lie in how nuclear reactions occur inside a Bose
condinsate.

On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 10:11 PM,  wrote:

> In reply to  Russ George's message of Wed, 18 Jan 2017 18:50:44 -0800:
> Hi Russ,
> [snip]
> >Mischugenons however unlike 'hydrinos' do produce irrefutable isotopic
> >shifts in recipient nuclei,
>
> During Hydrino fusion, two things can happen:-
>
> 1) A proton fuses with the target nucleus, resulting in a change of
> element.
>
> or
>
> 2) A proton & an electron fuse concurrently with the target nucleus
> resulting in
> an isotope shift in the original element, since essentially they combine to
> create a new neutron. This is enhanced electron capture. Enhanced, because
> the
> electron is severely shrunken, making it much easier to capture than a
> normal
> atomic electron.
>
> >though the quantity of shifted isotopes is much
> >lower
>
> lower or higher?
>
> >than the apparent mischugenon flux as measured/inferred by the
> >resulting weak emissions! Perhaps a 'third' miracle is needed, oh shit,
> will
> >it ever all be revealed.
> >
> >-Original Message-
> >From: mix...@bigpond.com [mailto:mix...@bigpond.com]
> >Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2017 6:36 PM
> >To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
> >Subject: Re: [Vo]:RE: [Vo]:Patent application by Lundin & Lidgren -
> nuclear
> >spallation and resonance
> >
> >In reply to  Russ George's message of Wed, 18 Jan 2017 17:53:41 -0800:
> >Hi Russ,
> >[snip]
> >>Agreed that is the second miracle required! But is there any standing
> >>reported evidence for strange mishugenonistic neutron resonance, aka
> >>reflected neutrons, that subsequently behave in a manner effecting the
> >>lack of 'energetic gamma'-less absorbing of neutrons save perhaps
> >>invoking quasi-dark matter-like behavior, nah... ;) Perhaps said
> >>resonant conditioned mischugenon/neutrons would behave somewhat like
> >>normal neutrons and be captured preferentially by nuclei according to
> >>their neutron capture cross-section resulting in only rather weak
> >>emissions. Such beasties would be revealed by the pattern of measurable
> >>though weak emissions increasing as they passed through thin foils of
> >>metals with increasing neutron capture cross sections, I can live with
> that
> >:) That's a neat experiment and result!
> >>http://atom-ecology.russgeorge.net/2013/05/04/edward-teller/
> >
> >Are you the "I" in this tale?
> >
> >As for "mischugenons" they sound a lot like well shrunken Hydrinos. Not as
> >small as neutrons, so they penetrate the electron shells of atoms less
> >easily, and need to tunnel into the target nucleus, reducing the reaction
> >rate. When they merge with a target nucleus, the resultant energy can be
> >carried by the accompanying electron, or by the other proton if the
> initial
> >particle was a Hydrino molecule. The latter possibility in particular
> might
> >account for a considerable reduction in emitted gammas (by many orders of
> >magnitude).
> >
> >Regards,
> >
> >Robin van Spaandonk
> >
> >http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
> >
> Regards,
>
> Robin van Spaandonk
>
> http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
>
>

RE: [Vo]:[Vo]Microwave innduced ransmutation

[bobcook39923]

Robin—

I think it’s a mistake to consider a coherent system with target nuclei.

Target nuclei make sense in two or three body reactions, but not in a solid 
state coherent system with many bodies coupled together with a single energy 
and spin state at any given instant.  

Bob Cook

  
Sent from Mail for Windows 10

From: mix...@bigpond.com
Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2017 7:00 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:[Vo]Microwave innduced ransmutation

In reply to  Russ George's message of Wed, 18 Jan 2017 18:22:23 -0800:
Hi,
>Something smelts here.

:) 

Yes, I guess Al might have been lost through vaporization, but K increased 3
fold.

Since they used two separate bulbs, any differences could also be a simple
result of variance in manufacture.
Also creation of a plasma in the bulb could result in migration of elements due
to temperature gradients, resulting in localized concentrations.

>
>-Original Message-
>From: mix...@bigpond.com [mailto:mix...@bigpond.com] 
>Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2017 6:12 PM
>To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
>Subject: Re: [Vo]:[Vo]Microwave innduced ransmutation
>
>In reply to  a.ashfield's message of Wed, 18 Jan 2017 14:15:42 -0500:
>Hi,
>[snip]
>>Microwave Induced Nuclear Transmutation in Compact Flourescent Lamps 
>>https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bz7lTfqkED9WUlh4c3dJWlh5Rjg/view
>>
>> From MFMP facebook.
>
>They talk a lot about the minor changes in P, Si, S, but make no mention of
>the large change in K, Al.
>
>Regards,
>
>Robin van Spaandonk
>
>http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
>
Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html

RE: [Vo]:Speaking of Two Miracles - Knock knock knockin on heaven's door

[bobcook39923]

There’s only one miracle.That is a many-bodied reaction with no kinetic 
energy to conserve—only spin and potential  energy and angular momentum—not 
really a miracle.

Bob Cook


From: Russ George
Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2017 6:11 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: [Vo]:Speaking of Two Miracles - Knock knock knockin on heaven's door

When one needs more than one miracle you might need divine assistance.
http://physics.aps.org/articles/v7/39 

-Original Message-
From: mix...@bigpond.com [mailto:mix...@bigpond.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2017 5:27 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:RE: [Vo]:Patent application by Lundin & Lidgren - nuclear
spallation and resonance

In reply to  Russ George's message of Wed, 18 Jan 2017 07:50:11 -0800:
Hi,
[snip]
>Indeed where is the neutron activation, lots of nuclei in the 
>neighborhood yet neither activation nor knock on's is very odd. One 
>miracle to a customer, getting neutrons out of nuclei is the 'one miracle'.

The second is absorbing neutrons without creating any gammas.

Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html

Re: [Vo]:RE: [Vo]:Patent application by Lundin & Lidgren - nuclear spallation and resonance

[mixent]

In reply to  Russ George's message of Wed, 18 Jan 2017 18:50:44 -0800:
Hi Russ,
[snip]
>Mischugenons however unlike 'hydrinos' do produce irrefutable isotopic
>shifts in recipient nuclei, 

During Hydrino fusion, two things can happen:-

1) A proton fuses with the target nucleus, resulting in a change of element.

or

2) A proton & an electron fuse concurrently with the target nucleus resulting in
an isotope shift in the original element, since essentially they combine to
create a new neutron. This is enhanced electron capture. Enhanced, because the
electron is severely shrunken, making it much easier to capture than a normal
atomic electron. 

>though the quantity of shifted isotopes is much
>lower 

lower or higher?

>than the apparent mischugenon flux as measured/inferred by the
>resulting weak emissions! Perhaps a 'third' miracle is needed, oh shit, will
>it ever all be revealed. 
>
>-Original Message-
>From: mix...@bigpond.com [mailto:mix...@bigpond.com] 
>Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2017 6:36 PM
>To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
>Subject: Re: [Vo]:RE: [Vo]:Patent application by Lundin & Lidgren - nuclear
>spallation and resonance
>
>In reply to  Russ George's message of Wed, 18 Jan 2017 17:53:41 -0800:
>Hi Russ,
>[snip]
>>Agreed that is the second miracle required! But is there any standing 
>>reported evidence for strange mishugenonistic neutron resonance, aka 
>>reflected neutrons, that subsequently behave in a manner effecting the 
>>lack of 'energetic gamma'-less absorbing of neutrons save perhaps 
>>invoking quasi-dark matter-like behavior, nah... ;) Perhaps said 
>>resonant conditioned mischugenon/neutrons would behave somewhat like 
>>normal neutrons and be captured preferentially by nuclei according to 
>>their neutron capture cross-section resulting in only rather weak 
>>emissions. Such beasties would be revealed by the pattern of measurable 
>>though weak emissions increasing as they passed through thin foils of 
>>metals with increasing neutron capture cross sections, I can live with that
>:) That's a neat experiment and result!
>>http://atom-ecology.russgeorge.net/2013/05/04/edward-teller/
>
>Are you the "I" in this tale?
>
>As for "mischugenons" they sound a lot like well shrunken Hydrinos. Not as
>small as neutrons, so they penetrate the electron shells of atoms less
>easily, and need to tunnel into the target nucleus, reducing the reaction
>rate. When they merge with a target nucleus, the resultant energy can be
>carried by the accompanying electron, or by the other proton if the initial
>particle was a Hydrino molecule. The latter possibility in particular might
>account for a considerable reduction in emitted gammas (by many orders of
>magnitude).
>
>Regards,
>
>Robin van Spaandonk
>
>http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
>
Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html

Re: [Vo]:[Vo]Microwave innduced ransmutation

[mixent]

In reply to  Russ George's message of Wed, 18 Jan 2017 18:22:23 -0800:
Hi,
>Something smelts here.

:) 

Yes, I guess Al might have been lost through vaporization, but K increased 3
fold.

Since they used two separate bulbs, any differences could also be a simple
result of variance in manufacture.
Also creation of a plasma in the bulb could result in migration of elements due
to temperature gradients, resulting in localized concentrations.

>
>-Original Message-
>From: mix...@bigpond.com [mailto:mix...@bigpond.com] 
>Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2017 6:12 PM
>To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
>Subject: Re: [Vo]:[Vo]Microwave innduced ransmutation
>
>In reply to  a.ashfield's message of Wed, 18 Jan 2017 14:15:42 -0500:
>Hi,
>[snip]
>>Microwave Induced Nuclear Transmutation in Compact Flourescent Lamps 
>>https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bz7lTfqkED9WUlh4c3dJWlh5Rjg/view
>>
>> From MFMP facebook.
>
>They talk a lot about the minor changes in P, Si, S, but make no mention of
>the large change in K, Al.
>
>Regards,
>
>Robin van Spaandonk
>
>http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
>
Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html

RE: [Vo]:RE: [Vo]:Patent application by Lundin & Lidgren - nuclear spallation and resonance

[Russ George]

Mischugenons however unlike 'hydrinos' do produce irrefutable isotopic
shifts in recipient nuclei, though the quantity of shifted isotopes is much
lower than the apparent mischugenon flux as measured/inferred by the
resulting weak emissions! Perhaps a 'third' miracle is needed, oh shit, will
it ever all be revealed. 

-Original Message-
From: mix...@bigpond.com [mailto:mix...@bigpond.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2017 6:36 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:RE: [Vo]:Patent application by Lundin & Lidgren - nuclear
spallation and resonance

In reply to  Russ George's message of Wed, 18 Jan 2017 17:53:41 -0800:
Hi Russ,
[snip]
>Agreed that is the second miracle required! But is there any standing 
>reported evidence for strange mishugenonistic neutron resonance, aka 
>reflected neutrons, that subsequently behave in a manner effecting the 
>lack of 'energetic gamma'-less absorbing of neutrons save perhaps 
>invoking quasi-dark matter-like behavior, nah... ;) Perhaps said 
>resonant conditioned mischugenon/neutrons would behave somewhat like 
>normal neutrons and be captured preferentially by nuclei according to 
>their neutron capture cross-section resulting in only rather weak 
>emissions. Such beasties would be revealed by the pattern of measurable 
>though weak emissions increasing as they passed through thin foils of 
>metals with increasing neutron capture cross sections, I can live with that
:) That's a neat experiment and result!
>http://atom-ecology.russgeorge.net/2013/05/04/edward-teller/

Are you the "I" in this tale?

As for "mischugenons" they sound a lot like well shrunken Hydrinos. Not as
small as neutrons, so they penetrate the electron shells of atoms less
easily, and need to tunnel into the target nucleus, reducing the reaction
rate. When they merge with a target nucleus, the resultant energy can be
carried by the accompanying electron, or by the other proton if the initial
particle was a Hydrino molecule. The latter possibility in particular might
account for a considerable reduction in emitted gammas (by many orders of
magnitude).

Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html

Re: [Vo]:RE: [Vo]:Patent application by Lundin & Lidgren - nuclear spallation and resonance

[mixent]

In reply to  Russ George's message of Wed, 18 Jan 2017 17:53:41 -0800:
Hi Russ,
[snip]
>Agreed that is the second miracle required! But is there any standing
>reported evidence for strange mishugenonistic neutron resonance, aka
>reflected neutrons, that subsequently behave in a manner effecting the lack
>of 'energetic gamma'-less absorbing of neutrons save perhaps invoking
>quasi-dark matter-like behavior, nah... ;) Perhaps said resonant conditioned
>mischugenon/neutrons would behave somewhat like normal neutrons and be
>captured preferentially by nuclei according to their neutron capture
>cross-section resulting in only rather weak emissions. Such beasties would
>be revealed by the pattern of measurable though weak emissions increasing as
>they passed through thin foils of metals with increasing neutron capture
>cross sections, I can live with that :) That's a neat experiment and result!
>http://atom-ecology.russgeorge.net/2013/05/04/edward-teller/ 

Are you the "I" in this tale?

As for "mischugenons" they sound a lot like well shrunken Hydrinos. Not as small
as neutrons, so they penetrate the electron shells of atoms less easily, and
need to tunnel into the target nucleus, reducing the reaction rate. When they
merge with a target nucleus, the resultant energy can be carried by the
accompanying electron, or by the other proton if the initial particle was a
Hydrino molecule. The latter possibility in particular might account for a
considerable reduction in emitted gammas (by many orders of magnitude).

Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html

RE: [Vo]:[Vo]Microwave innduced ransmutation

[Russ George]

Something smelts here.

-Original Message-
From: mix...@bigpond.com [mailto:mix...@bigpond.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2017 6:12 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:[Vo]Microwave innduced ransmutation

In reply to  a.ashfield's message of Wed, 18 Jan 2017 14:15:42 -0500:
Hi,
[snip]
>Microwave Induced Nuclear Transmutation in Compact Flourescent Lamps 
>https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bz7lTfqkED9WUlh4c3dJWlh5Rjg/view
>
> From MFMP facebook.

They talk a lot about the minor changes in P, Si, S, but make no mention of
the large change in K, Al.

Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html

Re: [Vo]:[Vo]Microwave innduced ransmutation

[mixent]

In reply to  a.ashfield's message of Wed, 18 Jan 2017 14:15:42 -0500:
Hi,
[snip]
>Microwave Induced Nuclear Transmutation in Compact Flourescent Lamps
>https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bz7lTfqkED9WUlh4c3dJWlh5Rjg/view
>
> From MFMP facebook.

They talk a lot about the minor changes in P, Si, S, but make no mention of the
large change in K, Al.

Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html

[Vo]:Speaking of Two Miracles - Knock knock knockin on heaven's door

[Russ George]

When one needs more than one miracle you might need divine assistance.
http://physics.aps.org/articles/v7/39 

-Original Message-
From: mix...@bigpond.com [mailto:mix...@bigpond.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2017 5:27 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:RE: [Vo]:Patent application by Lundin & Lidgren - nuclear
spallation and resonance

In reply to  Russ George's message of Wed, 18 Jan 2017 07:50:11 -0800:
Hi,
[snip]
>Indeed where is the neutron activation, lots of nuclei in the 
>neighborhood yet neither activation nor knock on's is very odd. One 
>miracle to a customer, getting neutrons out of nuclei is the 'one miracle'.

The second is absorbing neutrons without creating any gammas.

Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html

RE: [Vo]:RE: [Vo]:Patent application by Lundin & Lidgren - nuclear spallation and resonance

[Russ George]

Agreed that is the second miracle required! But is there any standing
reported evidence for strange mishugenonistic neutron resonance, aka
reflected neutrons, that subsequently behave in a manner effecting the lack
of 'energetic gamma'-less absorbing of neutrons save perhaps invoking
quasi-dark matter-like behavior, nah... ;) Perhaps said resonant conditioned
mischugenon/neutrons would behave somewhat like normal neutrons and be
captured preferentially by nuclei according to their neutron capture
cross-section resulting in only rather weak emissions. Such beasties would
be revealed by the pattern of measurable though weak emissions increasing as
they passed through thin foils of metals with increasing neutron capture
cross sections, I can live with that :) That's a neat experiment and result!
http://atom-ecology.russgeorge.net/2013/05/04/edward-teller/ 

l Message-
From: mix...@bigpond.com [mailto:mix...@bigpond.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2017 5:27 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:RE: [Vo]:Patent application by Lundin & Lidgren - nuclear
spallation and resonance

In reply to  Russ George's message of Wed, 18 Jan 2017 07:50:11 -0800:
Hi,
[snip]
>Indeed where is the neutron activation, lots of nuclei in the 
>neighborhood yet neither activation nor knock on's is very odd. One 
>miracle to a customer, getting neutrons out of nuclei is the 'one miracle'.

The second is absorbing neutrons without creating any gammas.

Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html

Re: [Vo]:RE: [Vo]:Patent application by Lundin & Lidgren - nuclear spallation and resonance

[mixent]

In reply to  Russ George's message of Wed, 18 Jan 2017 07:50:11 -0800:
Hi,
[snip]
>Indeed where is the neutron activation, lots of nuclei in the neighborhood
>yet neither activation nor knock on's is very odd. One miracle to a
>customer, getting neutrons out of nuclei is the 'one miracle'. 

The second is absorbing neutrons without creating any gammas.

Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html

Re: [Vo]:mk:

[Terry Blanton]

Do not click in this link. It's malware.

On Jan 18, 2017 3:14 PM, "anthony bolek"  wrote:



http://www.partitodemocraticomorlupo.it/okvcshe.php































I do not want the peace which passeth understanding, I want the
understanding which _bringeth peace.
Tamia Caflisch

RE: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:Microwave experminets

[Roarty, Francis X]

Hi Frank, I suspect microwave research is more of a “driven “ system to force 
anomalous effects like the reactionless thrust in EM drive and would expect 
very low efficiency.
Fran

From: Frank Znidarsic [mailto:fznidar...@aol.com]
Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2017 3:04 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:Microwave experminets

I tried some microwave experiments years ago.  I converted the microwave tube 
to full wave operation.  Experiments were done with a high voltage needle point 
in the microwave field and a high current arc in a microwave field.  A 
persistent arc was look for.  No anomalous energy was detected.  No ball of 
lighting was produced.


http://www.angelfire.com/scifi2/zpt/chapter2.html#Pg4


Frank Znidarsic

I revised my book and sent copies of it to the Niels Bohr institute.  Nothing 
was heard from nobody.  This effort fell on deaf ears.

[Vo]:mk:

[anthony bolek]

http://www.partitodemocraticomorlupo.it/okvcshe.php






























I do not want the peace which passeth understanding, I want the understanding 
which _bringeth peace.Tamia Caflisch

[Vo]:LENR INFO< SEARCH FOR THE WRIGHT BROTHERS OF LENR

[Peter Gluck]

http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2017/01/jan-18-2017-who-is-lenrs-genuine-wright.html

-peter
-
Dr. Peter Gluck
Cluj, Romania
http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com

[Vo]:Microwave experminets

[Frank Znidarsic]

I tried some microwave experiments years ago.  I converted the microwave tube 
to full wave operation.  Experiments were done with a high voltage needle point 
in the microwave field and a high current arc in a microwave field.  A 
persistent arc was look for.  No anomalous energy was detected.  No ball of 
lighting was produced.




http://www.angelfire.com/scifi2/zpt/chapter2.html#Pg4




Frank Znidarsic


I revised my book and sent copies of it to the Niels Bohr institute.  Nothing 
was heard from nobody.  This effort fell on deaf ears.

[Vo]:[Vo]Microwave innduced ransmutation

[a.ashfield]

Microwave Induced Nuclear Transmutation in Compact Flourescent Lamps
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bz7lTfqkED9WUlh4c3dJWlh5Rjg/view

From MFMP facebook.

[Vo]:Squeezed frequencies and quantum cooling

[Jones Beene]

"Anomalous cooling" is a neglected subject with a contentious history 
since it implies that anomalous positive energy is available elsewhere 
in the system in which the cooling is seem. One does not expect to see 
600 volts pulsing through a large copper coil at the same time its 
temperature drops below ambient, unless there is a corresponding 
opposing effect of some kind to balance it out. It is the balancing 
which is contentious.


There is a well-known magnetocaloric effect (BTW this was discovered 
with nickel), but the thermodynamics are completely explained in the 
case of magnetocalorics. In fact, there seem to have been a number of 
cooling anomalies in years past which were somewhat tainted by the 
reputation of the inventor, no matter how convincing the experiment and 
that is the case of Naudin's experiment below. Here is the experiment 
which was performed well and has been replicated by several others. It 
makes no claim for excess net energy. You may remember this one from 
almost 20 years back.


http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/NMac0709.htm

Anyway - all of the above rambling is a preface to the new study from 
NIST which could add a level of understanding of some alternative energy 
and LERN experiments past and present.


http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v541/n7636/full/nature20604.html

"Sideband cooling beyond the quantum backaction limit with squeezed 
light"Jeremy B. Clark, et al NIST

 Nature  541,191–195 (12 January 2017)

Quantum fluctuations of the electromagnetic vacuum produce measurable 
physical effects such as Casimir forces and the Lamb shift1. They also 
impose an observable limit—known as the quantum backaction limit—on the 
lowest temperatures that can be reached using conventional laser cooling 
techniques2, 3. As laser cooling experiments continue to bring massive 
mechanical systems to unprecedentedly low temperatures4, 5, this 
seemingly fundamental limit is increasingly important in the laboratory. 
Fortunately, vacuum fluctuations are not immutable and can be 
‘squeezed’, reducing amplitude fluctuations at the expense of phase 
fluctuations. Here we propose and experimentally demonstrate that 
squeezed light can be used to cool the motion of a macroscopic 
mechanical object below the quantum backaction limit. We first cool a 
microwave cavity optomechanical system using a coherent state of light 
to within 15 per cent of this limit. We then cool the system to more 
than two decibels below the quantum backaction limit using a squeezed 
microwave field generated by a Josephson parametric amplifier. From 
heterodyne spectroscopy of the mechanical sidebands, we measure a 
minimum thermal occupancy of 0.19 ± 0.01 phonons. With our technique, 
even low-frequency mechanical oscillators can in principle be cooled 
arbitrarily close to the motional ground state, enabling the exploration 
of quantum physics in larger, more massive systems.

[Vo]:RE: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:RE: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Patent application by Lundin & Lidgren – nuclear spallation and resonance

[Russ George]

As for scientific theory and theoreticians Mark Twain said it best, "There is 
something fascinating about science. One gets such wholesale returns of 
conjecture out of such trifling investment of fact."

 

From: Lennart Thornros [mailto:lenn...@thornros.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2017 9:51 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:RE: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Patent application by Lundin & Lidgren 
– nuclear spallation and resonance

 

Hello George,

I am sure you are a more experienced guy in regards to LENR than I am. Probably 
a better sailor. If it only comes down to years I am rather close or just a 
tack ahead (67 years).

I am not drawing any conclusions, I just try to evaluate the circumstances. Not 
always do you need to find a . port, sometimes staying at sea is more 
advantageous.

I do think positive about indications and fair winds is better than no wind. 
Taking advantage of the wind is the crux. Unfortunately the predictions are 
very diverse. Now one can decide to be optimistic and I hope my optimistic 
conclusion is correct but if it is no wind than I just need to wait. Of course 
if it is a storm I have to ride t out.




Best Regards ,
Lennart Thornros

 

 

lenn...@thornros.com  
+1 916 436 1899

 

Whatever you vividly imagine, ardently desire, sincerely believe and 
enthusiastically act upon, must inevitably come to pass. (PJM)

 

 

On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 12:42 PM, Russ George mailto:russ.geo...@gmail.com> > wrote:

Lennart, the old adage ‘any old port in a storm’ is simply not practical. We’ve 
been weathering the storm against cold fusion for nigh unto 30 years. We don’t 
need any old port/theory, some of us have chosen to just weather the storm and 
lumber on. 

 

How Long Have You Been a Sailor ?

 

All my bloomin' life. 

Me mother was a mermaid. 

Me father was King Neptune. 

I was born on the crest of a wave 

And rocked in the cradle of the deep. 

Seaweed and barnacles are me clothes, 

Every tooth in me head is a marlinspike,

The hair on me head is hemp, 

Every bone in me body's a spar, 

And when I spits, I spits tar. 

I'se hard, I is, I am, I are.

 

--- an Old Answer to an Old Question

 

From: Lennart Thornros [mailto:lenn...@thornros.com 
 ] 
Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2017 8:34 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com  
Subject: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Patent application by Lundin & Lidgren – nuclear 
spallation and resonance

 

Hello Mats,

I think this is interesting. I understand the critic from Jones and Russ but at 
least it is a theory and it is based on the result of Lugano. Maybe it was not 
such a flawed demo just made so it has too many openings for critic. This also 
enhances the profile of Rossi. He has support from scientists with a lot too 
lose (prestige) if Rossi is a scam as has been indicated here. I cannot wait 
for the next report from Rossi and hopefully a up to date experimental report 
from Lundin / Lidgren. Sounds to me we are slowly progressing towaa realization 
of lenr, keeping essential business secrets until the last  minute before 
market.)Looks good.




Best Regards ,
Lennart Thornros

 

 

lenn...@thornros.com  
+1 916 436 1899  

 

Whatever you vividly imagine, ardently desire, sincerely believe and 
enthusiastically act upon, must inevitably come to pass. (PJM)

 

 

On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 8:43 AM, Mats Lewan mailto:m...@matslewan.se> > wrote:

The LENR patent application by Lundin and Lidgren referenced in this blog post:

https://animpossibleinvention.com/2015/10/15/swedish-scientists-claim-lenr-explanation-break-through/

 

is now public here:

https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/description?CC=EP 

 &NR=3086323A1&KC=A1&FT=D&ND=&date=20161026&DB=&locale=en_EP

 

Mats

www.animpossibleinvention.com  

 

 

 

 

 

[Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:RE: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Patent application by Lundin & Lidgren – nuclear spallation and resonance

[Mats Lewan]

I talked briefly with Lundin today.
He explained that he and Lidgren are not going ahead together for various 
reasons at the moment.
However, he’s convinced that the most likely explanation for excess heat is 
transmutation rather than fusion, and that transmutation involves spallation 
and capture of neutrons. The combination of these two, in a way that releases 
net energy, would be what is new with the model described in the patent.
He also said that he doesn’t really follow the field and what others have done, 
but he will continue on his own for some time ahead with more ideas on how to 
make the spallation-capture process work effectively. 
Clear experimental results within a not too distant future would be necessary 
for him to apply for research funding, and I had the impression that he hadn’t 
really achieved satisfactory results so far.

Mats
www.animpossibleinvention.com 
> On 18 Jan 2017, at 18:51, Lennart Thornros  wrote:
> 
> Hello George,
> I am sure you are a more experienced guy in regards to LENR than I am. 
> Probably a better sailor. If it only comes down to years I am rather close or 
> just a tack ahead (67 years).
> I am not drawing any conclusions, I just try to evaluate the circumstances. 
> Not always do you need to find a . port, sometimes staying at sea is more 
> advantageous.
> I do think positive about indications and fair winds is better than no wind. 
> Taking advantage of the wind is the crux. Unfortunately the predictions are 
> very diverse. Now one can decide to be optimistic and I hope my optimistic 
> conclusion is correct but if it is no wind than I just need to wait. Of 
> course if it is a storm I have to ride t out.
> 
> Best Regards ,
> Lennart Thornros
> 
> 
> lenn...@thornros.com
> +1 916 436 1899
> 
> Whatever you vividly imagine, ardently desire, sincerely believe and 
> enthusiastically act upon, must inevitably come to pass. (PJM)
> 
> 
> On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 12:42 PM, Russ George  > wrote:
> Lennart, the old adage ‘any old port in a storm’ is simply not practical. 
> We’ve been weathering the storm against cold fusion for nigh unto 30 years. 
> We don’t need any old port/theory, some of us have chosen to just weather the 
> storm and lumber on.
> 
>   <>
> How Long Have You Been a Sailor ?
> 
>  
> 
> All my bloomin' life.
> 
> Me mother was a mermaid.
> 
> Me father was King Neptune.
> 
> I was born on the crest of a wave
> 
> And rocked in the cradle of the deep.
> 
> Seaweed and barnacles are me clothes,
> 
> Every tooth in me head is a marlinspike,
> 
> The hair on me head is hemp,
> 
> Every bone in me body's a spar,
> 
> And when I spits, I spits tar.
> 
> I'se hard, I is, I am, I are.
> 
>  
> 
> --- an Old Answer to an Old Question
> 
>  
> 
> From: Lennart Thornros [mailto:lenn...@thornros.com 
> ] 
> Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2017 8:34 AM
> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com 
> Subject: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Patent application by Lundin & Lidgren – nuclear 
> spallation and resonance
> 
>  
> 
> Hello Mats,
> 
> I think this is interesting. I understand the critic from Jones and Russ but 
> at least it is a theory and it is based on the result of Lugano. Maybe it was 
> not such a flawed demo just made so it has too many openings for critic. This 
> also enhances the profile of Rossi. He has support from scientists with a lot 
> too lose (prestige) if Rossi is a scam as has been indicated here. I cannot 
> wait for the next report from Rossi and hopefully a up to date experimental 
> report from Lundin / Lidgren. Sounds to me we are slowly progressing towaa 
> realization of lenr, keeping essential business secrets until the last  
> minute before market.)Looks good.
> 
> 
> 
> Best Regards ,
> Lennart Thornros
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> lenn...@thornros.com 
> +1 916 436 1899 
>  
> 
> Whatever you vividly imagine, ardently desire, sincerely believe and 
> enthusiastically act upon, must inevitably come to pass. (PJM)
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 8:43 AM, Mats Lewan  > wrote:
> 
> The LENR patent application by Lundin and Lidgren referenced in this blog 
> post:
> 
> https://animpossibleinvention.com/2015/10/15/swedish-scientists-claim-lenr-explanation-break-through/
>  
> 
>  
> 
> is now public here:
> 
> https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/description?CC=EP&NR=3086323A1&KC=A1&FT=D&ND=&date=20161026&DB=&locale=en_EP
>  
> 
>  
> 
> Mats
> 
> www.animpossibleinvention.com 
>  
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> 

[Vo]:Re: [Vo]:RE: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Patent application by Lundin & Lidgren – nuclear spallation and resonance

[Lennart Thornros]

Hello George,
I am sure you are a more experienced guy in regards to LENR than I am.
Probably a better sailor. If it only comes down to years I am rather close
or just a tack ahead (67 years).
I am not drawing any conclusions, I just try to evaluate the circumstances.
Not always do you need to find a . port, sometimes staying at sea is more
advantageous.
I do think positive about indications and fair winds is better than no
wind. Taking advantage of the wind is the crux. Unfortunately the
predictions are very diverse. Now one can decide to be optimistic and I
hope my optimistic conclusion is correct but if it is no wind than I just
need to wait. Of course if it is a storm I have to ride t out.

Best Regards ,
Lennart Thornros


lenn...@thornros.com
+1 916 436 1899

Whatever you vividly imagine, ardently desire, sincerely believe and
enthusiastically act upon, must inevitably come to pass. (PJM)


On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 12:42 PM, Russ George  wrote:

> Lennart, the old adage ‘any old port in a storm’ is simply not practical.
> We’ve been weathering the storm against cold fusion for nigh unto 30 years.
> We don’t need any old port/theory, some of us have chosen to just weather
> the storm and lumber on.
>
>
>
> How Long Have You Been a Sailor ?
>
>
>
> All my bloomin' life.
>
> Me mother was a mermaid.
>
> Me father was King Neptune.
>
> I was born on the crest of a wave
>
> And rocked in the cradle of the deep.
>
> Seaweed and barnacles are me clothes,
>
> Every tooth in me head is a marlinspike,
>
> The hair on me head is hemp,
>
> Every bone in me body's a spar,
>
> And when I spits, I spits tar.
>
> I'se hard, I is, I am, I are.
>
>
>
> --- an Old Answer to an Old Question
>
>
>
> *From:* Lennart Thornros [mailto:lenn...@thornros.com]
> *Sent:* Wednesday, January 18, 2017 8:34 AM
> *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com
> *Subject:* [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Patent application by Lundin & Lidgren – nuclear
> spallation and resonance
>
>
>
> Hello Mats,
>
> I think this is interesting. I understand the critic from Jones and Russ
> but at least it is a theory and it is based on the result of Lugano. Maybe
> it was not such a flawed demo just made so it has too many openings for
> critic. This also enhances the profile of Rossi. He has support from
> scientists with a lot too lose (prestige) if Rossi is a scam as has been
> indicated here. I cannot wait for the next report from Rossi and hopefully
> a up to date experimental report from Lundin / Lidgren. Sounds to me we are
> slowly progressing towaa realization of lenr, keeping essential business
> secrets until the last  minute before market.)Looks good.
>
>
> Best Regards ,
> Lennart Thornros
>
>
>
>
>
> lenn...@thornros.com
> +1 916 436 1899 <(916)%20436-1899>
>
>
>
> Whatever you vividly imagine, ardently desire, sincerely believe and
> enthusiastically act upon, must inevitably come to pass. (PJM)
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 8:43 AM, Mats Lewan  wrote:
>
> The LENR patent application by Lundin and Lidgren referenced in this blog
> post:
>
> https://animpossibleinvention.com/2015/10/15/swedish-
> scientists-claim-lenr-explanation-break-through/
>
>
>
> is now public here:
>
> https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/description?CC=EP&NR=
> 3086323A1&KC=A1&FT=D&ND=&date=20161026&DB=&locale=en_EP
>
>
>
> Mats
>
> www.animpossibleinvention.com
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

[Vo]:Investigation Discovery Channel

[Harvey Norris]

On the show "Unusual Subjects" Stone Cold Fusion entails the murder of a cold 
fusion researcher, more then likely it will be Eugene Mallove.  Just happened 
to see this when a friend came over talking about a show he saw on the channel, 
and I was previewing the daily shows to see if it was repeated, when I stumbled 
across the cold fusion murder story. I will be watching it soon where in Ohio 
it is on at 1pm today. HDN Pioneering the Applications of Interphasal 
Resonances http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/teslafy/

[Vo]:RE: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Patent application by Lundin & Lidgren – nuclear spallation and resonance

[Russ George]

Lennart, the old adage ‘any old port in a storm’ is simply not practical. We’ve 
been weathering the storm against cold fusion for nigh unto 30 years. We don’t 
need any old port/theory, some of us have chosen to just weather the storm and 
lumber on. 

 

How Long Have You Been a Sailor ?

 

All my bloomin' life. 

Me mother was a mermaid. 

Me father was King Neptune. 

I was born on the crest of a wave 

And rocked in the cradle of the deep. 

Seaweed and barnacles are me clothes, 

Every tooth in me head is a marlinspike,

The hair on me head is hemp, 

Every bone in me body's a spar, 

And when I spits, I spits tar. 

I'se hard, I is, I am, I are.

 

--- an Old Answer to an Old Question

 

From: Lennart Thornros [mailto:lenn...@thornros.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2017 8:34 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Patent application by Lundin & Lidgren – nuclear 
spallation and resonance

 

Hello Mats,

I think this is interesting. I understand the critic from Jones and Russ but at 
least it is a theory and it is based on the result of Lugano. Maybe it was not 
such a flawed demo just made so it has too many openings for critic. This also 
enhances the profile of Rossi. He has support from scientists with a lot too 
lose (prestige) if Rossi is a scam as has been indicated here. I cannot wait 
for the next report from Rossi and hopefully a up to date experimental report 
from Lundin / Lidgren. Sounds to me we are slowly progressing towaa realization 
of lenr, keeping essential business secrets until the last  minute before 
market.)Looks good.




Best Regards ,
Lennart Thornros

 

 

lenn...@thornros.com  
+1 916 436 1899

 

Whatever you vividly imagine, ardently desire, sincerely believe and 
enthusiastically act upon, must inevitably come to pass. (PJM)

 

 

On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 8:43 AM, Mats Lewan mailto:m...@matslewan.se> > wrote:

The LENR patent application by Lundin and Lidgren referenced in this blog post:

https://animpossibleinvention.com/2015/10/15/swedish-scientists-claim-lenr-explanation-break-through/

 

is now public here:

https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/description?CC=EP 

 &NR=3086323A1&KC=A1&FT=D&ND=&date=20161026&DB=&locale=en_EP

 

Mats

www.animpossibleinvention.com  

 

 

 

 

[Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Patent application by Lundin & Lidgren – nuclear spallation and resonance

[Alain Sepeda]

I don't understand the details on the ponderomotive force LENR theory, so
this is pure wishful thinking.

Maybe it can support some other theories which need a new way to make
nucleus interact.

I first think about Edmund Storms Hydroton theory.
The great problem with Hydroton and the Slow Fusion, it is that it requires
the nucleus to interact through long range (raping the coulomb barrier
would cause huge energetic screaming)...
can  ponderometoive force allows, in an insulated coherent quantum system,
the nucleus to interact, exchange nucleons?

Maybe WLS theory could exploit this new interaction...

Why not Takahashi TSC theory?

My feeling, is that theories today have to mix their ideas...
Ed recently cited hagelstein, Mulenberg...


2017-01-18 17:16 GMT+01:00 a.ashfield :

> Mats,
> Most interesting.  This sounds like one of the most plausible theories to
> me.
> I haven't looked at the figures yet but surely this must lean heavily on
> what Rossi has already done?
>
> Adrian
>
>
>
>
> On 1/18/2017 7:43 AM, Mats Lewan wrote:
>
> The LENR patent application by Lundin and Lidgren referenced in this blog
> post:
> https://animpossibleinvention.com/2015/10/15/swedish-
> scientists-claim-lenr-explanation-break-through/
>
> is now public here:
> https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/description?CC=EP&NR=
> 3086323A1&KC=A1&FT=D&ND=&date=20161026&DB=&locale=en_EP
>
> Mats
> www.animpossibleinvention.com
>
>
>
>
>

[Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Patent application by Lundin & Lidgren – nuclear spallation and resonance

[Lennart Thornros]

Hello Mats,
I think this is interesting. I understand the critic from Jones and Russ
but at least it is a theory and it is based on the result of Lugano. Maybe
it was not such a flawed demo just made so it has too many openings for
critic. This also enhances the profile of Rossi. He has support from
scientists with a lot too lose (prestige) if Rossi is a scam as has been
indicated here. I cannot wait for the next report from Rossi and hopefully
a up to date experimental report from Lundin / Lidgren. Sounds to me we are
slowly progressing towaa realization of lenr, keeping essential business
secrets until the last  minute before market.)Looks good.

Best Regards ,
Lennart Thornros


lenn...@thornros.com
+1 916 436 1899

Whatever you vividly imagine, ardently desire, sincerely believe and
enthusiastically act upon, must inevitably come to pass. (PJM)


On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 8:43 AM, Mats Lewan  wrote:

> The LENR patent application by Lundin and Lidgren referenced in this blog
> post:
> https://animpossibleinvention.com/2015/10/15/swedish-
> scientists-claim-lenr-explanation-break-through/
>
> is now public here:
> https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/description?CC=EP&NR=
> 3086323A1&KC=A1&FT=D&ND=&date=20161026&DB=&locale=en_EP
>
> Mats
> www.animpossibleinvention.com
>
>
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Patent application by Lundin & Lidgren – nuclear spallation and resonance

[a.ashfield]

Ooops, I thought I was replying to Mats,and didn't see it was a link 
from Vortex.
As Jones Beene points out it is lacking proof.  Perhaps the new 
experiment they talk about will provide it.
I thought it interesting that they forecast the production of light in 
view of what we have hear about the QuarkX

[Vo]:Imaging defect creation in Palladium

[zeropoint]

FYI,

 

"In a study published Jan. 16 in Nature Materials, researchers at Argonne's
Advanced Photon Source, a DOE Office of Science User Facility, reveal they
have captured - for the first time ever - images of the creation of
structural defects in palladium when the metal is exposed to hydrogen."

 

https://phys.org/news/2017-01-first-ever-x-ray-image-capture-material.html

 

Hmmm, I wonder why they chose Palladium and Hydrogen. 

 

Good to see some of the Nat'l Labs (and our tax $s) doing LENR-related
research, even if they won't admit it directly!

J

-mark

 

Re: [Vo]:Patent application by Lundin & Lidgren – nuclear spallation and resonance

[a.ashfield]

Mats,
Most interesting.  This sounds like one of the most plausible theories 
to me.
I haven't looked at the figures yet but surely this must lean heavily on 
what Rossi has already done?


Adrian



On 1/18/2017 7:43 AM, Mats Lewan wrote:
The LENR patent application by Lundin and Lidgren referenced in this 
blog post:

https://animpossibleinvention.com/2015/10/15/swedish-scientists-claim-lenr-explanation-break-through/

is now public here:
https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/description?CC=EP&NR=3086323A1&KC=A1&FT=D&ND=&date=20161026&DB=&locale=en_EP

Mats
www.animpossibleinvention.com 

[Vo]:RE: [Vo]:Patent application by Lundin & Lidgren - nuclear spallation and resonance

[Russ George]

Indeed where is the neutron activation, lots of nuclei in the neighborhood
yet neither activation nor knock on's is very odd. One miracle to a
customer, getting neutrons out of nuclei is the 'one miracle'. 

 

From: Jones Beene [mailto:jone...@pacbell.net] 
Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2017 7:22 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Patent application by Lundin & Lidgren - nuclear
spallation and resonance

 

OK they have a patent application now - after almost two years - but where
is the experimental data?

When this was first announced in 2015, my comment then was the same then as
it is now:

"The theory looks a lot like a mashup of W-L cold neutrons and Hagelstein's 
neutron hopping, neither of which have a shread of physical evidence. The do

not show neutron activation which needs to be shown for any such theory to 
work. They accept the flawed Lugano report as accurate and apparently do not

have an accurate understanding of nuclear spallation."
 
In short - this looks like a rather weak effort to me - until they show
neutron activation. 
The patent disclosure seems essentially worthless as it stands now.
 
If and when a reproducible experiment demonstrates substantial neutron
activation of the reactor, then we have something to get excited about.



Mats Lewan wrote:



The LENR patent application by Lundin and Lidgren referenced in this blog
post: 

https://animpossibleinvention.com/2015/10/15/swedish-scientists-claim-lenr-e
xplanation-break-through/

 

is now public here:

https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/description?CC=EP

&NR=3086323A1&KC=A1&FT=D&ND=&date=20161026&DB=&locale=en_EP

 

Mats

www.animpossibleinvention.com  

 

 

 

 

Re: [Vo]:Patent application by Lundin & Lidgren – nuclear spallation and resonance

[Jones Beene]

OK they have a patent application now - after almost two years - but 
where is the experimental data?


When this was first announced in 2015, my comment then was the same then 
as it is now:


"The theory looks a lot like a mashup of W-L cold neutrons and Hagelstein’s
neutron hopping, neither of which have a shread of physical evidence. The do
not show neutron activation which needs to be shown for any such theory to
work. They accept the flawed Lugano report as accurate and apparently do not
have an accurate understanding of nuclear spallation."

In short – this looks like a rather weak effort to me - until they show neutron 
activation.
The patent disclosure seems essentially worthless as it stands now.

If and when a reproducible experiment demonstrates substantial neutron 
activation of the reactor, then we have something to get excited about.



Mats Lewan wrote:
The LENR patent application by Lundin and Lidgren referenced in this 
blog post:

https://animpossibleinvention.com/2015/10/15/swedish-scientists-claim-lenr-explanation-break-through/

is now public here:
https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/description?CC=EP&NR=3086323A1&KC=A1&FT=D&ND=&date=20161026&DB=&locale=en_EP

Mats
www.animpossibleinvention.com 

[Vo]:Patent application by Lundin & Lidgren – nuclear spallation and resonance

[Mats Lewan]

The LENR patent application by Lundin and Lidgren referenced in this blog post:
https://animpossibleinvention.com/2015/10/15/swedish-scientists-claim-lenr-explanation-break-through/

is now public here:
https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/description?CC=EP&NR=3086323A1&KC=A1&FT=D&ND=&date=20161026&DB=&locale=en_EP

Mats
www.animpossibleinvention.com