Re: [Vo]:New Salt Compounds Challenge the Foundation of Chemistry
I agree. This is nothing more than alloying, say having an impurity in Na metal or an excess of chlorine in NaCl. On Sat, Dec 21, 2013 at 10:40 PM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.comwrote: This paper by Oganov is full of exaggerations. High pressure has been used for years to create new materials and explore compounds that cannot form under normal pressure. The authors of this paper give the impression they discovered something new in violation of chemical laws. Thus is not the case. They simply applied a well understood method while using the accepted chemical laws. They only found a behavior in a particular chemical system (NaCl) that did not behave as they expected. Such surprises happen frequently in chemistry. This surprise does not give permission to assume the chemical laws can be easily violated. Unlike QM in physics, chemistry is an OLD science that has been practiced under a huge range of conditions. The chemical laws have, with very few exceptions, been found to apply. LENR occurs in a chemical system, unlike hot fusion. This requires chemistry be considered. Ed Storms On Dec 21, 2013, at 3:18 PM, Alan Fletcher wrote: From: H Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2013 6:21:41 PM Subject: [Vo]:New Salt Compounds Challenge the Foun To Oganov, impossible didn't mean something absolute. The rules of chemistry are not like mathematical theorems, which cannot be broken, he says. The rules of chemistry can be broken, because impossible only means 'softly' impossible! You just need to find conditions where these rules no longer hold. Doesn't apply to physics and LENR, of course.
Re: [Vo]: Collective Phenomena
Really, the MB distribution should allow for these outliers then CF would be happening with a non-vanishing probability. The electrons obey FD statistics but contribute a small amount to the heat capacity. So there again I cannot see a mechanism, even if they were to switch between MB and FD. I am still struggling with the putative process and the result,, which should give off gamma rays, neutrons and locally vaporise the lattice. On Sun, Dec 22, 2013 at 1:59 AM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: This concept is going to take a while to develop. The first question that comes to mind is whether or not repulsive forces that vary as 1/R^2 work in a similar fashion to attractive ones. This will take some simulation. In the case of planets, all of the interacting bodies attract each other. Wiki has an interesting article concerning gravity assist that is worth reading. It reveals how the process works with space ships. The other issue that has long escaped my understanding is the photoelectric effect that Einstein explained to get his Nobel prize. He used this phenomena to more or less prove that photons of light behave as particles. Each particle resulted in the emission of one electron instead of sharing the energy among a multitude of them residing on the surface of the metal. The wavelength of the incoming light is far larger than the size of a single electron yet only one receives the photon energy and is ejected. I still do not understand why this is so. Is it possible that other many body reactions exist that can give a large quantity of the shared energy to one member? If this is true, then one might expect the inverse reaction to also occur which would be able to explain why the fusion energy is released into the larger body of particles instead of having to be emitted as one energetic gamma. Perhaps it is time to look into the emission of gamma rays from nickel nuclei to see if there is anything suspicious occurring. This exercise will likely lead to a dead end, but it could offer some helpful insight. Dave -Original Message- From: John Franks jf27...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Sat, Dec 21, 2013 8:31 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]: Collective Phenomena So if that little guy is a proton against the 10^8 -10^9 collective of other protons with thermal energy 25meV or so, that gets you in the ball park... What are the conditions to make this so - H2 loading, cracks, a lattice over say a liquid (no-one uses Hg). Any other pointers? Still having trouble with what happens after the reaction because of the femto level it is free space compared to the lattice on the 0.1nm level and the thermal wavelength of the heavy nuclei can't be making them overlap to behave collectively. On Sun, Dec 22, 2013 at 1:13 AM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.comwrote: ... When one of the bodies is much smaller than the other two, the little guy can be sent packing in a hurry. Dave -Original Message- From: John Franks jf27...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Sat, Dec 21, 2013 11:43 am Subject: Re: [Vo]: Collective Phenomena http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_drift On Sat, Dec 21, 2013 at 4:28 PM, Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.comwrote: Hi :) On Sat, Dec 21, 2013 at 8:05 AM, John Franks jf27...@gmail.com wrote: I was thinking about your desire to have quasi-particles, which are low energy collective phenomena operating over several 10s of nm, somehow do the impossible and behave like a real particle with reduced charge etc. Personally, I think the quasi-particle lead is a red herring when it comes to explaining LENR. I understand that quasi-particles are only very weakly bound -- the binding energy being much less than an eV. I also am not impressed by coherent-motion theories. (As a physics dilettante, I have no basis for not being impressed. I'm just not.) I was looking at the wandering planets thread and probably the reason for the observed ejection is a phenomena called digital energy drift (wiki it). This sounds a little like a rogue wave phenomenon [1]; Jones mentioned something similar sometime back [2]. I'm personally guessing the planets in the simulation are being ejected because of a gradual floating point error (I think James Bowery alluded to this) or just insufficiently sophisticated handling of the startup of the system. Eric [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rogue_wave [2] http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg22649.html
Re: [Vo]:Etched glass could create table-top particle accelerators
Wakefield generator? Free electron laser? The money spent on PP is shocking and one could argue that there are more pressing problems and what was done previously, was a misallocation of resources. On Sun, Dec 22, 2013 at 2:55 AM, H Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote: Etched glass could create table-top particle accelerators Two independent teams of physicists have used small pieces of glass etched with tiny gratings to accelerate electrons through enormous electric-field gradients. One team boosted the kinetic energy of the electrons at about the same rate as a conventional particle accelerator, while the other achieved 10 times that rate. The technology could one day be used to build table-top accelerators that are much smaller than conventional devices, bringing the benefits of particle-beam therapy to a wider range of cancer patients... http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/2013/oct/03/etched-glass-could-create-table-top-particle-accelerators
[Vo]: Collective Phenomena
Vo, I was thinking about your desire to have quasi-particles, which are low energy collective phenomena operating over several 10s of nm, somehow do the impossible and behave like a real particle with reduced charge etc. It is understood that quasi particles are a approximation attempt to multi-body dynamics - the lattice (i.e. everything else) distorts around the particles of interest and we say they are paired etc. I was sceptical of low energy collective phenomena which apply to electrons (leptons) being applied to hadrons (the wavelength would be too short) but is there another way... I was looking at the wandering planets thread and probably the reason for the observed ejection is a phenomena called digital energy drift (wiki it). However it is known that collective systems of particles in orbit can chaotically throw out a member we high energy. Is there some basis in collections of atoms ejecting an atom at high energy so that it over comes the Coulomb barrier? You'd still need to explain lack of neutrons and gamma and how all that energy gets dissipated. Just a thought. JF.
Re: [Vo]: Collective Phenomena
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_drift On Sat, Dec 21, 2013 at 4:28 PM, Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.com wrote: Hi :) On Sat, Dec 21, 2013 at 8:05 AM, John Franks jf27...@gmail.com wrote: I was thinking about your desire to have quasi-particles, which are low energy collective phenomena operating over several 10s of nm, somehow do the impossible and behave like a real particle with reduced charge etc. Personally, I think the quasi-particle lead is a red herring when it comes to explaining LENR. I understand that quasi-particles are only very weakly bound -- the binding energy being much less than an eV. I also am not impressed by coherent-motion theories. (As a physics dilettante, I have no basis for not being impressed. I'm just not.) I was looking at the wandering planets thread and probably the reason for the observed ejection is a phenomena called digital energy drift (wiki it). This sounds a little like a rogue wave phenomenon [1]; Jones mentioned something similar sometime back [2]. I'm personally guessing the planets in the simulation are being ejected because of a gradual floating point error (I think James Bowery alluded to this) or just insufficiently sophisticated handling of the startup of the system. Eric [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rogue_wave [2] http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg22649.html
Re: [Vo]: Collective Phenomena
So if that little guy is a proton against the 10^8 -10^9 collective of other protons with thermal energy 25meV or so, that gets you in the ball park... What are the conditions to make this so - H2 loading, cracks, a lattice over say a liquid (no-one uses Hg). Any other pointers? Still having trouble with what happens after the reaction because of the femto level it is free space compared to the lattice on the 0.1nm level and the thermal wavelength of the heavy nuclei can't be making them overlap to behave collectively. On Sun, Dec 22, 2013 at 1:13 AM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: ... When one of the bodies is much smaller than the other two, the little guy can be sent packing in a hurry. Dave -Original Message- From: John Franks jf27...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Sat, Dec 21, 2013 11:43 am Subject: Re: [Vo]: Collective Phenomena http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_drift On Sat, Dec 21, 2013 at 4:28 PM, Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.comwrote: Hi :) On Sat, Dec 21, 2013 at 8:05 AM, John Franks jf27...@gmail.com wrote: I was thinking about your desire to have quasi-particles, which are low energy collective phenomena operating over several 10s of nm, somehow do the impossible and behave like a real particle with reduced charge etc. Personally, I think the quasi-particle lead is a red herring when it comes to explaining LENR. I understand that quasi-particles are only very weakly bound -- the binding energy being much less than an eV. I also am not impressed by coherent-motion theories. (As a physics dilettante, I have no basis for not being impressed. I'm just not.) I was looking at the wandering planets thread and probably the reason for the observed ejection is a phenomena called digital energy drift (wiki it). This sounds a little like a rogue wave phenomenon [1]; Jones mentioned something similar sometime back [2]. I'm personally guessing the planets in the simulation are being ejected because of a gradual floating point error (I think James Bowery alluded to this) or just insufficiently sophisticated handling of the startup of the system. Eric [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rogue_wave [2] http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg22649.html
[Vo]: White Dwarves
If CF is real, why doesn't it occur in white dwarves with their high temperature and pressure electron degenerate matter? After all, that is the belief system of CF in cramming these lattices with hydrogen. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_dwarf The material in a white dwarf no longer undergoes fusion reactions, so the star has no source of energy, nor is it supported by the heat generated by fusion against gravitational collapse. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electron-degenerate_matter#Degenerate_gases Under high densities the matter becomes a degenerate gas when the electrons are all stripped from their parent atoms. In the core of a star, once hydrogen burning in nuclear fusionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_fusion reactions stops, it becomes a collection of positively charged ionshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ion, largely helium and carbon nuclei, floating in a sea of electrons, which have been stripped from the nuclei. Degenerate gas is an almost perfect conductor of heat and does not obey the ordinary gas laws. White dwarfshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_dwarfs are luminous not because they are generating any energy but rather because they have trapped a large amount of heat.
Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves
Furthermore, The density of white dwarves is some 10^6g/cm^3 compared to water at 1g/cm^3. This would mean that the inter-nuclei spacing was 1/100 of water. Now Muon catalyzed fusion http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muon-catalyzed_fusion which we know works brings the nuclei 1/207 of the distance with electrons. It happens at an appreciable rate. since white dwarves are not more luminous than a black body radiating away with the Stefan Boltzmann law, we can conclude that there are no nuclear reactions AND that is the limit of what can be done with ordinary matter. In short, if you can't even get in the ball park of white dwarf matter in the lab, what chance in hell have you of even approaching muon catalysed reaction rates?
Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves
Further furthermore if 90% of main sequence stars end up as white dwarves when they have finished hot fusion, according to their limits, why don't they go on burning in a CF manner so that the sky is full of UV,Xray or even gamma ray dwarves? As the temperature built up again thermal runaway would occur as radiation would be limited by the small size and SB law so that hot fusion would occur again and a supernova would result. In that case all main sequence stars would end up as neutron stars or black holes and the sky would be littered with them. On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 10:03 AM, John Franks jf27...@gmail.com wrote: Furthermore, The density of white dwarves is some 10^6g/cm^3 compared to water at 1g/cm^3. This would mean that the inter-nuclei spacing was 1/100 of water. Now Muon catalyzed fusion http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muon-catalyzed_fusion which we know works brings the nuclei 1/207 of the distance with electrons. It happens at an appreciable rate. since white dwarves are not more luminous than a black body radiating away with the Stefan Boltzmann law, we can conclude that there are no nuclear reactions AND that is the limit of what can be done with ordinary matter. In short, if you can't even get in the ball park of white dwarf matter in the lab, what chance in hell have you of even approaching muon catalysed reaction rates? If CF is real, why doesn't it occur in white dwarves with their high temperature and pressure electron degenerate matter? After all, that is the belief system of CF in cramming these lattices with hydrogen. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_dwarf The material in a white dwarf no longer undergoes fusion reactions, so the star has no source of energy, nor is it supported by the heat generated by fusion against gravitational collapse. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electron-degenerate_matter#Degenerate_gases Under high densities the matter becomes a degenerate gas when the electrons are all stripped from their parent atoms. In the core of a star, once hydrogen burning in nuclear fusionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_fusion reactions stops, it becomes a collection of positively charged ionshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ion, largely helium and carbon nuclei, floating in a sea of electrons, which have been stripped from the nuclei. Degenerate gas is an almost perfect conductor of heat and does not obey the ordinary gas laws. White dwarfshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_dwarfs are luminous not because they are generating any energy but rather because they have trapped a large amount of heat.
Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves
With respect, who the f... are you? Are you a faculty member of any half decent university? Will I find you in Nature, Science or Phys. Rev? On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 2:05 PM, fznidar...@aol.com wrote: In short, if you can't even get in the ball park of white dwarf matter in the lab, what chance in hell have you of even approaching muon catalysed reaction rates? snip Yes, No chance at all for any kind of fusion, especially with heavy metals. Forget about shrunken atoms, the heavy neutrons of the Larson Widom theory, and the like. They are all working with the strong force. It need high temps to work. In order to reactions working at low temperature you have to invoke another force the nuclear spin orbit force. It's the magnetic component of the strong nuclear force. Its called the spin orbit force and its not conserved. Its a long story that takes a book to describe. That's why I wrote one. http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-textfield-keywords=%22znidarsic+science+books%22rh=n%3A133140011%2Ck%3A%22znidarsic+science+books%22 Frank Z
Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves
The only thing a metal lattice has is periodicity, it certainly wouldn't have the density of a white dwarf. So, this leads to the question, what has periodicity got to do with cold fusion? On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 2:04 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: John Franks jf27...@gmail.com wrote: If CF is real, why doesn't it occur in white dwarves with their high temperature and pressure electron degenerate matter? This reminds me of the question posed by Morrison: Why doesn't cold fusion occur in heavy water ice? To address your question, let me quote Schwinger, The defense is simply stated: The circumstances of cold fusion are not those of hot fusion. A metal lattice does not resemble the inside of the sun. They are about as different as any two configurations of matter could be. - Jed
Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves
Why should I buy his book? Why can't he give a brief overview? Why can't he just write a Hamiltonian so we can see what he's on about? If it's some exchange type interaction, wouldn't the wavefunctions have to overlap or there would be some mediating particle with spin, even then all it would do is align the spins. If he is saying that electromagnetism is mediating fusion, why does it do such a good job preventing it? On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 2:26 PM, Foks0904 . foks0...@gmail.com wrote: Mr. Franks why are you still on this list? We thought you got on your coat, *twice* in one day, and found a hole to crawl into. Why are you still wasting everyone's time with your antagonism? Are you mentally dependent on catharsis and trolling? On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 9:24 AM, John Franks jf27...@gmail.com wrote: With respect, who the f... are you? Are you a faculty member of any half decent university? Will I find you in Nature, Science or Phys. Rev? On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 2:05 PM, fznidar...@aol.com wrote: ... Its a long story that takes a book to describe. That's why I wrote one. Frank Z
Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves
You wot? On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 2:35 PM, fznidar...@aol.com wrote: What do you need to make a strong electromagnet? Just line up the electron spins. The electrons are already moving. What do you need to make a strong long range spin orbit force magnet. Line a the nuclear spins and get them moving. This is best done is a proton conductor. How fast to they have to go you say, 1.094,000 meters per second. Frank Z
Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves
You're just like the Bessler's Wheel crowd. You're convinced that some new arrangement of the weights and arm length will make the wheel turn around in perpetuity. Everyone will tell you, until you sort out the mechanism (not nuts and bolts) but how this would be possible in a conservative field, there is little point in experimenting. Another way... it's like this, we know wheels are round, so there is little point in experimenting in the shape of wheels (on a flat surface that is) convincing yourself that some magical arrangement is going to be more efficient than a flat wheel. If you are going to do research, you have to say your logical point of departure. It is not enough to have hope or belief, you have to say where in the theory base everyone is getting it wrong. Theory is a summary of experiments, all the billions of person hours that have been put in. Like Bessler's Wheel, CF is trying to do the impossible because it cannot say how it could possibly work in the first instance. Coupled with observational data (how white dwarves are cooling, not heating), just what do you have as a starting point? On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 2:46 PM, James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote: As Norman Ramsey https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman_Foster_Ramsey,_Jr.pointed out in his preamble to the DoE's original review of cold fusion: However, even a *single* short but valid cold fusion period would be revolutionary. Dr. Franks will be gratified to learn that this kook died recently -- still believing that scientific funding priorities could be altered by a single experimental outcome. A single experimental outcome is not reliable replication comprising the extraordinary proof required of extraordinary claims and surely a revolutionary claim qualifies as extraordinary. Now, for the rest of us to die off so the pious can get back to placing argumentation over experimentation the way it was before that pesky thing called the Enlightenment came along and caused such a ruckus -- and the way Dr. Franks is here.
Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves
I have a new fancy name for Bessler's Wheel / RAR Low Energy Nutation Research (LENR) or Lossless Anomalous Nutation Rectification (LANR). CF/LENR/LANR whatever fancy dancy name you're calling it these days is another STEORN. What is your C.O.P? 100 Watts (in the 1990s) tending to zero Watts today. Pathological Science. On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 2:53 PM, John Franks jf27...@gmail.com wrote: You're just like the Bessler's Wheel crowd. You're convinced that some new arrangement of the weights and arm length will make the wheel turn around in perpetuity. Everyone will tell you, until you sort out the mechanism (not nuts and bolts) but how this would be possible in a conservative field, there is little point in experimenting. Another way... it's like this, we know wheels are round, so there is little point in experimenting in the shape of wheels (on a flat surface that is) convincing yourself that some magical arrangement is going to be more efficient than a flat wheel. If you are going to do research, you have to say your logical point of departure. It is not enough to have hope or belief, you have to say where in the theory base everyone is getting it wrong. Theory is a summary of experiments, all the billions of person hours that have been put in. Like Bessler's Wheel, CF is trying to do the impossible because it cannot say how it could possibly work in the first instance. Coupled with observational data (how white dwarves are cooling, not heating), just what do you have as a starting point? On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 2:46 PM, James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote: As Norman Ramseyhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman_Foster_Ramsey,_Jr.pointed out in his preamble to the DoE's original review of cold fusion: However, even a *single* short but valid cold fusion period would be revolutionary. Dr. Franks will be gratified to learn that this kook died recently -- still believing that scientific funding priorities could be altered by a single experimental outcome. A single experimental outcome is not reliable replication comprising the extraordinary proof required of extraordinary claims and surely a revolutionary claim qualifies as extraordinary. Now, for the rest of us to die off so the pious can get back to placing argumentation over experimentation the way it was before that pesky thing called the Enlightenment came along and caused such a ruckus -- and the way Dr. Franks is here.
Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves
What's the COP? Why don't they just commercialise it? On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 3:04 PM, James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote: Yes R. A. ORIANI, JOHN C. NELSON, SUNG-KYU LEE, and J. H. BROADHURST University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota are just like Bessler's Wheel crowd: Conducting a replication of a device's extraordinary effect which they attempted (unlike Nathan Lewis et al) AFTER the publication of the full paper describing the experimental protocol to be replicated, and then submitting a paper on that replication to Nature for peer review. The peer reviewers had comments on needed corrections. That right there proves Oriani et al are kooks to anyone in their right mind. No reputable scientist has any second drafts submitted to a journal as prestigious as Nature in response to peer review and expects that revised draft to be published. Oh, but Oriani et al were clearly not reputable because they went ahead and provided the corrections, submitted to Nature the draft for peer review and the peer reviewers, not realizing they were being had by obviously invalid publishing protocol, reviewed the revised draft!! Outrageous. What's even more outrageous is that they not only reviewed it -- they passed it on to the editors of Nature to publish! We can all be grateful to the editors of Nature for telling it like it is in their rejection letter to Oriani -- that this experimental outcome doesn't fit with theory so -- circular file time. If only we could inculcate more would-be scientists with this kind of ruthless rigor!
Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves
You shining light. That's just how the Bessler's wheel crowd think. It's just needs someone to come out with modified Newtonian gravity and of course, teflon wheel bearings. On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 3:08 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: John Franks jf27...@gmail.com wrote: Everyone will tell you, until you sort out the mechanism (not nuts and bolts) but how this would be possible in a conservative field, there is little point in experimenting. You have that backward. Cold fusion was discovered by experiment. We know it is real because it has been widely replicated, often at high signal to noise ratios. There is no theory to explain it. You seem to believe that science must begin with theory and then proceed to experiment. That does happen from time to time, but more often it begins with a discovery which only later is explained by theory.
Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves
What rot you speak. Tell me Energy Out / Energy In. Ecat got your tongue? On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 3:09 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: John Franks jf27...@gmail.com wrote: What is your C.O.P? 100 Watts (in the 1990s) tending to zero Watts today. A COP is a ratio, not a power level. The COP for many cold fusion reactions is infinity. - Jed
Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves
Oh boo hoo. On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 3:12 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: If you keep posting these rude, ignorant comments, I and many others will add your name to our kill file, and no one will see your comments or pay any attention to you. - Jed
Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves
How so? So you think there wouldn't be thermal runaway in a white dwarf if CF was occurring, how so? On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 3:14 PM, Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.com wrote: On Dec 19, 2013, at 1:45, John Franks jf27...@gmail.com wrote: If CF is real, why doesn't it occur in white dwarves with their high temperature and pressure electron degenerate matter? This is an interesting thought experiment. But it begs three questions: ... * Is cold fusion *not* occurring on white dwarves? You made an initial pass at a prima facie case that it is not, but the arguments for and against are quite speculative at this point (e.g., re blackbody radiation). Eric
Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves
You're mistaking not believing in MAGICAL THINKING to being a pathological skeptic. On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 3:24 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: Pathological skeptics often fail to realize that. They confuse their own opinion with reality. - Jed
[Vo]: Real Cold Fusion
http://nectar.nd.rl.ac.uk/en/research/port1.html Muon catalysed d-t fusion is a genuine cold-fusion process. One negative muon produces 120 d-t fusions during its lifetime. The present rate is 1 million d-t fusions per second (equivalent to 3μW of energy production), and corresponding to 40% of 'scientific breakeven'. So not much hope for CF even at White Dwarf pressures and temperatures...
Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves
Too vague. Ask why this should be so. What COP (Energy Output / Energy Input) do you claim? On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 5:07 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: Cold fusion occurs in a unique mixture of matter and gas in a particular topology and within a tight temperature range. Meeting these tight parameters is not found often in nature, but it can happen. It is amazing that a very few and inspired experimenters have meet these parameters, optimized them, and got this wonderful process to bend to their will.
Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves
But what have chemical processes in the range of a few eV got to do with nuclear processes in the range of MeV and cold fusion? On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 5:14 PM, torulf.gr...@bredband.net wrote: The hydrogen in metal hydrides is *atomic hydrogen* (nascent hydrogen). In electron degenerate mater there are free protons. Your critique maybe constructive because it sorts outs some theories but not all theories about cold fusion. On Thu, 19 Dec 2013 10:29:01 +, John Franks jf27...@gmail.com wrote: Further furthermore if 90% of main sequence stars end up as white dwarves when they have fini https://www.bredbandsbolaget.se/webmail/?_task=mail_action=listshed hot fusion, according to their limits, why don't they go on burning in a CF manner so that the sky is full of UV,Xray or even gamma ray dwarves? As the temperature built up again thermal runaway would occur as radiation would be limited by the small size and SB law so that hot fusion would occur again and a supernova would result. In that case all main sequence stars would end up as neutron stars or black holes and the sky would be littered with them. On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 10:03 AM, John Franks jf27...@gmail.com wrote: Furthermore, The density of white dwarves is some 10^6g/cm^3 compared to water at 1g/cm^3. This would mean that the inter-nuclei spacing was 1/100 of water. Now Muon catalyzed fusion http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muon-catalyzed_fusion which we know works brings the nuclei 1/207 of the distance with electrons. It happens at an appreciable rate. since white dwarves are not more luminous than a black body radiating away with the Stefan Boltzmann law, we can conclude that there are no nuclear reactions AND that is the limit of what can be done with ordinary matter. In short, if you can't even get in the ball park of white dwarf matter in the lab, what chance in hell have you of even approaching muon catalysed reaction rates? If CF is real, why doesn't it occur in white dwarves with their high temperature and pressure electron degenerate matter? After all, that is the belief system of CF in cramming these lattices with hydrogen. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_dwarf The material in a white dwarf no longer undergoes fusion reactions, so the star has no source of energy, nor is it supported by the heat generated by fusion against gravitational collapse. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electron-degenerate_matter#Degenerate_gases Under high densities the matter becomes a degenerate gas when the electrons are all stripped from their parent atoms. In the core of a star, once hydrogen burning in nuclear fusionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_fusion reactions stops, it becomes a collection of positively charged ionshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ion, largely helium and carbon nuclei, floating in a sea of electrons, which have been stripped from the nuclei. Degenerate gas is an almost perfect conductor of heat and does not obey the ordinary gas laws. White dwarfshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_dwarfs are luminous not because they are generating any energy but rather because they have trapped a large amount of heat.
Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves
So do you encourage people working on Bessler's Wheel, Steorn, SMOT devices when they keep banging up against known theory (and hence experimental observations) that in a conservative field, what you gain going down, you give going up? WHAT IS THE NEW ANGLE THAR EVERYONE IS MISSING? So the belief is that it has nothing to do with temperature, pressure, proximity but something to do with the lattice. Please expand on this. If you are suggesting BEC, well electrons are leptons and light, how can you get heavy hadrons into one coherent state at room temperature? If this is the case, has CF been observed to occur spontaneously in liquid H2? On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 5:30 PM, Alain Sepeda alain.sep...@gmail.comwrote: Jed, you hit the hard point that I found in an article (a recent message). Your position is evident for someone with good scientific culture and good practical sense, but not brainwashed by academic training of Popper science philosophy . 2013/12/19 Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com John Franks jf27...@gmail.com wrote: Everyone will tell you, until you sort out the mechanism (not nuts and bolts) but how this would be possible in a conservative field, there is little point in experimenting. You have that backward. Cold fusion was discovered by experiment. We know it is real because it has been widely replicated, often at high signal to noise ratios. There is no theory to explain it. You seem to believe that science must begin with theory and then proceed to experiment. That does happen from time to time, but more often it begins with a discovery which only later is explained by theory.
Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves
The magnetic field in white dwarves is very high. It will have similar angular momentum to the parent star yet it has been compressed down to an earth-sized radius. Concomitantly the magnetic field will be massive. On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 5:37 PM, Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com wrote: There is no chemical process involved in CF. White dwarves are compressed by degenerate matter by gravity, and not strong magnetic fields. If they were, they would do cold fusion. -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com
Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves
And how is this relevant to CF when the best super-conducting electromagnets are about 100T http://www.lanl.gov/science-innovation/science-features/world-record-set-magnetic-field.php What current or spin currents would need to flow in a real material given that iron has a maximum moment of about 2T and all our permanent magnetic materials are based around this figure? On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 5:47 PM, Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com wrote: But not high enough. Not in the Teratesla range. 2013/12/19 John Franks jf27...@gmail.com The magnetic field in white dwarves is very high. It will have similar angular momentum to the parent star yet it has been compressed down to an earth-sized radius. Concomitantly the magnetic field will be massive. On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 5:37 PM, Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.comwrote: There is no chemical process involved in CF. White dwarves are compressed by degenerate matter by gravity, and not strong magnetic fields. If they were, they would do cold fusion. -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com
Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves
Oh please: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_dwarf#Magnetic_field On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 5:50 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: Have you seen data that supports you belief that the magnetic field is intense? I would assume that the radiation from the star would demonstrate this effect. Unless this has been proven, your assumption may not be accurate. The extreme conductivity of the material would tend to lock magnetic fields into place if I recall. Dave -Original Message- From: John Franks jf27...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thu, Dec 19, 2013 12:46 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves The magnetic field in white dwarves is very high. It will have similar angular momentum to the parent star yet it has been compressed down to an earth-sized radius. Concomitantly the magnetic field will be massive. On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 5:37 PM, Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.comwrote: There is no chemical process involved in CF. White dwarves are compressed by degenerate matter by gravity, and not strong magnetic fields. If they were, they would do cold fusion. -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com
Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves
Is like or maybe is How so? Once again, QHE or FQHE is to do with cooperative properties of light leptons. So how does this carry over to heavy hadrons and what does that have to do with CF? On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 5:53 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: Cold fusion is like(or maybe is) the Factional Quantum Hall Effect(FQHE). Science did not believe that something like the FQHE was possible until it was shown experimentally. Cold fusion is the FQHE moved over to the fermions of the fermions of the atomic nucleus. If you are suggesting BEC, well electrons are leptons and light, how can you get heavy hadrons into one coherent state at room temperature? If this is the case, has CF been observed to occur spontaneously in liquid H2?
Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves
Holy holy holy, Lord LENR Almighty More holes than a colander. Maybe the Holy Spirit or just liquor can explain that special bit in CF theories. Did anyone answer the COP question? On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 6:00 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: So? You pointed out a good link as requested. Why the sarcasm? Do you believe that everyone is supposed to answer your questions without expecting equal treatment? Please continue to supply pertinent data to the group instead of being so negative. Who knows, you might become convinced that LENR is real provided you take the time to read the experimental reports. It is not easy to start at ground zero as in your case as well as everyone else's. It takes work to get there. Dave -Original Message- From: John Franks jf27...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thu, Dec 19, 2013 12:54 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves Oh please: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_dwarf#Magnetic_field On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 5:50 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.comwrote: Have you seen data that supports you belief that the magnetic field is intense? I would assume that the radiation from the star would demonstrate this effect. Unless this has been proven, your assumption may not be accurate. The extreme conductivity of the material would tend to lock magnetic fields into place if I recall. Dave -Original Message- From: John Franks jf27...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thu, Dec 19, 2013 12:46 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves The magnetic field in white dwarves is very high. It will have similar angular momentum to the parent star yet it has been compressed down to an earth-sized radius. Concomitantly the magnetic field will be massive. On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 5:37 PM, Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.comwrote: There is no chemical process involved in CF. White dwarves are compressed by degenerate matter by gravity, and not strong magnetic fields. If they were, they would do cold fusion. -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com
Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves
What's the magnitutde magnetic field and how do heavy hadrons display these collective properties like light leptons? On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 6:05 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: FQHE reduces the inherent charge of fermions as a function of increasing magnetic field. The nucleus is a fermion, the protons and neutrons are fermions and so are quarks. Why should a magnetic field make a distinction in the way it reduces charge is the various types of fermions? I won't. On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 12:59 PM, John Franks jf27...@gmail.com wrote: Is like or maybe is How so? Once again, QHE or FQHE is to do with cooperative properties of light leptons. So how does this carry over to heavy hadrons and what does that have to do with CF? On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 5:53 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: Cold fusion is like(or maybe is) the Factional Quantum Hall Effect(FQHE). Science did not believe that something like the FQHE was possible until it was shown experimentally. Cold fusion is the FQHE moved over to the fermions of the fermions of the atomic nucleus. If you are suggesting BEC, well electrons are leptons and light, how can you get heavy hadrons into one coherent state at room temperature? If this is the case, has CF been observed to occur spontaneously in liquid H2?
Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves
You wot? You have a CF cell or whatever, you set it up and measure how much energy was required to get it going. Now, how much energy was produced over what you put in? On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 6:08 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: COP is an engineering question, not a science question. Control of the LENR reaction requires a limitation on COP. An infinite COP means that the reactor melts down. On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 1:05 PM, John Franks jf27...@gmail.com wrote: Holy holy holy, Lord LENR Almighty More holes than a colander. Maybe the Holy Spirit or just liquor can explain that special bit in CF theories. Did anyone answer the COP question?
Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves
How? No data, no COP and reliable experiments. No rationale. On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 6:03 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: Axil is a fairly knowledgeable guy, but he can not single handedly develop all the important laws of physics concerning LENR. Perhaps you might wish to contribute? Dave
Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves
Is this laying on of hands stuff ever going to get you in Nature? What the hell is a femto-atto pinch? A Vimto-apple punch could be quite a nice concoction, mmmh, must try it. On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 6:09 PM, Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com wrote: The current does not need to flow in a mateial and it does not. It is a femto-atto pinch. I cannot say more. -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com
Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves
Is this your great contribution to science? On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 6:15 PM, Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com wrote: None of your business. 2013/12/19 John Franks jf27...@gmail.com You wot? You have a CF cell or whatever, you set it up and measure how much energy was required to get it going. Now, how much energy was produced over what you put in? On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 6:08 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: COP is an engineering question, not a science question. Control of the LENR reaction requires a limitation on COP. An infinite COP means that the reactor melts down. On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 1:05 PM, John Franks jf27...@gmail.com wrote: Holy holy holy, Lord LENR Almighty More holes than a colander. Maybe the Holy Spirit or just liquor can explain that special bit in CF theories. Did anyone answer the COP question? -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com
Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves
You need a different kind of help... On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 6:21 PM, Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com wrote: See, why you don't deserve. You are a pseudo skeptical. You won't help in the research I am involved. 2013/12/19 John Franks jf27...@gmail.com Is this laying on of hands stuff ever going to get you in Nature? What the hell is a femto-atto pinch? A Vimto-apple punch could be quite a nice concoction, mmmh, must try it. On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 6:09 PM, Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.comwrote: The current does not need to flow in a mateial and it does not. It is a femto-atto pinch. I cannot say more. -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com
Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves
Does 'g' mean anything to you? What is the magnetic moment of an electron? On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 6:15 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: The magnetic field is atomic level. The next step in the research that the Ni/H reactor developers need to do is measure the magnetic fields that they are developing in their reactions. This can be done using sub-micron hall effect probes. On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 1:10 PM, John Franks jf27...@gmail.com wrote: What's the magnitutde magnetic field and how do heavy hadrons display these collective properties like light leptons? On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 6:05 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: FQHE reduces the inherent charge of fermions as a function of increasing magnetic field. The nucleus is a fermion, the protons and neutrons are fermions and so are quarks. Why should a magnetic field make a distinction in the way it reduces charge is the various types of fermions? I won't. On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 12:59 PM, John Franks jf27...@gmail.com wrote: Is like or maybe is How so? Once again, QHE or FQHE is to do with cooperative properties of light leptons. So how does this carry over to heavy hadrons and what does that have to do with CF? On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 5:53 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: Cold fusion is like(or maybe is) the Factional Quantum Hall Effect(FQHE). Science did not believe that something like the FQHE was possible until it was shown experimentally. Cold fusion is the FQHE moved over to the fermions of the fermions of the atomic nucleus. If you are suggesting BEC, well electrons are leptons and light, how can you get heavy hadrons into one coherent state at room temperature? If this is the case, has CF been observed to occur spontaneously in liquid H2?
Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves
The magnitude of it... I'm going as the level of debate is very very amateur here. On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 6:29 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: What is your point? Spin of a fermion is quantized. On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 1:26 PM, John Franks jf27...@gmail.com wrote: Does 'g' mean anything to you? What is the magnetic moment of an electron? On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 6:15 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: The magnetic field is atomic level. The next step in the research that the Ni/H reactor developers need to do is measure the magnetic fields that they are developing in their reactions. This can be done using sub-micron hall effect probes. On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 1:10 PM, John Franks jf27...@gmail.com wrote: What's the magnitutde magnetic field and how do heavy hadrons display these collective properties like light leptons? On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 6:05 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: FQHE reduces the inherent charge of fermions as a function of increasing magnetic field. The nucleus is a fermion, the protons and neutrons are fermions and so are quarks. Why should a magnetic field make a distinction in the way it reduces charge is the various types of fermions? I won't. On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 12:59 PM, John Franks jf27...@gmail.comwrote: Is like or maybe is How so? Once again, QHE or FQHE is to do with cooperative properties of light leptons. So how does this carry over to heavy hadrons and what does that have to do with CF? On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 5:53 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.comwrote: Cold fusion is like(or maybe is) the Factional Quantum Hall Effect(FQHE). Science did not believe that something like the FQHE was possible until it was shown experimentally. Cold fusion is the FQHE moved over to the fermions of the fermions of the atomic nucleus. If you are suggesting BEC, well electrons are leptons and light, how can you get heavy hadrons into one coherent state at room temperature? If this is the case, has CF been observed to occur spontaneously in liquid H2?
Re: [Vo]:Official policy of Nature/Science/SciAm on cold fusion publishing
It's because cold fusion is rubbish.There's no data, no mechanism, it's inhabited by cranks with a bunker mentality. You talk lies about 100% repeatability and offer youtube videos as evidence, instead of proper conferences, attended by professionals (for and against) with questions from the floor to the presenters. You're just playing at science, like a children's tea party.
Re: [Vo]:Blue moon
Hmm... evidence of cold fusion on Europa ? Now you're getting desperate. What is it..? lanthanide contraction, plasma cavities inside metals, aneutronic fusion with some weird multibody effect to explain lake of gamma rays and neutrons, waxing lyrical about QCD, ad-hoc this ad-hoc that. Really desperate.
Re: [Vo]:Official policy of Nature/Science/SciAm on cold fusion publishing
... like applying two-body free space assumption inside a solid In a lattice, scale order of 0.1nm, nuclear processes at the sub pm even fm level are effectively free space. There is no overlap of wavefunctions or fields to make all the nuclei behave in some collective manner such that neutrons and gamma rays aren't produced (even then, what would be the branching ratios - you mean absolutely no neutrons or gamma!?!!). Any form of mass coherence would be disrupted by thermal energy. No lanthanide or relativistic effects will make electrons shells appreciably shrink below the about 0.1nm radius of the ground state to be getting into the territory of the known muon catalysed CF. No fancy cavities or electrical fields will produce bare nuclei in the lattice, the work function of the material would be exceeded and you'd never get bare nuclei. For these reasons, scholarly journals like Nature won't publish CF because it clearly shows lack of knowledge of the literature base (and I don't mean bogus literature like CF/LENR/LANR). Lack of knowledge of what came before shows you are incapable of making a contribution to knowledge and precious journal space should not be wasted ahead of the efforts of serious science. You do not own Nature and have no right to inflict yourselves on them. I take a network of experimental scientific paper by many (thousands) scientists included reputed professional (dozens) from varied and mostly reputed organization (dozens), showing various connected phenomenons, and some correlations of phenomenons, as evidences. Mass hysteria, mass incompetence, corrupt practices, delusions. To be getting the results they claim must mean they've made an error and are deluding themselves much as those bessler's wheel italians. *You have no rationale* so it must be wrong. Don't give me that blind empiricism carp, how can you be so naive?
Re: [Vo]:Official policy of Nature/Science/SciAm on cold fusion publishing
Axil Axil: IBM has just demonstrated Bose-Einstein condensation at room temperature. So what has that got to do with cold fusion? http://www-03.ibm.com/press/us/en/pressrelease/42710.wss Foks0904http://www.mail-archive.com/search?l=vortex-l@eskimo.comq=from:%22Foks0904+.%22 : Personally I don't mind Mr. Franks making a fool of himself RAR! RAR! RAR! Or maybe Mahnah mahnah? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8N_tupPBtWQnoredirect=1 It's not easy being green :-) On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 2:57 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: *In a lattice, scale order of 0.1nm, nuclear processes at the sub pm even fm level are effectively free space. There is no overlap of wavefunctions or fields to make all the nuclei behave in some collective manner such that neutrons and gamma rays aren't produced (even then, what would be the branching ratios - you mean absolutely no neutrons or gamma!?!!). Any form of mass coherence would be disrupted by thermal energy. * IBM has just demonstrated Bose-Einstein condensation at room temperature. Franks, look up the associated vortex post dated a few days ago. This is polariton condensation. Polaritons, something else the Franks must learn to moderate his technical ignorance. On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 7:32 AM, John Franks jf27...@gmail.com wrote: ... like applying two-body free space assumption inside a solid In a lattice, scale order of 0.1nm, nuclear processes at the sub pm even fm level are effectively free space. There is no overlap of wavefunctions or fields to make all the nuclei behave in some collective manner such that neutrons and gamma rays aren't produced (even then, what would be the branching ratios - you mean absolutely no neutrons or gamma!?!!). Any form of mass coherence would be disrupted by thermal energy. No lanthanide or relativistic effects will make electrons shells appreciably shrink below the about 0.1nm radius of the ground state to be getting into the territory of the known muon catalysed CF. No fancy cavities or electrical fields will produce bare nuclei in the lattice, the work function of the material would be exceeded and you'd never get bare nuclei. For these reasons, scholarly journals like Nature won't publish CF because it clearly shows lack of knowledge of the literature base (and I don't mean bogus literature like CF/LENR/LANR). Lack of knowledge of what came before shows you are incapable of making a contribution to knowledge and precious journal space should not be wasted ahead of the efforts of serious science. You do not own Nature and have no right to inflict yourselves on them. I take a network of experimental scientific paper by many (thousands) scientists included reputed professional (dozens) from varied and mostly reputed organization (dozens), showing various connected phenomenons, and some correlations of phenomenons, as evidences. Mass hysteria, mass incompetence, corrupt practices, delusions. To be getting the results they claim must mean they've made an error and are deluding themselves much as those bessler's wheel italians. *You have no rationale* so it must be wrong. Don't give me that blind empiricism carp, how can you be so naive?
Re: [Vo]: RAR energia update
Foks0904 : Obviously I hope it performs as advertised. What has hope got to do with science? Do you believe in mind matter effects and magical thinking? Nature (excuse the pun) just does what it bloody well wants to. CF *is* like RAR where grown ups keep telling them to read the proper literature (or get an education) and some things just **are impossible**. On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 2:11 PM, Foks0904 . foks0...@gmail.com wrote: Obviously I hope it performs as advertised. So I do care in that respect. My point is it is novel and inspired enough to be interesting and worth paying attention to no matter what. On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 7:57 AM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 10:05 PM, Foks0904 . foks0...@gmail.com wrote: Truly bizarre, and I could care less as to its usefulness. . . . could *not* care less . . .
Re: [Vo]: RAR energia update
What has hope got to do with science? Your assertion below is incorrect. We know that physical diseases have a biochemical basis, so we are correct to apply the scientific method and *suspect* that greater knowledge and/or a cure will result. This is why people fund the science of cancer research. It is based on the good reputation, good education, legacy of discoveries in the subject. In the case of CF, there is none of this. It doesn't get past first base as there is no data and when there is claims of data, that data is flawed. There is no theory base too to make the real scientific community *suspect* that anything will come out of it. You're on the same level as the RAR people, though with a little more knowledge of science but it's all ad-hoc and you attempt to blind people with science on things like BECs, lanthanide contractions, relativistic effects on f-shells, plasmids because it sounds flash and like I said, you are playing at science, it's Cargo Cult Science. If the RAR/Besslers wheel people started talking all kinds of fancy Quantum Gravity, wormhole through space into extra dimensions, you'd suspect immediately that they had been watching too much Stargate and that a little bit of knowledge can fool all the people all the time. It's all Rodney Mackay bar the Canadian accent and comedy acting. This is how people who know about nuclear physics feel about the CF crowd - wannabes, amateurs, people mixing science fiction with science fact. On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 3:30 PM, Nigel Dyer l...@thedyers.org.uk wrote: It was, and is the hope that we will find cures for cancer that provides the funds for many people such as myself to do the research that I am doing. In a number of cases there was no scientific basis for the hope when the research was started, but it funded the scientific research, and science produced results. In other cases the hope has (to date) proved to be unfounded. Nigel
Re: [Vo]:Official policy of Nature/Science/SciAm on cold fusion publishing
Deliberately misquoting or passing off material as what someone said has got to be against forum rules. I ask again, what does the IBM BEC work regarding low dimensional structures, leptons and low energy have to do with CF and hadrons? Can anybody answer these questions, like my others (What is Faraday Efficiency?) without leaping in and insulting me or blinding me with science and bogus references? You people have got to be kidding me if you think that this is how real science is conducted. On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 4:04 PM, James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote: Axil, Dr. Franks is merely pointing out the obvious: IBM has succumbed to Mass hysteria, mass incompetence, corrupt practices, delusions. Always your fellow true believer, -- Jim
Re: [Vo]:Official policy of Nature/Science/SciAm on cold fusion publishing
Oh yeah? Peer reviewed? Cited by whom? And, no you didn't. On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 4:27 PM, Foks0904 . foks0...@gmail.com wrote: Mr. Franks, BEC has to do with Yeong Kim and Akito Takahashi's theoretical claims for condensate clusters in hydride lattices. I answered your question on Faraday efficiency. You don't read carefully. Regards.
Re: [Vo]: RAR energia update
What is wrong with the data Mr. Franks? Specifically the Excess Heat data. What artifacts are present in the calorimetry? Point out to me the peer reviewed critiques of researchers' calorimetry that have stood the test of time. Wow! Was it you claiming one group had 100% repeatability or another 70-80%. If that is the case, why are you arguing with me? Don't bring nonsense complaints that no theory can account for the effect. Who demanded a theory right away for superconductivity? How about excess heat coming off radium in early 20th century? Show me how the heat measurements are wrong. Silly rabbit. They had something working. (see my first response above). I asked you this in the your orphaned thread on recombination, which you quickly abandoned. I pointed out to you that the Big 3 objections (recombination, stirring, cigarette lighter effect) had all been accounted for and answered between 1989 and 1994. If you are quoting stuff from that long ago, where is the monograph. Where are the graduate level courses at top institutions teaching this as you seem to regard it as common knowledge. You people are not scientists, or even engineers. You are journalists, activists, the awkward squad who mistake shouting, posturing, getting liked on facebook or youtube as the process of doing science. All I have to report, as ever, is that Cold Fusion is a dead subject full of wannabes, the mentally ill and geriatrics, since no self-respecting young person would waste time learning useless knowledge in this subject.
[Vo]:unsubscribe
[Vo]:[Vo] That BEC paper
That great paper where the mechanism is revealed to the world and CF is all done and settled (barred getting anything that works), take a look where it was published and the readership. Hardly a critical audience, it's all BIOLOGY!!! Volume 96, Issue 7, July 2009 ISSN: 0028-1042 (Print) 1432-1904 (Online) In this issue (16 articles) Review A review on molecular topology: applying graph theory to drug discovery and design José María Amigó, Jorge Gálvez, Vincent M. Villar Pages 749-761 Download PDF (289KB) View Article Original Paper Testosterone: from initiating change to modulating social organisation in domestic fowl (Gallus gallus domesticus) John P. Kent, Kenneth J. Murphy, Finian J. Bannon, Niamh M. Hynes… Pages 763-770 Download PDF (195KB) View Article Original Paper No evidence for sperm priming responses under varying sperm competition risk or intensity in guppies Jonathan P. Evans Pages 771-779 Download PDF (192KB) View Article Original Paper Waterproof and translucent wings at the same time: problems and solutions in butterflies Pablo Perez Goodwyn, Yasunori Maezono, Naoe Hosoda, Kenji Fujisaki Pages 781-787 Download PDF (780KB) View Article Original Paper The armoured dissorophid Cacops from the Early Permian of Oklahoma and the exploitation of the terrestrial realm by amphibians Robert R. Reisz, Rainer R. Schoch, Jason S. Anderson Pages 789-796 Download PDF (410KB) View Article Original Paper The liver but not the skin is the site for conversion of a red carotenoid in a passerine bird Esther del Val, Juan Carlos Senar, Juan Garrido-Fernández… Pages 797-801 Download PDF (132KB) View Article ORIGINAL PAPER Theory of Bose–Einstein condensation mechanism for deuteron-induced nuclear reactions in micro/nano-scale metal grains and particles Yeong E. Kim Pages 803-811 Download PDF (216KB) View Article Original Paper Soil resource supply influences faunal size–specific distributions in natural food webs Christian Mulder, Henri A. Den Hollander, J. Arie Vonk… Pages 813-826 Download PDF (1607KB) View Article ORIGINAL PAPER Cold winter temperatures condition the egg-hatching dynamics of a grape disease vector Julien Chuche, Denis Thiéry Pages 827-834 Download PDF (264KB) View Article ORIGINAL PAPER When signal meets noise: immunity of the frog ear to interference Mario Penna, Juan Pablo Gormaz, Peter M. Narins Pages 835-843 Download PDF (262KB) View Article Short Communication Polymorphic ROS scavenging revealed by CCCP in a lizard Mats Olsson, Mark Wilson, Caroline Isaksson, Tobias Uller Pages 845-849 Download PDF (113KB) View Article Short Communication Olfactory learning and memory in the bumblebee Bombus occidentalis Andre J. Riveros, Wulfila Gronenberg Pages 851-856 Download PDF (193KB) View Article Short Communication Decision rules for egg recognition are related to functional roles and chemical cues in the queenless ant Dinoponera quadriceps Ivelize C. Tannure-Nascimento, Fabio S. Nascimento, José O. Dantas… Pages 857-861 Download PDF (203KB) View Article SHORT COMMUNICATION Impact of biocide treatments on the bacterial communities of the Lascaux Cave Fabiola Bastian, Claude Alabouvette, Valme Jurado… Pages 863-868 Download PDF (158KB) View Article Comments Replies Turanoceratops tardabilis—sister taxon, but not a ceratopsid Andrew A. Farke, Scott D. Sampson, Catherine A. Forster… Pages 869-870 Download PDF (69KB) View Article Comments Replies Phylogenetic position of Turanoceratops (Dinosauria: Ceratopsia) Hans-Dieter Sues, Alexander Averianov Pages 871-872 Download PDF (76KB) View Article
Re: [Vo]:[Vo] That BEC paper
Quickly scanning it (I'm reading it on a small screen on a sea ferry), the premise is that the deuterons don't obey MB statistics (wrong, density not high enough), that there needs to be some modification to the tail-off of the statistics too and that the crossing of grain boundaries relieves the deuterons of their kinetic energy. From all this, supposedly all these heavy deuterons can then condense into a BEC state. Then from this belief he derives some bogus selection rules which favors helium production. He derives some nuclear rate reactions that are devoid of the Gamow factor and hails this as proof that the Coulomb repulsion has been overcome and furthermore, since his deuterons have gone into the BEC state, the nuclear reactions he wants then proceed with vigor. So, like I said, who is citing this paper, what was its readership, who cast a critical eye over it? Having something published doesn't make it right, it's the start of the discussion. SO WHO WAS THE INTENDED AUDIENCE IN THIS BIOLOGY JOURNAL!!!
Re: [Vo]:[Vo] That BEC paper
NO! I know you embarrassment is palpable now - it's like the your love of your life, the the past 20+ years, your ecstasy and joy, has a STI and the nurse at the clinic just shouted it out to the whole waiting room. Use protection when doing science or you'll be ill-conceived, unplanned or oozing pus. Oh dear! (Shakes head, buries head in hands) On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 9:58 PM, Foks0904 . foks0...@gmail.com wrote: *SO WHO WAS THE INTENDED AUDIENCE IN THIS BIOLOGY JOURNAL!!! * Can you stop yelling? On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 4:43 PM, John Franks jf27...@gmail.com wrote: Quickly scanning it (I'm reading it on a small screen on a sea ferry), the premise is that the deuterons don't obey MB statistics (wrong, density not high enough), that there needs to be some modification to the tail-off of the statistics too and that the crossing of grain boundaries relieves the deuterons of their kinetic energy. From all this, supposedly all these heavy deuterons can then condense into a BEC state. Then from this belief he derives some bogus selection rules which favors helium production. He derives some nuclear rate reactions that are devoid of the Gamow factor and hails this as proof that the Coulomb repulsion has been overcome and furthermore, since his deuterons have gone into the BEC state, the nuclear reactions he wants then proceed with vigor. So, like I said, who is citing this paper, what was its readership, who cast a critical eye over it? Having something published doesn't make it right, it's the start of the discussion. SO WHO WAS THE INTENDED AUDIENCE IN THIS BIOLOGY JOURNAL!!!
Re: [Vo]:[Vo] That BEC paper
I'll get my coat. Nothing to see here. Nothing has happened in the past 20 years. UNSUBSCRIBING. In another 20, you'll all be dead or (more) gaga. On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 10:17 PM, Foks0904 . foks0...@gmail.com wrote: I already conceded defeat Franks. *it's like the your love of your life, the the past 20+ years, your ecstasy and joy...* Yes. Exactly. Eloquent stuff.
Re: [Vo]: What is Faraday Efficiency?
Axil Axilhttp://www.mail-archive.com/search?l=vortex-l@eskimo.comq=from:%22Axil+Axil%22 Sat, 14 Dec 2013 18:34:20 -0800http://www.mail-archive.com/search?l=vortex-l@eskimo.comq=date:20131214 Experimentation with gold nano-particles show LENR+reaction with 100% repeatability. Foks0904 . http://www.mail-archive.com/search?l=vortex-l@eskimo.comq=from:%22Foks0904+.%22 Sat, 14 Dec 2013 17:35:15 -0800 http://www.mail-archive.com/search?l=vortex-l@eskimo.comq=date:20131214 ...take Energetics in Israel (now at U of M) for example who had reach ~70-80% repeatability in their cells. Delusional, just lies or maybe incompetence. The onus is on you to rule out mistakes and other artifacts before shooting off that it's nuclear reaction in an otherwise chemical setup. So far, no one is listening.
Re: [Vo]:More versatile Maxwell's demons
Perhaps sufficient screening can bring nucleons within 10s of fermis of one another. You mean muonic hydrogen and yes that does work. For hydrogen made with electrons (lattice or not once again), you can't get lower than the ground state. This is nothing to do with lack of imagination, more wishful thinking on the part of LENR.
Re: [Vo]:More versatile Maxwell's demons
If LENR is real, as many experiments indicate... still un-taught in University nuclear physics, where admittedly it does not fit well. Not convinced. But in contrast to the large amount of positive lab results in LENR ??? Sounds pathological. Church of the converted. Experiment rules ! That is our motto. Dispassionate inquiry without conflicts of interests rule! should be the motto. Take care, John.
Re: [Vo]:More versatile Maxwell's demons
Vortex, I contacted Remi after tracking down his email and he writes below -- Forwarded message -- From: Remi Cornwall Date: Sat, Dec 14, 2013 at 6:51 PM Subject: RE: Thermo-converter and other things To: John Franks Dear John, Thank you for showing interest and contacting me. Yes, we have data but we aren't rushing anything and will very diligently question our data and setup before announcing anything more formally. We can report that the electrodynamic model in chapter 4 of the thesis is a faithful representation of what we see in the lab. We shall engage in calorimetry to prove the link with the thermodynamic cycles in the thesis. The way to do science is just to be patient and keep your powder dry. In all our endeavours, we are in no rush, wishing to submit grant applications and assemble a team of competent co-workers. This takes time and in fact, most of my time seems to be taken up with administrative matters - not least report writing, grants, patents, presentations. In the works, I am conceiving/writing a few papers: one leading on from the QSE (Quantum Signalling and Encryption) project to find a mechanism for Relativity, another in the QSE project to do with a Franson interferometer setup and then hopefully a return to ideas on Electromagnetic Propulsion, where I may have some basis as to dumping momentum in the putative scheme on cornwallresearch.org and the university site but not listed on vixra or arxiv until I am ready. Of course, more results from TEC (Thermo-electromagnetic conversion) will be listed in due course. You are welcome to have a go yourself and I believe all the material, specifically the grade of ferrofluid, can be found in the thesis and is available from Liquids Research, Bangor, UK - contacts Dr Vijay Patel/dept. chemistry, Bangor and Prof Kevin O'Grady/dept. physics York. In the meantime I might be changing department or university. Onwards and upwards! All the best, Remi. From: John Franks Sent: 14 December 2013 17:45 To: Remi Cornwall Subject: Thermo-converter and other things Dear Dr Cornwall, I have come across your work on vixra.org and elsewhere and was intrigued as to the status of it and your other projects. You have a very bold research portfolio! Regards, John Franks, engineer (ret)
[Vo]: What is Faraday Efficiency?
Dear Vortex, What is Faraday Efficiency and might it be behind some of the mistaken claims of excess heat from LENR? And all this talk of imagination in other threads, relativistic electrons, the lattice somehow doing something, how is it possible to get two nucleons close enough for the strong force to take over? You can't get lower than the ground state and 0.1nm or so is a lot larger than the 0.1pm and less to get significant fusion. This shielding talk seems is bogus as is talk of other types of nuclear reactions that don't produce neutrons or gamma rays. Why can't you LENR people do one definitive experiment after all these years (going on 25) and 100s of millions of dollars? JF.
Re: [Vo]:WAY OFF TOPIC North Korea
Is the USA building up to another war of resources/currency/strategic placement of military bases? Maybe the next game is to destabilise China.
[Vo]:More versatile Maxwell's demons
Hi vortex, I found this which says it is a Maxwell Demon, http://vixra.org/abs/1311.0077 http://vixra.org/abs/1311.0078 Regards, John.
Re: [Vo]:More versatile Maxwell's demons
Jones, I don't know, this guy is at a really good university and its been signed off by some top academics. He seems to be in the middle of his work and the theory is well based on experimental fact and he has a rationale. LENR has been going on for years and I and others just can't see how you can bring nucleons within 10s of fermi of each other to fuse, lattice or no lattice. The link with BEC or Cooper paring is just plain wrong, they never come that close and it is a low temperature effect. I don't see a mechanism and claims of excess energy require extraordinary evidence, which no one is buying. Hasn't it been up to DoE review twice now and they still don't believe it? It seems delusional to me, deeply flawed from the start. The only device is the Farnsworth Fusor which is based in experimental and theoretical fact. Good luck anyhow. I will try to contact Remi to find out what the situation is. He has three other websites and other projects: http://webspace.qmul.ac.uk/rocornwall/ http://www.cornwallresearch.org/index.htm http://arxiv.org/a/cornwall_r_1#! The last one is very conservative and blacklists a lot of new physics. That seems to be the problem with getting new ideas past the establishment. I think this guy has the right idea in taking them head on by doing a PhD. The establishment is more hindrance than help and explains why this stuff takes so long, the trouble is, governments and investors are enthralled to the universities. The options for energy production don't look good - renewables, fracking or nuclear. The public aren't convinced and there could be a sea-change in thinking. John. On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 6:40 PM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: For many years Remi was posting his thermoelectric ideas here, and he is a clever guy. I hope that he has now discovered a new thermal cycle, but to be honest - I have much more faith in LENR than in new thermal cycles. But there is overlap !
