Re: [Vo]:Orchestrated Objective Reduction

[Ken Deboer]

I have an open-ended question for this group, which I have great admiration
for. I'm a biologist and am writing a book on, especially, the population
problem. One of the chapters is on energy, mainly from the viewpoint of
future energy sources. The only one I am at all even partly able to judge
fairly is biomass, and to some extent solar, wind and similar 'standard'
ones. I am helpless about nuclear, and like Daniel Yergin in "Quest" dont
say much about it. What do y'all see as real possibilities in 50 years?
regards, ken deboer

On Sun, May 31, 2020 at 10:30 AM Terry Blanton  wrote:

>
> Thanks for the update!  I hope Jack is in good health.  He should be
> around  80 yrs.
>
> Did anyone on the current Vort list participate in the Quantum Mind forum
> at the University of Arizona in the early 90's.  Not long ago, that list
> was available still and I intended to d/l it; however, I can no longer find
> it.  
>
> Those were fun times, including the summer Sarfatti invited Shipov to
> California to discuss torsion fizzicks!  :)
>
> Cheers!
>
> On Sun, May 31, 2020 at 11:45 AM ROGER ANDERTON <
> r.j.ander...@btinternet.com> wrote:
>
>> History of it is alternative physics.
>>
>> Mainstream physics based on ignoring Einstein's search for unified field
>> theory (UFT).
>>
>> But this alternative physics is built on it.
>>
>> Bohm was student of Einstein taking up UFT research. But Bohm ran into
>> problems of being called a communist and ran foul of McCarthy Witch hunt.
>> Similarly, Bohm's student Vigier ran into same sort of problem.
>>
>> Vigier Conferences named after physicist Vigier known as "The Heretic of
>> France".
>>
>> Latest problem being looked at seems to be: the failure of Einstein's
>> Equivalence Principle et al. When heat an object by E=mc2 would expect its
>> mass to increase, but the opposite seems to happen. Paper abstract for this
>> year's presentation at: http://www.noeticadvancedstudies.us/LoXII.pdf
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sunday, 31 May 2020, 16:27:35 BST, ROGER ANDERTON <
>> r.j.ander...@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> many of them now go to Vigier Conferences, this year's organization of
>> conference messed up by covid19
>>
>>
>> Vigier 12 <http://www.noeticadvancedstudies.us/index12.html>
>>
>> Vigier 12
>>
>> <http://www.noeticadvancedstudies.us/index12.html>
>> I video many of the talks.
>>
>> I think main theory being promoted (at moment) is Rowland's theory, talk
>> by Michael Houlden:
>>
>>
>>
>> Michael Houlden talk on Rowlands' theory
>> <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k5sIV5lgW00=youtu.be>
>>
>> Michael Houlden talk on Rowlands' theory
>>
>> <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k5sIV5lgW00=youtu.be>
>>
>> Sarfatti hasn't been to Vigier Conference in ages.
>>
>>
>> There is also ANPA Conference:
>>
>>
>> Alternative Natural Philosophy Association - Alternative Natural
>> Philosophy Association <http://anpa.onl/>
>>
>> Alternative Natural Philosophy Association - Alternative Natural
>> Philoso...
>>
>> Alternative Natural Philosophy Association
>> <http://anpa.onl/>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sunday, 31 May 2020, 16:17:39 BST, Terry Blanton 
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>> I'll answer for Jonesie.
>>
>> It's a bit older than that:
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamental_Fysiks_Group
>>
>> On Sun, May 31, 2020 at 11:09 AM bobcook39...@hotmail.com <
>> bobcook39...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Jones—
>>
>>
>>
>> Is the  Fysics group you referenced the one that Allen Smith at LENR
>> Forum organized?
>>
>>
>>
>> Bob Cook
>>
>>
>>
>> *From: *Jones Beene 
>> *Sent: *Saturday, May 30, 2020 10:53 AM
>> *To: *vortex-l@eskimo.com
>> *Subject: *Re: [Vo]:Orchestrated Objective Reduction
>>
>>
>>
>> all the members of the "Fundamental Fysiks Group" [sic] reportedly merged
>> into a single quantum entangled meme...
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Terry Blanton wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> ...and what ever happened to Jack Sarfatti?  :)
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>

Re: [Vo]: Spider phonons

[Ken Deboer]

Hi all,
Also of possible interest to many is the recent article in Nat. Materials
about manufacturing rather large scale nanolattices, which have some
intriguing properties.

On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 3:02 PM, a.ashfield  wrote:

> Of possible interest to Axil
> https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/07/160725135354.htm
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Ukrainian Paper on the active particle of LENR

[Ken Deboer]

Hi,
Speaking of heat conduction "and stuff", I ran across an article that could
possibly eventually prove of interest.  A couple of MIT researchers
recently reported that graphene could convert electricity (electrons) into
light through some (to me) miraculous process.  They found phonons and
Cerenkov emissions, for one thing (I've attached the little blurb I'm
refering to).Also, a related thought:   ceramic is a very poor heat
conductor, while on the other hand, graphene is a super duper conductor.
Also, it has a melting point about 4500 C. Graphene as a container?
Best regard, ken deboer

On Sun, Jun 26, 2016 at 10:19 PM, Bob Cook <frobertc...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> Jones—
>
>
>
> Convection heat transfer which you suggest would involve a gas or plasma
> with macroscopic motion of the mobile species NECESSARY for distribution of
> kinetic energy.  Would this system imply the nuclear reaction producing the
> anomalous heat resulted in energetic (kinetic energy) particles as opposed
> to higher spin states of the reactants?
>
>
>
> Also what is your judgement as to the speed of the reaction being  slow
> enough to avoid local melting considering the low heat transfer coeff.
> associated with convection cooling? I would think CONDUCTION cooling would
> be faster and more likely than CONVECTION cooling to avoid melting.
>
>
>
> Then again the power density may be low enough to avoid mechanical
> deformations.  I could not find anything about the power density of the
> reaction in the Ukrainian paper.
>
>
>
> Bob Cook
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Sent from Mail <https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> for
> Windows 10
>
>
>
>
>
> *From: *Jones Beene <jone...@pacbell.net>
> *Sent: *Sunday, June 26, 2016 6:00 PM
> *To: *vortex-l@eskimo.com
> *Subject: *RE: [Vo]:Ukrainian Paper on the active particle of LENR
>
>
>
> *From:* Bob Cook
>
>
>
> But how does the ‘anomalous heat’ get out of the reaction site?  Is it by
> spin coupling of the reacting coherent system, which includes the metal
> lattice?
>
>
>
>
>
> What’s wrong with regular convection? Think of it as sequential
> phase-change, which is continuous over time. It’s just heat at that point.
>
>
>
> BTW - here is one of several interesting papers from 2009…
>
>
> http://lenrcanr.org/acrobat/KidwellDdoesgasloa.pdf=U=0ahUKEwjiiOz1isfNAhVD9GMKHfMTCEEQFggJMAI=internal-uds-cse=AFQjCNE8KOsK3JddH2zxL_2r9-bHkrTPnQ
>
>
>
> … considering the result, e.g. - apparent inaction, when the experiments
> were more than good, would lead the cynic to suspect that the Navy
> converted this technology into a black project of some kind around 2010 or
> thereafter. This would also explain a number of apparently missed
> opportunities in the closing of SPAWARS, ect, ect.
>
>
>
>
>
Title: Researchers discover new way to turn electricity into light, using graphene













Skip to content




	MIT Energy Initiative
	
	Linking science, innovation, and policy to transform the world's energy systems

	
		

  MIT Energy Initiative

  

  
 Search this site: 
 









		

  The Login Menu

  Member Login
Contact


	

	


  About
Calendar
NewsNews
In the Media
Member News
Video
Media Kit



	


  Research
Education
Membership
Publications
Support MITEI





	
		Home > News > Researchers Discover New Way Turn Electricity Light Using Graphene
	

	



  Research
Education
Membership
Publications
Support MITEI


		


  About
Calendar
NewsNews
In the Media
Member News
Video
Media Kit



	


	
		


  

  
  
  

  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  
 

		Researchers discover new way to turn electricity into light, using graphene		By slowing down light to a speed slower than flowing electrons, researchers create a kind of optical “sonic boom.”

  

Media RequestsFor help finding a researcher or other requests, please contact:
Emily DahlCommunications Director(617) 253-3411
Secondary contact:
Francesca McCaffreyCommunications Coordinator(617) 324-2408
Connect
Subscribe




Interested in...
News Events Energy Futures magazine











  News

  
  
  
  



  



	
		
	
	
	
		
			Energy storage's role in decarbonization will depend on duration, cost cuts		
			
			Utility Dive		

		Further cost reductions will be necessary to justify widespread storage deployment for decarbonization purposes, Argonne and MIT researchers found.		
			
			June 15, 2016Read more		
	
  

  

  
  
  
  
  
  More News

  
  
 June 13, 2016David L. Chandler, MIT News Office MIT News This illustration depicts the process of light emission from a sheet of graphene

Re: [Vo]:Cheap Solar Power (harvard.edu)

[Ken Deboer]

Vis a vis this excellent thread, I'd be interested in people's thoughts
about a new video by Robert Murray Smith on "The Internet of Energy".
This looks to me to be better than Tesla's technology, and in fact, a very
significant advance for, especially, widespread solar.
ken


On Thu, May 5, 2016 at 12:30 PM, Eric Walker  wrote:

> As your analysis demonstrates, there's no warranty of any particular level
> of insight that attaches to comments in this and similar fora. You are free
> to leave when you like.
>
> Eric
>
>
> On May 5, 2016, at 13:19, Che  wrote:
>
> > On Wed, May 4, 2016 at 5:06 PM, Eric Walker 
> wrote:
> >>
> >> On Wed, May 4, 2016 at 4:07 PM, Blaze Spinnaker <
> blazespinna...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Fortunately, looks like LENR may not be needed to rescue the planet
> >>>
> >>> http://www.keith.seas.harvard.edu/blog-1/cheapsolarpower
> >>>
> >>
> >> Indeed.  If solar power will help humanity to squeak by, and LENR will
> allow it to build out all kinds of military capabilities, solar power may
> end up saving humanity where LENR would doom it.
> >>
> >> Eric
>
> * Dealing with an out-of-[democratic-]control Military-Police apparatus is
> essentially a _political_ issue: generally only solved by class violence of
> some degree.
>
> * Cold Fusion OTOH is a _technological_ issue: with a political-economic
> social nature necessarily attached to it, after the fact.
>
> * These two issues do NOT easily conflate. Not in this (too-usual,
> unfortunately) way.
>
>
> And IMO it is one of the great failings of this and other fora that such a
> basic understanding of fundamental societal relations is almost invariably
> and essentially tossed aside -- in favor of the usual simplistic
> understanding of how non-technological social issues actually operate.
> (i.e. 'technology will save/doom us!!', yadda...) Technology, per se, *is
> essentially NEUTRAL*.
>
>
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Rossi's missing secret or E-CatX description or both?

[Ken Deboer]

Hi guys,
This discussion gave me a wild general idea for a series of possible
experiments.  Many folks have talked about  the central feature of Lenr
maybe involving Casimir cavities, as well as graphene and similar lattice
materials.  Lots of scientists lately have reported many Casimir like
properties of graphene.  Now also several groups have not only made
macroscopic length graphene films, but also some  interesting 3D printed
forms (e.g. C. Zhu .   M. Worsley. Highly compressible 3D periodic
graphene aerogel microlattices.  Nat. Comm 2015  DOI: 10.1038/ncomms7962; ;
J. H. Kim et al 2015. 3D printing of graphene oxide nanowires.  Adv. Mtls
27(1):157-61.;  Zhang et al 2016. 3D printing of graphene aerogels.  Small
12:1702-8.).   How about assembling a stack of graphene sheets of various
forms, in a 'box' with hydrogen (in some form), along with maybe some of
the other catalysts, then compress the hell out of it. And  hit it with
lasers, or arcs, or high EMF and all the rest  too.
I'd pay to watch that!
regards, ken

On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 11:31 AM, Jack Cole  wrote:

> Yes, I think Andrew et al believe this has nothing to do with LENR, but
> theorize a different process.  It may end up being the case that nickel
> will need to be abandoned altogether in powder form.  Last I knew, Andrew
> was going back to work on repeating some of the titanium experiments with
> better instrumentation.
>
> On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 12:09 PM Jones Beene  wrote:
>
>> *From:* Jack Cole
>>
>>
>>
>> Maybe Rossi has finally found something that will work (e.g., using a
>> method similar to Andrew Hrischanovich with titanium
>> 
>> ).
>>
>>
>>
>> This is interesting work from Ukraine/Russia. One of the claims,
>> according to Alan Smith who translated the documents - is that they have a
>> system where the adsorption / desorption of hydrogen by titanium is
>> exothermic in both directions. That is huge – if true, since it gets us
>> away from the potential problem of inviting scrutiny from the NRC.
>>
>>
>>
>> IOW - this is not LENR and probably not related to Parkhomov.
>>
>>
>>
>> What is most interesting is that it operates like asymmetric phase
>> change, since the volume of material changes at the subnanometer level, and
>> phase change is known to be very energetic is certain circumstances.
>>
>>
>>
>> The precise mechanism for gain could be another instance of DCE – or the
>> Dynamical Casimir Effect – which is a proved phenomenon but heretofore was
>> not very robust and only involved light emission.
>>
>>
>>
>> And we can see why such a system which is cycling around what are
>> operative phase-changes -- would benefit from on/off cycling of the power
>> supply… which… come to think of it… makes the details even more interesting
>> to anyone using TiH2 in an experiment…
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>

Re: [Vo]:CNN: The largest U.S. coal company just filed for bankruptcy

[Ken Deboer]

That is exactly right, Jones!  There are several papers and patents on
feasible ways to use coal as high value products, especially CNTs,
activated carbon, graphene, quantum dots etc.  Here are four examples C.
Xiang et al (J. Tour's group at Rice Univ) . Coal as an abundant source of
graphene quantum dots. Nat. Comm. Doi.101038/ncomms3943;  J. Satterfield,
2015  US Pat 9108186  "Phosphoric acid treatment of carbonaceous material
prior to activation" ; Petrik V.  2010 US pat. "Mass production of carbon
nanostructures";  Wu et al 2012.  Efficient large scale synthesis of
graphene from coal and its electrical properties studies. J Nanosci.
Nanotech. 12:1-4.
  I have used Wu's method to make some of this stuff in my garage without
difficulty.  I could also make a pretty decent battery out of it.  What to
do about coal is the biggest political issue in my state of Montana (as
well as Wyoming) right now and your suggestion of using coal as a new high
value product is exactly the only solution to humanely ending the coal
burning business.  I have written essentially this same argument to the
Governor and staff, but of course, have not heard from them.   Using a much
smaller amount of 20 cent coal to make significant amounts of these kinds
of much higher value, more benign, products seems like it should be a
no-brainer, but

cheers, ken

On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 6:45 PM, Jed Rothwell  wrote:

> I wrote:
>
>
>> 2. The total mass of coal needed to replace steel this would be much less
>> than the mass of coal we now burn. I estimate it would be roughly 1/5th.
>> World production of steel is 135 million tons per month or 1.620 billion
>> tons per year . . .
>>
>
> I realize that is a silly analysis. We are not going to replace every ton
> of steel with carbon filament. In many cases it would be a bad choice of
> materials. You would not want carbon filament manhole covers. Most of the
> steel we replace would be used in transportation, making automobiles,
> trucks and railroad trains. I do not know what fraction of total steel
> production that is. Forbes tells me automobile manufacturing consumes 12%
> of steel:
>
>
> http://www.forbes.com/sites/greatspeculations/2015/05/20/trends-in-steel-usage-in-the-automotive-industry/#65264c677865
>
> So, let us say carbon replaces 30% of steel, including cars, railroad
> cars, bridges, and other applications that would benefit from a
> lightweight, stronger replacement for steel. To replace that much steel
> with an equivalent mass of coal (ignoring the fact that carbon fiber is
> lighter) it would take 6% of the mass of coal we now mine. That will not
> save the industry or preserve employment.
>
> - Jed
>
>

Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC Video shows how superior animal intelligence is compared to artificial intelligence

[Ken Deboer]

Jed,
That movie is terrific. And also hilarious.   The reaction of the monkey is
exactly the same as all of has seen many times in humans.  It is getting
absolutely untenable anymore to deny the lack of sentience in some of the
animal world with profound implications for humanity.  I'm quite
familiar with de Waal work and others, especially with bonobos and
chimpanzees.  Interestingly, bonobos are closer in DNA homology to humans
than even gorillas are.  thanks for the post.

On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 2:00 PM, Jed Rothwell  wrote:

> Here is the full video that segment is taken from:
>
> http://www.ted.com/talks/frans_de_waal_do_animals_have_morals?language=en
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Cellani replication 'flea bitten' lenr radiation NOT

[Ken Deboer]

Still  wondering if instead of nickel wires or sintered powder etc, it may
yet be possible to 3d print various lattices of nickel.  The industry blurb
from Nano Dimensions from Israel included here is kinda interesting.

On Wed, Mar 9, 2016 at 3:22 PM, Jed Rothwell  wrote:

> I wrote:
>
> I lost track of the discussion but I recall there was still one graph that
>> looked promising, with a conservative claim of anomalous heat. Perhaps it
>> is still unresolved?
>>
>
> Ah, here we are:
>
>
> https://www.facebook.com/MartinFleischmannMemorialProject/photos/p.1126094137421284/1126094137421284/?type=3
>
> - Jed
>
>


nickel.doc
Description: MS-Word document

Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC Video shows how superior animal intelligence is compared to artificial intelligence

[Ken Deboer]

Nice work, Jed, and also the comments of Vibrator are right on.  As an old
retired biologist,it has been heartening to see the neurosciences admitting
to higher neural and mental functioning in animals, including the
near-human intellectual and cognitive achievements you noted in the cat.
Psycho-and neuro-sciences are indeed making great strides, allowing some
deep peeks into the mechanisms and substrates which produce some of our
human (or animal) behaviors and cognitions, even our thoughts and beliefs.
I survey some of this in my little (layman-directed) book on Amazon ("Mind
>From Matter") where I try to encourage expanding this into actual human
societal realms.  But the fact that our biological apparati, i.e. brain, is
the complete and sole substrate for our human thoughts, beliefs, actions
and behaviors is frequently ignored (or in many cases, totally
unsuspected).  While we all intuitively recognize that humanity is frail,
incomprehensibly complex, uncertain, and quirky, usually though we fail to
recognize too our biological facts.  We see though, that we are often lead
'astray' in various ways by our own brains with its inborn infinitude of
inborn programming and variations.  I beleive we are, however, making great
strides, mainly though science, in 'adjusting' (sometimes!) our thinking or
behavior as a society and a world.   But such a long, long way to go.  My
present wish is for social, and particularly political, scientists to get
with and make some serious efforts to use science to develop some
guidelines and principles to help societies in practical ways.   Of course,
science does not deliver truth, wisdom, judgement, comity, creativity, or
'correct' beliefs or anything of that sort directly, but we still do
require it as a societal facilitator and glue in a million ways.

On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 3:04 PM, Vibrator !  wrote:

> Cool topic, cognitive science is one of my interests.  I think that at the
> stage we're at, the outstanding technical challenges aren't so much
> quantitative as qualitative - we need to crack the Hard Problem, for an
> emergent, bottom-up intelligence rather than a "brute forced" but top-down
> Turing champion.
>
>
> Although we've made strides in all areas of dynamical systems theory, we
> can still only speculate about the general principles of multicellular
> information processing - in particular we lack a general principle of
> informational binding (the so-called binding problem), that would unify all
> the disparate sensory modalities and the vagaries of their respective
> sensory systems with a general principle of consciousness.  So, some
> researchers will produce limited success with cellular automata, another
> team with game theory and so on... we already have the quantitative ability
> to simulate the smallest nervous systems (nematodes etc.), but no means of
> understanding whether a given simulation would be processing - or, more to
> the point, "feeling" - in the same manner as a living organism.
>
> And here, the field is still beset by philosophical dogma, such as the
> notion of "qualia" - essentially an argument for the irreducible complexity
> of subjective experience - and widespread doubts that any tractable handle
> on the problem is even possible (typified by David Chalmers "zombie Dave"
> poser - we cannot know that any other entity is conscious in the same
> manner as ourselves); but although i go along with Dennet in many of his
> contentions, i have in my own research identified something traditionally
> believed to be entirely subjective, but which is, in fact, an objective
> universal; namely, the perception of octave equivalence, which i believe
> does give us a "qualia", albeit one amenable to definitive description and
> replication.  In short, i believe it's possible to engineer a neural net
> that would percieve octaves as "equivalent" in the same way we do, and that
> as such it would be "feeling" and processing information about that
> sensation in a naturalistic manner.
>
> The key to the binding problem is deriving an objective theory of metadata
> - ie. identifying how living brains process information "about" other
> information, be that sensory input, motor control or general knowledge.
>
> Work on the "semantic web" (AKA "web of things" or web 2.0), in which
> information is indexed by context, will inevitably spin off advances in
> collating and processing metadata, but this alone won't see us out of the
> "zombie Dave" dilemma.
>
> There's always the question of "does it really matter" - if an AI says
> "here, hold my pint" before trashing a human in an ethics debate, who cares
> if it's genuinely conscious in the same way as us?  But look at where we're
> headed with autonomous vehicles etc. (some lawmakers have already ruled
> that such cars can be considered as "responsible" drivers from a legal
> persective) - if an AI is chauffeuring me around, then actually i'd be
> rather comforted in the 

Re: [Vo]:LENR fuel deployment

[Ken Deboer]

Hi Axil et al,
  This makes me wonder (as many of you probably also have) about some new
particular ways to approach manufacturing the reactor from scratch.  It
seems certain that structure, especially micro- and nano-structure, of the
fuel especially is just as important as the material itself.
  'Additive manufacturing' is all the rage nowaday, especially with metals
and exotic materials, like graphene for example.  Recently I saw where XJET
in Israel is coming out with a metal nanoparticle inkjet 3D printer.
 "nanomanufacturing".  It might be nice, then, if some enterprising group
could try to build reactors almost atom by atom and then test those under
various conditions. For example, I'm thinking of the kind of manufactured
Casimir cavities in the recent patent app of Charles Hillel Rosendorf,
2014, ("Methods and equipment for quantum vacuum energy extraction"  US
201400092521).  I myself really wouldn't be able to tell the difference
between a Casimir cavity and a bear cave, but it seems from you and others'
conversations that whistling H or D thru them sets off some interesting
cascades.  Anyway, it would also be very nice if the Energy Dept, for
one,would get on the stick and put some real money and effort into the
whole arena.  It would be more than interesting to see some of the grant
applications from new - and old- blood if that happened.
cheers, ken

On Fri, Dec 4, 2015 at 5:40 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:

> [image: Thumbnail]
> 
>
> Back in the early days, the cause of the breakup between Defkalion and
> Rossi was the tendency for Rossi's reactor to blow apart during startup.
> This was caused by a pileup of the fuel in the center of the reaction
> chamber. When DGT started their R, they hit upon a technique that spread
> the nickel micro powder evenly across the reaction chamber and held the
> powder more or less spread equally within the volume of the reaction
> chamber. . Dekalion used a nickel metal foam to hold the particles
> suspended in space so that the powder does not settle in a pile in the
> middle of the reaction tube.
>
> There are indications that Rossi is doing the same metal mesh based powder
> suspension method.
>
> If a replicator experiences a tube explosion, he is close to a successful
> LENR reaction. The replicator would be well served to insert a metal nano
> mesh into his alumina tube to keep the fuel particles distributed in the
> reaction chamber.
>

Re: [Vo]: How many atoms to make condensed matter?

[Ken Deboer]

Question:  Not sure if it has been discussed before, but could it be that
nanoparticulate fuel arrangements are not the ideal?  Many workers, most
recently JM Thomas (Nature 17 Sept 2015) showed that single atoms, of Pd
especially, make better catalysts than nanoparticles. super catalysts, in
fact.

On Sun, Nov 15, 2015 at 5:42 PM, Jones Beene  wrote:

> Yet another interesting possibility for anomalous energy, showing up in
> nature but heretofore unappreciated - which arguably fits into a version
> of the Holmlid effect is in biology. If Holmlid is correct that iron-oxide
> catalyst along with an alkali (potassium) and a source of light, can
> create energetic particles, we can look at biology in a new light, so to
> speak.
>
> Disregarding Kervran, there are two biological energy anomalies in
> particular which are really rusty, so to speak. One is the Monarch
> butterfly and the other is the class of plants called epiphytes. Both of
> these are strong energy anomalies of a biological sort with iron oxide
> and light as contributory.
>
> Epiphytes are non-parasitic plants that grow on trees, deriving nutrients
> from air and rain, not from the host. Spanish Moss is the classic example,
> growing on oak trees for physical support, but having no roots, it
> generally does not negatively affect the oak. It has been shown that Spanish
> Moss, Tillandsia, grows faster on electrical cables than on trees and has
> 17% Fe2O3, iron oxide in its ashes, when burned, as well as potassium. This
> plant captures sunlight and possibly induced electrical current as a
> supplement (or alternative) to photosynthesis. It is a fast grower, not
> as fast as Kudzu but in times past, tens of millions of pounds was
> harvested annually in the USA for such things as the Model-T Ford (seat
> padding). I love these old PopSci references:
>
>
> *https://books.google.com/books?id=eiYDMBAJ=PA32=Popular+Science+1932+plane=en=uwhRTaffEsq9tgf9vIG6CQ=X=book_result=result=10=0CEkQ6AEwCTgy#v=onepage=true*
> 
>
> ___
>
> Another interesting possibility for anomalous heat due to the Holmlid
> effect (nucleon disintegration) is the planet Jupiter.
>
> Jupiter has a core temperature estimated to be 36,000 K (64,300 °F)
> despite the cold surface - but its large gravitational force is far from
> being able to trigger nuclear reactions. It is a factor of 75 too low to
> trigger fusion. It also has an iron core, the surface of which is probably
> catalytic and where heat is generated via proton disintegration. Jupiter
> could be the ideal mass range for finding hydrogen planets with hot cores -
> where the Holmlid effect predominates. There really are few other choices
> that make as much sense.
>
> The present consensus for Jupiter’s internal heating is that the great
> mass and compressibility is making energy available from gravitational
> contraction. But that explanation is close to brain-dead, IMO since there
> is no net gain from gravitation oscillation around an static average value.
> And there is no indication of permanent shrinkage.
>
> However, theoretical models do indicate that if Jupiter had even slightly
> more mass than it does at present, it would shrink significantly, meaning
> that it is in a metastable state already which is probably exacerbated due
> to the internal heating. So to the extent that internal heat offsets
> gravity, then yes gravity heating is arguable, but not without the internal
> heat. Thus we cannot attribute this core temperature to gravity at all,
> except as the transfer medium/mechanism.
>
> *From:* Bob Higgins
>
> Ø   Can you say what evidence the natural state should exhibit if
> such a sub-nuclear shuffle were as "less difficult" as you describe?  Are
> there natural occurrences that can be looked for that could validate such a
> proposition?
>
> Indeed – such a radical shift would have dramatic, even Universal
> repercussions (turtles all the way down) .
>
> The obvious first place to look is our sun. Do we really understand the
> solar hydrogen fusion cycle?  My opinion is that we could have it partly
> wrong, especially the basic P+P reaction- which is statistically difficult
> to reconcile. Here is the way the mainstream looks at it:
>
> *https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proton%E2%80%93proton_chain_reaction*
> 
>
> But many observers are struck by the mechanics of the solar fusion cycle
> being absolutely dependent on a rare beta decay in the diproton. Can that
> really happen during the short lifetime of the species? Despite what you
> may think, this critical detail has never been observed, and is merely an
> educated guess. It is a guess which is based mostly on lack of another
> viable mechanism.
>
> If 

Re: [Vo]:The self-charging supercapacitor/battery

[Ken Deboer]

Hi Jones,
You and others have often speculated on a possible role of magnetism.  In
that regard I wonder if the recent finding by a Rice Univ. group (Yakobson
et al; Nano Lett. Oct 15, 2015 "Riemann surfaces of carbon as graphene
nanosolenoids") would be of interest.  They found a 1T field induced by
very low voltage in spiral graphene nanoparticles.

[BTW., Even tho I had gotten completely out of the stock market casino
years ago, even before the 2008 crash, I did buy a thousand shares of
Sunvault Energy stock a few months ago as a bet on Dr. Smith's thing!].
 regards, ken

On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 8:53 AM, Jones Beene  wrote:

> Robert Murray-Smith explains how carbon-carbon (graphene-graphite)
> becomes self-charging
>
> *https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cLGtWEmTGl4=1*
> 
>
> This device blurs the distinction between battery and capacitor. It is
> really a bit of both.
>
> There is no overunity – but the lifetime of the effect is surprising.
>
> This indicates a factoid which many of us have suspected for a long time
> – there can be a lot more energy in normal “chemical energy” than
> expected. Normal chemistry refers to valence electrons only.
> “Suprachemistry” can refers to exploiting sub-valence electrons or
> redundant orbits using chemistry – not fusion.
>
> It is not ruled out that the energy seen in many if not most forms of
> LENR, including dense hydrogen, comes from “chemistry”. Holmlid now says
> that the dense hydrogen state has binding energy of 630 eV (not 50 eV as
> in an older paper). This is chemical energy, yet it can provide hundreds
> of times more apparent gain than burning hydrogen in air. Yet it is not
> “overunity” since it requires energy input to create the dense cluster.
>
> Jones
>

Re: [Vo]:Sealing the Dog Bone

[Ken Deboer]

I'm not sure if Axil gets credit for first bringing up graphene, but I've
often wondered if there weren't a role for it in either the macro- or nano-
structure of a device.  BTW, graphene can be 3d printed on regular
machines, while alumina can be 2d printed (with some difficulty I believe)
on laser lithography type 3d printers.
ken

On Sat, Jan 3, 2015 at 12:21 PM, Bob Cook frobertc...@hotmail.com wrote:

  Eric--

 Also keep in mind the physics student, Carl-Oscar Gullstrom, at the
 Uppsala University and under one of the Lugano authors, has a theory that
 is similar to Robin's idea. Its worth reviewing.


 http://www.scribd.com/doc/244393652/Low-radiation-fusion-through-bound-neutron-tunneling

 Bob

 - Original Message -
 *From:* Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.com
 *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com
 *Sent:* Saturday, January 03, 2015 10:16 AM
 *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:Sealing the Dog Bone

  On Sat, Jan 3, 2015 at 9:24 AM, Bob Cook frobertc...@hotmail.com wrote:

 It may be that the hydrogen only acts to help distribute the Li-7 to the
 Ni isotopes for the Li-7+Ni reactions Jones suggested back in October and
 Eric has just reviewed.


 Just a small correction.  It was Robin that suggested that what was going
 on was a chain of 7Li(Ni,Ni)6Li neutron-stripping reactions.  This is a
 suggestion that I'm still partial to.  Unless there has been an error in my
 analysis, I'm inclined to think the percentage of lithium reported in the
 2mg sample from the Lugano assay was unrepresentative of the percentage of
 lithium in the total charge by a factor of 10-20.  Admittedly, this is a
 heavy strike against the proposed involvement of 7Li, all else being equal.

  Most advances in technology are based on a mixture of trial and error
 work and application of half-baked theory.  They go hand in hand.


 Nice summary.

 Eric

Re: [Vo]:The melting miracle

[Ken Deboer]

Regarding the 'shell' of various LENR reactors, I wonder if someone could
recap or comment on what the history has been and what some of the
considerations  and rational were behind them.  Most reactors have been
built around steel if I'm not mistaken, and some of glass. The new Rossi
model is of alumina and I wonder what led him to that?  Also, someone a
good while back, Jones I think, mentioned about maybe silicon carbide
having some beneficial features (electrical or electromagnetic?).  People
have mused about what kinds of physical or geometric, micro or macro,
 configurations might help, and all this seems to me to be of value.  I
also had another wild (dangerous!) thought- heating by microwave?
cheers, ken

On Thu, Jan 1, 2015 at 7:29 PM, Bob Cook frobertc...@hotmail.com wrote:

  I think the size of the nano Ni is important in creating resonant
 conditions to support LENR reactions in a magnetic field.  This may include
 cavity sizes.

 Bob

 - Original Message -
 *From:* Nick nix...@ameritech.net
 *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com
 *Sent:* Thursday, January 01, 2015 6:06 PM
 *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:The melting miracle

  I’m way out of my zone of expertise here, as a speaker builder/designer,
 I am familiar with resonant frequencies of boxes, cavities, or spaces. Has
 the possibility that Rossi is optimizing the reactor design so the reactor
 cavity resonates at specific frequencies? Has this been considered? We’ve
 all seen the YouTube videos that show how powdered materials dance and move
 in patterns when subjected to strong fields of acoustic energy at varying
 frequencies. Acoustic waves can levitate heavy objects, is it not possible
 that such an effect could keep the powder mix in a turbulent and evenly
 distributed state even when at high temperatures? The sintering seen
 afterward could be taking place when the device is powered down and the
 fuel mix settles to the bottom, no longer being agitated. I realize I don’t
 have the background to tell you much of anything that you do not already
 know in this discussion, but I have not seen the subject addressed, at
 least not that I can recall. The differing pressures and temperatures
 inside the active vessel would alter these figures significantly I'm sure,
 but these such factors could be addressed and managed.

 A link about this here,
 http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/waves/cavity.html#c1

 Resonance of a Coke Bottle,
 http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/waves/coke.html#c1


 Nixter


   On Thursday, January 1, 2015 4:08 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com
 wrote:


   As I have stated in another thread:

 Doing science inside the dog bone can be like doing science inside
 another universe. There is no certainty  that physics or chemistry works
 that same inside the a functioning dog bone as it does in the real world.
 Maybe different physical rules apply.

  On Thu, Jan 1, 2015 at 4:48 PM, Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.com
 wrote:

  On Thu, Jan 1, 2015 at 12:58 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote:

  I am interested in what keeps the Rossi micro powder from
 sintering/melting at high surface temperatures when the reactor is in
 operation. We call this weird behavior the melting miracle.

 This is an interesting question.  If the same internal/external
 temperature gradient was in effect in the Lugano test as seen in the MFMP 
 dogbone calibrations (at the higher temperatures, a delta T of 330 C
 [1]), we're left with some weird possibilities to sort through:

- the temperature calculated for the outside of the Lugano E-Cat was
significantly lower than 1400.
- the nickel in the volume of the core of the Lugano reactor was not
subject to the same amount of heat across the length of the core, and the
nickel extracted for the isotope assays was from an area that maintained a
temperature below the point of the complete melting point of nickel.
- the outside temperature of the Lugano reactor was as reported, and
the nickel in the core vaporized and then recrystallized when the
temperature was still high towards the end of the test, resulting in a
partially sintered appearance, while somehow maintaining an isotope
gradient.
- other possibilities?

 I do not know what unsintered nickel looks like, so it is hard for me to
 get a sense of where along the spectrum the nickel in the images taken from
 the Lugano assays was.

 Eric


 [1] http://www.e-catworld.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/DogboneDec30.jpg

Re: [Vo]:OT: what if everybody got free cash?

[Ken Deboer]

Dave,
 This is an important thread and one I touch on in a book I am finishing
up, called Mind from Matter.  I think a basic income is inevitable and
could be relatively painless, as I think you have overestimated the outlay
required and underestimated the return.  My calculations (as an amateur)
are based on about $2000/month per household. Assuming 90 percent of 115
million US households would need it, that would amount to roughly $2.5
trillion needed annually. At present, direct Government outlay for basic
'welfare' programs is at minimum $.5 T, much of which would be 'saved'.
Private welfare charity amounts to at minimum $125 B per year, again some
of which could be saved (especially by the lower incomes, which actually
give to charity at higher rates than the very wealthy). There is a total of
$17 T in public and private pensions, again some of which would become
redundant.  The government also pays $1.3T annually for healthcare, which
might possibly then be reduced by some amount. The added income would also
result in some amount of increased taxes paid by some of the recipients,
again reducing the extra taxation imposed on the upper taxpayers.  So all
in all the direct extra outlay might not be that far out. Not to mention,
of course, the real reason to do this. ken deboer

On Sun, Dec 14, 2014 at 11:43 PM, H Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote:

 I did not mean to play the scare card. In fact anybody, no matter their
 age or health, could wake one morning and find themselves in need of long
 term care. Everyone deserves to live, grow old, and die in dignity. Since
 careworkers play a huge role in making that possible it is important that
 their dignity be recognized too and a guaranteed basic income would help in
 that respect. These remarks are motivated by my personal experience which I
 will describe.

 In July my mother died from complications due to advanced dementia. Almost
 eight years ago she was diagnosed with vascular dementia.
 When my mother her broke her hip six years ago I moved back into my
 parent's home and became heavily involved in mother's rehabilitation and
 care. I tended to all her needs as you would do for any child or infant. A
 number of factors made this possible.  I was unemployed, single with no
 children so I had the time, my fathers pension could support us both and we
 were fortunate enough to become clients of a new pilot program in assisted
 living. That program provided us with regularly scheduled help as well as
 extra help when ever we needed it. In the last two and half years the
 personal support workers were coming 4 or 5 times a day.

 Harry


 On Sat, Dec 13, 2014 at 6:28 PM, Orionworks - Steven Vincent Johnson 
 orionwo...@charter.net wrote:

  Harry,



 The more I think about it, I don't think you were trying to play a scare
 card. This is just an issue that concerns me deeply. As I get older I
 suspect it will concern me even more. Hopefully I will be in a position do
 to something about it on my own terms.



 Depending on my circumstances, as I approach the end of my useful life, I
 would like to have the option of being able to invite all my best friends
 over to my abode, and perhaps a few irritating foes as well, for one last
 get-together. It should be party. There I would like to casually and
 perhaps with some humor give out a few of my most cherished possessions to
 the appropriate. I hope someone asks me, Steve, can I have your bike? It
 should be a happy feast of remembrance with some nice music playing in the
 background. Then, on my signal, I want the cup barer to bring the potion
 over to me. By law he or she will be required to warn me If you drink this
 potion you will die. I'll take the potion and I will drink it. Then, I'll
 lay back listening to soft music... maybe a little Beethoven... or maybe
 Enya, while holding hands with loved ones.



 Time to die.



 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NOW4QiOD-oc



 But in the meantime, just so most Vorts don't end up with the impression
 I'm romanticizing the process a tad too much, the following clip best
 expresses my current attitude about dying.



 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UPatfgoNBRo



 Regards,

 Steven Vincent Johnson

 svjart.orionworks.com

 zazzle.com/orionworks

Re: [Vo]:Punctuated equilibrium

[Ken Deboer]

Jojo,
Here's one (actually a few ): clymene dolphin
plus 2-4% of all flowering plants, inc. many sunflowers, and many crop
species.

BTW.  This whole 'odds' thing is a joke.  Julian Huxley, for example, did
not state his opinion re; the astronomical 'odds' of a horse, but did
ridicule the guy that did. It appears, for example, that the odds that you
and I could ever agree on most anything is, let's see, 80 billion neuronal
actions per sec X  80 billion neurons actions per sec by you  X 30 years =
  (I'm not too good at math, you do the math).

From a former biology teacher, ken
PS.  don't call me, I'll call you back.


On Wed, Aug 27, 2014 at 12:16 PM, jwin...@cyllene.uwa.edu.au wrote:

  On 28/08/2014 1:11 AM, Jojo Iznart wrote:

 John, my friend, you have a fundamental problem in your analysis.
 Your unyielding adherence to Darwinian dogma

 You are mistaken.  I have no adherence to Darwinian dogma whatsoever.  If
 Darwinian dogma (whatever that is) happens to coincide with my
 understanding - well maybe its right.

  is blinding you and preventing you from asking the right questions.  You
 assume Darwinian Evolution is true first and that skews your analysis.

 For example, you assume that the Coelacanth is 350 million years old.  How
 do you know that?

 We have been over this ad nauseum.  I accept radiometric dating.  In many
 cases it is simply superb.  You are welcome to continue rubbishing it but
 you should be aware that in the almost unanimous view of intelligent and
 well educated people you are thereby only rubbishing yourself.

  You know that only because Darwinian Evolution theory told you so.
 Since your first assumption is that Darwinian Evolution is true, you can
 liberally conclude that the Coelacanth is 350 million years old.  Then a
 wrong question stems from this wrong understanding - wrong assumption.  You
 then ask why the coelacanth stopped evolving?  This of course is the
 wrong question that you are trying to answer.

 What you should do is not assume anything.  You then look at the data and
 see if Darwinian Evolution fits the data.

 What about you?  You make one massive assumption (that the history and
 legends brought back by the Jews after their exile in Babylon has to be
 completely inerrant), and then you look at the data and no matter how good
 it is, you toss it out if you can't make it fit that massive assumption.

  Can Darwinian Evolution explain the existence of the Coelacanth up to
 today and why it hasn't evolved?  If not, Darwinian Evolution theory is
 wrong.

 Instead, you ask, how could the Coelacanth exist unchanged for 350 million
 years?  This is the wrong questions that should not have been asked if your
 initial assumptions did not screw with your analysis.

 Jojo

 PS: I'm really at a loss understanding why people can't seem to see the
 stupidities of their belief in Darwinian Evolution - why they can see that
 Darwinian Evolution could be wrong.

 Take out the plank that is in your own eye, and then you can see better to
 pick specks of dust from others assumptions.

Re: [Vo]:Italian minor, sucess in cold fusion... any more info

[Ken Deboer]

excuse my ignorance, but isn't this just hydrogen burning in oxygen, and
just like the h-cat?  ken


On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 3:12 PM, Alain Sepeda alain.sep...@gmail.com
wrote:

 what is the evidence of cold fusion. I don't see any calorimetry.
 it seems to be Mizuno electrolysis, buthow do they prove LENR ?

 gamma (few)? neutrons (normally fewer)? tritium detection ?


 2014-07-30 22:12 GMT+02:00 Giovanni Santostasi gsantost...@gmail.com:

 This is the youtube video:

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n7WjzYflPYI




 On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 3:02 PM, Alain Sepeda alain.sep...@gmail.com
 wrote:


 http://iltirreno.gelocal.it/pistoia/cronaca/2014/02/02/news/a-13-anni-riproducono-la-fusione-a-freddo-1.8591445

 it seems to be a Mizuno, but very few details...

 does anyone have better data?

 ---


 At 13 reproduce the cold fusion

 The experiment of three boys in the garage of the home of one of them:
 No minor he had succeeded


  Pistoia also has its own via Panisperna boys.Matthew and Ivan are
 Matteini Perrella, with the collaboration of Julia Ricciardi. Compared
 to Fermi, Amaldi, Majorana and other eminent physicists, very young, in the
 thirties of the last century realized in the laboratory, the first nuclear
 reactor, physicists Pistoia are still young, very young indeed.They
 have 13 years old and attending the 3rd Q of the school Marconi Via
 Puccini. Early last month have carried out an experiment in the garage
 at home, they say confidently documented, the only juvenile in the world
 to have succeeded.This is the cold fusion. The cold nuclear fusion,
 advocated for decades by scientists not only because it would allow to
 produce nuclear energy without producing temibilissime slag, is a generic
 name given to the alleged nature of nuclear reactions, which would occur at
 pressures and temperatures much lower than those needed for obtain nuclear
 fusion hot, for which are instead necessary temperatures of the order of
 one million kelvin and plasma density very high. Many scientists are
 skeptical: to date, the very existence of these phenomena has not been
 demonstrated conclusively, on the contrary to the prevailing opinion in the
 scientific community is that all the evidence proposed to be due to
 measurement errors or non-nuclear phenomena. The fact is that the boys
 have done the experiment Pistoia, reproducing, as they called the same guys
 they shot a video on Youtube, a star in a jar.Thanks to my father,
 an engineer in 'electronic company - says Matthew, who loves physics and
 experiments since piccolossimo, while Ivan is the computer of the group -
 and Julius Nesti who supported us in logistics, we could set up the garage
 at home mine with all the necessary equipment: voltmeter, ammeter,
 herzometro and what you need to succeed. A basic table for discharge to
 the ground, otherwise it ran the risk of being electrocuted terrible, or
 burned by temperatures in the range of 3-4000 degrees or, again, it
 exploded all over. The experiment, which took place on January 3,
 eventually succeeded after twenty black smoke. The whole thing lasted
 about half an hour, no more and left us amazed, as well as very satisfied. 
 The
 first practical and tangible result of the fusion describe the boys: We
 have produced a soapy liquid that does not produce any toxin and we washed
 their hands. An effect of the experiment, tell Matthew and others, was
 to be put out of televisions and mobile phones due to the strong
 electromagnetic field. At school, classmates and teachers are proud of
 their young scientists, but would point out the teacher of astronomy, they
 did it all by yourself.

  Francis Albonetti

Re: [Vo]:New spongelike structure converts solar energy into steam

[Ken Deboer]

I wonder is this the same phenonomena as that described by Halas's group at
Rice Univ a couple years back?.  They simply focused sunlight onto carbon
black in water and saw water boiling directly off at apparently low temp.
 I briefly reproduced her experiment by a fresnel lens focused on a little
pill bottle with carbon black and it indeed does  generate steam locally
very quickly and vigourously. They planned to use Bill Gates money to make
medical distillers in Africa if I recall.   hmm.
ken


On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 2:01 PM, John Berry berry.joh...@gmail.com wrote:

 Surely it would make a steam punk fans day.


 On Mon, Jul 28, 2014 at 7:49 AM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote:

 Can this system support supercritical steam generation. How hot are the
 hot spots?

 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supercritical_steam_generator



 On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 2:29 PM, Frank roarty fr...@roarty.biz wrote:

 http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/07/140724213957.htm

 *Source:*

 Massachusetts Institute of Technology

 *Summary:*

 A new material structure generates steam by soaking up the sun. The
 structure -- a layer of graphite flakes and an underlying carbon foam -- is
 a porous, insulating material structure that floats on water. When sunlight
 hits the structure's surface, it creates a hotspot in the graphite, drawing
 water up through the material's pores, where it evaporates as steam. The
 brighter the light, the more steam is generated.

Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo] Rossi Effect Not Before June--

[Ken Deboer]

FUTURE?
  I'd like to throw in a couple of general comments on the current trend of
this Forum and LENR in general (Just as a cheerleader, since I am totally
incapable of contributing or even understanding the technical details).
Despite no real evidence of any imminent breakthrough, still, we seem
to be witnessing something like an amorphous landlside of some kind that is
slowly inching us down (up?) towards a preliminary working model of LENR.
The ideas floating around the last several months seem like they are kind
of spiraling around the central kernel of the mystery.  The ideas around
the size and shape of particles (nano and othewise), the role of magnetism,
RF, nanoplasmonics, lattices and the like seems to be taking a (shadowy)
shape and leads us to hope that a working synthesis might not be that far
away.. (We eagerly await too, Dr. Storms new book and work, and Dr. Craven's
 stuff, and MFMP, and others).
  I am reminded of the history of genetics, where a gene was for a long
time thought of as a 'particle of inheritance', b ut without any idea of
what it might physically look like or how it worked.   THe concept of the
NAE, the site of the magic activity on a metal, is analogous (and equally
pregnant as an heuristic tool).  The nature of the gene of course has been
beaten down into its ultimate form, and now the nature of the NAE is being
dissected in somewhat the same manner as the gene was.  There were Nobel
prizes attached to the genetic unraveling and there will be Nobel prizes in
the NAE unraveling.  We would be thrilled if some of 'or guys' would be in
that number.  At the least, there seems to be some definite directions as
to what kind of experimental reactors to test out.


On Fri, May 2, 2014 at 11:39 AM, Bob Cook frobertc...@hotmail.com wrote:

  Yesterday Rossi (on his reader blog)  indicated that the third party
 tests would *not* be reported before June.

 Vortexers have at least another month to speculate on the mechanism of the
 Ni-H Rossi Effect.  However it may be quite bit longer, depending upon
 patent disclosure strategy.  What are the possibilities regarding outing of
 a  theory supported by good data in conjunction with the release of the
 third party report?

 Like Rossi implies in his response to a comment yesterday regarding the
 probability of the Rossi Effect happening naturally,  the design of his
 reactor certainly had some design behind it.  I think Focardi nailed the
 theory and should be hailed appropriately.   Rossi had the wherewithal to
 add some development funds and theory of his own and probably should get
 the Nobel Prize.  I hope it happens soon.

 I am planning a trip to Italy in September and will visit the University
 of Bologna for two days with the objective of talking with folks who knew
 Focardi and are currently working in the field of solid states physics and
 nano technology.  Alain has already asked me to visit the History Dept
 there as well to find out the facts about the death of Bruno which this
 blog discussed a few weeks ago.

 I will report on my trip and interactions.  Vortexers that may have other
 ideas or questions, if so inclined, should present them to me via my own
 email address so that I might address them with the Bologna historians or
 researchers.   Alain has already given me some good ideas and leads.

 Bob Cook

 - Original Message -
 *From:* Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com
 *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com
 *Sent:* Friday, May 02, 2014 9:38 AM
 *Subject:* [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Pasadena: Theater Arts at Caltech
 dramatizes the discovery and debunking of “cold fusion” (bring tomatoes)

 I believe that play has been around for a while. I heard about it years
 ago.

 - Jed

Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo] Rossi Effect Not Before June--

[Ken Deboer]

Whoops, accidentally interrupted my above message.   To conclude:

  That unraveling will, of course, take some great deal more effort, as
well as probably a great deal of time and money, even though we all hope(d)
that it could be carried off by the 'underground'.   Lennart Thomas seems
to have a good understanding of how the Standard Model' of current
business operates and his general approach may yet be necessary.  It seems
likely, in fact, as soon as a little more meat is on the LENR bones (or
Rossi finally drops the bomb) that the huge industry surrounding LENR will
suddenly devleop.  Who will do this is a critical questiion.  I'd rather
not buy my lenr energy from Duke Enerergy or BP.
Cheers, ken


On Fri, May 2, 2014 at 2:55 PM, Ken Deboer barlaz...@gmail.com wrote:

 FUTURE?
   I'd like to throw in a couple of general comments on the current trend
 of this Forum and LENR in general (Just as a cheerleader, since I am
 totally incapable of contributing or even understanding the technical
 details).
 Despite no real evidence of any imminent breakthrough, still, we seem
 to be witnessing something like an amorphous landlside of some kind that is
 slowly inching us down (up?) towards a preliminary working model of LENR.
 The ideas floating around the last several months seem like they are kind
 of spiraling around the central kernel of the mystery.  The ideas around
 the size and shape of particles (nano and othewise), the role of magnetism,
 RF, nanoplasmonics, lattices and the like seems to be taking a (shadowy)
 shape and leads us to hope that a working synthesis might not be that far
 away.. (We eagerly await too, Dr. Storms new book and work, and Dr. Craven's
  stuff, and MFMP, and others).
   I am reminded of the history of genetics, where a gene was for a long
 time thought of as a 'particle of inheritance', b ut without any idea of
 what it might physically look like or how it worked.   THe concept of the
 NAE, the site of the magic activity on a metal, is analogous (and equally
 pregnant as an heuristic tool).  The nature of the gene of course has been
 beaten down into its ultimate form, and now the nature of the NAE is being
 dissected in somewhat the same manner as the gene was.  There were Nobel
 prizes attached to the genetic unraveling and there will be Nobel prizes in
 the NAE unraveling.  We would be thrilled if some of 'or guys' would be in
 that number.  At the least, there seems to be some definite directions as
 to what kind of experimental reactors to test out.


 On Fri, May 2, 2014 at 11:39 AM, Bob Cook frobertc...@hotmail.com wrote:

  Yesterday Rossi (on his reader blog)  indicated that the third party
 tests would *not* be reported before June.

 Vortexers have at least another month to speculate on the mechanism of
 the Ni-H Rossi Effect.  However it may be quite bit longer, depending upon
 patent disclosure strategy.  What are the possibilities regarding outing of
 a  theory supported by good data in conjunction with the release of the
 third party report?

 Like Rossi implies in his response to a comment yesterday regarding the
 probability of the Rossi Effect happening naturally,  the design of his
 reactor certainly had some design behind it.  I think Focardi nailed the
 theory and should be hailed appropriately.   Rossi had the wherewithal to
 add some development funds and theory of his own and probably should get
 the Nobel Prize.  I hope it happens soon.

 I am planning a trip to Italy in September and will visit the University
 of Bologna for two days with the objective of talking with folks who knew
 Focardi and are currently working in the field of solid states physics and
 nano technology.  Alain has already asked me to visit the History Dept
 there as well to find out the facts about the death of Bruno which this
 blog discussed a few weeks ago.

 I will report on my trip and interactions.  Vortexers that may have other
 ideas or questions, if so inclined, should present them to me via my own
 email address so that I might address them with the Bologna historians or
 researchers.   Alain has already given me some good ideas and leads.

 Bob Cook

 - Original Message -
 *From:* Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com
 *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com
 *Sent:* Friday, May 02, 2014 9:38 AM
 *Subject:* [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Pasadena: Theater Arts at Caltech
 dramatizes the discovery and debunking of “cold fusion” (bring tomatoes)

 I believe that play has been around for a while. I heard about it years
 ago.

 - Jed

Re: [Vo]:Resonant photons for CNT ring current

[Ken Deboer]

Not sure if these recent papers on potential of graphene arrangements would
be helpful, but FWItW here are a few:
Huang B-L et al 2012. Persistent currents on a graphene ring with armchair
edges. J. Phys. Cond. Matter 24:

Dubey S. et al 2013, Tunable superlattice in graphene to control the number
of Dirac points. Nano Lett 13:3990-5.

Bludov YV et al 2013. A primer on surface plasmon polaritons in graphene.
Intl J. Modern Phys. B, 27 (10)

Li, T. et al 2012 Femtosecond population inversion and stimulated emisssion
of dense Dirac fermions. Phys. Rev Lett 108:167401

Hasmimoto, T.  Graphene edge spins: Spintronics and magnetism in graphene
nanomeshes. Nanosystems: Physics, Chem. Math: 5:25-8.

I only read a couple, (and problably wouldn't have understood much of them
anyway), and not sure what it may mean,  but got that the zigzag edge forms
are ferromagnetic and very avid hydrogen 'magnets'?

Cheers all,   ken


On Tue, Mar 4, 2014 at 11:07 PM, Bob Cook frobertc...@hotmail.com wrote:

  Rossi may not have been smart enough, but what about Focardi?



 - Original Message -
 *From:* Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com
 *To:* vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
 *Sent:* Tuesday, March 04, 2014 9:03 PM
 *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:Resonant photons for CNT ring current

  All nanoparticles of a certain size have a negative index of refraction
 as regards to the long wavelengths of infrared light. Short wavelengths are
 absorbed. It's a matter of geometry.



 A mix of particles of various sizes is needed in a Ni/H reactor to form an
 amalgam.


 This may be why BIG particles are needed to absorb the infrared light and
 that infrared energy once absorbed in the big particles is passed via
 dipole motion to the smaller particles witch usually reflect that long
 wavelength  light.

 It is my evolving opinion that predestination of some sort was involved in
 the Ni/H reactor design because Rossi cannot be this smart.








 On Tue, Mar 4, 2014 at 11:34 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote:

  SPP happen at the interface between a dielectric a material with a
 *negative* index of refraction.(a metal the reflect light).

 should read

 SPP happen at the interface between a dielectric and a material with a
 *negative* index of refraction.(a metal the reflect light).


 On Tue, Mar 4, 2014 at 11:32 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote:

  SPP happen at the interface between a dielectric a material with a
 *negative* index of refraction.(a metal the reflect light).

 Do CNTs qualify. They must if the Chinese say so.

  *Negative Refractive Index Metasurfaces for Enhanced Biosensing *


  *Research as follows:*

  Inorganic ultrathin nanocomposites include metals and metal
 composites, various oxides, semiconductor materials, different inorganic
 compounds but also pure elements. Various metals were reported as
 freestanding nanomembrane materials, including chromium, titanium,
 tungsten, nickel, aluminum, silver, gold, platinum; most of these being
 structural metals having both electromagnetic and mechanical functions at
 the same time. Elemental semiconductor nanomembranes were also reported,
 and among them, an especially important mention belongs to silicon
 freestanding structures, which are connected with the most widespread and
 mature technology. Silicon with a thickness ranging between 10 nm and 100
 nm was mentioned for instance in the context of nanomembrane-based
 stretchable electronics [95]. Buckled silicon nanoribbons and full
 nanomembranes were also reported [96]. *Materials **2011*, *4 **7 *

 *An important material for nanomembranes in CBB sensor applications is
 carbon, which may be used in membranes in the form of carbon nanotubes [97]
 or as freestanding, ultrathin diamond or diamandoid film [97]. *The
 excellent mechanical properties of such carbon-based materials make them
 convenient for their use as reinforcements for the nanometer-thin
 freestanding structures, but also as the dielectric part of the
 metasurfaces. Other classes of inorganic freestanding nanomembranes include
 oxide, nitride and carbide structures, many of them used either as
 wide-bandgap semiconductors or insulators. Silicon dioxide nanomembranes
 [98] are among the important ones, again because of the widely available
 and mature silicon technology. Other materials include silicon nitride,
 titanium dioxide, gallium arsenide, *etc*. A special class of interest
 for this review belongs to plasmonic materials. These include Drude metals.
 Freestanding gold films with a thickness below 100 nm have been known for a
 long time [99]. In our experiments we fabricated chromium-containing
 nanomembranes down to 8 nm thickness and with areas of tens of millimeters
 square [94,100]. Another possibility to obtain freestanding nanomembranes
 with plasmonic properties is to utilize non-metallic Drude materials like
 transparent conductive oxides (e.g., tin oxide, indium oxide, *etc.*)
 [101,102]. Symmetric plasmonic nanomembranes may be 

Re: [Vo]:Christopher H. Cooper

[Ken Deboer]

RE C. Cooper
Hi, Found out a little bit about Chris Cooper.  He was actually the founder
of Seldon Technologies, which is based on his work with CNT's. He was
trained in nuclear physics and may have a Ph., D. in it. He ( and maybe his
father? William  Cooper) have fairly recently written over a dozen patent
apps, mostly  on CNTs in various applications.  The water purification
technology, which is quite straightforward is described in this paper
DeVolder M.  et al 2013, Carbon nanotubes: Present and future commercial
applications. Sci 339:534-9.
  I have been following various aspects of graphene for a little while for
bionanotechnology apps, but mostly for the hell of it, but also always
looking for its possible use as  lattice materials, some of which was
kindled by Jones' comments a while back on silicon carbide. Graphene can be
made a number of ways, some of which involves splitting of carbon nanotubes
to form ribbons, including tunable ones, 'armchair' and the like. It can
also be made directly from silicon carbide (Peng et al 2013. Direct
transformation of amorphous silicon carbide into graphene under low
temperature and ambient pressure. Scientific reports 3(1148) FREE).   Also
they form Dirac cones which I gather, although I know nothing about them
myself, are interesting.
cheers, ken


On Sat, Mar 1, 2014 at 10:10 AM, Bob Cook frobertc...@hotmail.com wrote:

 Fran and Jones--

 Maybe they make a thin substrate ( that H diffuses through, gouge out a
 line with a laser beam or electron beam, lay in the nanotubes and then make
 layers of the nanotube filled substrate film, sandwich these between good
 heat conductors with high magnetic susceptibility and finally  fuse the
 assembly together in a plate-like array under temperature and pressure.

 That could do away with finding a geometric compound that naturally forms
 alternating geometries.

 Bob
 - Original Message - From: Frank roarty fr...@roarty.biz
 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
 Sent: Saturday, March 01, 2014 6:37 AM
 Subject: RE: [Vo]:Christopher H. Cooper



  Jones, Yes, I agree.. the paper from Cornell re catalytic action only
 occurring at openings and defects in nano tubes would also lend support to
 your suspicion that he may be legit. He is in the correct industry and may
 have discovered a way to increase the defects thru self assembly that
 would
 surpass the random nature of the tubules approach. We know water molecules
 do some unique alignments when drawn thru a nano filter and we know
 multiwall nanotubes basically self assemble so perhaps he has married
 tubes
 to some geometric compound that naturally forms alternating geometries
 inside the nanotube..basically the Haisch- Modell tunnels but much smaller
 and self assembled.
 Fran

 _
 From: Jones Beene [mailto:jone...@pacbell.net]
 Sent: Friday, February 28, 2014 3:37 PM
 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
 Subject: [Vo]:Christopher H. Cooper


 Prolific inventor, possibly in LENR: Christopher H. Cooper

 https://www.google.com/search?tbo=ptbm=ptshl=enq=
 ininventor:%22Christophe
 r+H.+Cooper%22

 Is Chris legit ... or is he more of a patent troll?

 Over 200 hits and no known data or publications that I can find to back up
 the claims... at least the excess energy claims. No papers on LENR-CANR or
 elsewhere pop up on google.

 Here is why I ask - many of his filings are definitely LENR based, but
 there
 is not much evidence that any have been reduced to practice. Most of them
 seem to have been filed after the Rossi information about tubules or
 whatever it was.

 https://www.google.com/patents/US20110255644

 However, he appears to be affiliated with a water filtration company,
 Seldon
 Technologies of Vermont, which seems to be a player in CNT filters - so it
 is quite possible that he stumbled onto the energy anomaly via other RD.

 I would love to see the data - if there is any.

Re: [Vo]:Small business attempts

[Ken Deboer]

SMALL
  Lennart,
I couldn't agree more with your take.   As a serial biotech entrepeneur, a
couple of which went fairly big for a while, the NEED to get rather large
too quickly doomed 3 of them.  I always said that we had a million dollar
appetite on a beer budget. Small is good.
ken


On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 4:29 PM, Lennart Thornros lenn...@thornros.comwrote:

 I did not vote for Obama. I do not like his politics very much. The
 problem is that I dislike most of everything out of the mouth of a
 politician. Therefore I will defend Obama a little. It is not his fault.

 Reality is that it is hard to start a business.
 Even worse it is 25 times harder than most people can handle to make it
 survive. (Can be backed with stats:.)

  So what is the problem?
 I have an answer and it is a little of a repetition. We need to change our
 philosophy. Bigger is not better.Small is beautiful.
 Unfortunately your attempts to start a business was made very difficult by
 the rules/laws that asks you to behave like a major corporation from day
 one. It does not support your ambitions because politicians thinks small
 businesses can not do much good. They do not understand that small flexible
 organizations can do what large (GM, GE, IBM) has no department for because
 it is so small. The politician reads all the time that all growth has been
 accomplished by small medium sized companies. They just refuse to draw the
 conclusion that small companies are good for the society. The reason is
 that being part of the most enormous bureaucracy we have make them
 defensive to small ill-defined entities. They rather talk to one big bank
 for example and think that the rest will follow suite.
 In today's fast and reliable communication/information world, it is easy
 to organize small entities so that they can accomplish what large
 organizations can do just as well and at a fraction of the cost.
 Unfortunately this is a political problem so I can see your frustration.
 You know how the politician will see at least you have my idea above. What
 is a little amazing is that among people in Vortex, with such an open mind
 to physics, cannot see the need for a more small scale business and public
 sector utilizing all the modern technology you guys have created. Think
 about any project you have been involved in. Is it not true that there were
 just a few individuals that took on the job and whole horde of bureaucrats
 who wanted to have their say for reasons hard to determine and increasing
 with the level of success in the project. I promise you were seeing the
 situation right. It was just easier to just ignore the BS and concentrate
 on the real issues while the bureaucrats dealt with how to get some credit
 from the work.





 Best Regards ,
 Lennart Thornros

 www.StrategicLeadershipSac.com
 lenn...@thornros.com
 +1 916 436 1899
 6140 Horseshoe Bar Road Suite G, Loomis CA 95650

 Productivity is never an accident. It is always the result of a
 commitment to excellence, intelligent planning, and focused effort. PJM


 On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 7:40 AM, fznidar...@aol.com wrote:

 I voted for Obama and I listened to what he said.  He said to start a
 small business and hire someone.  Its the thing to do after you have
 retired.  I have tried.

  Cold fusion proved to be to hard of a nut for me to crack and I backed
 off.

  I next built a cell phone adapter for older cars.  I was cheep,worked
 well, and could possibly save lifes.   It was the kind of product that
 Obama ordered.  I built and tested it.  A video is below.

  http://www.angelfire.com/scifi2/zpt/blog/blog.html

  Heath Kit almost took it as a kit. Too bad they went bankrupt.  The
 product worked but failed in the marketplace.
 Consumer products are too cheep for home manufacture.  I could not make
 the device by myself for $9 and sell it.  No large manufacturer wanted it.
  Darn!

  Next I tried a mining relay.  It detected the condition of an
 open ground wire.  Joy Loader invited me to their office and I presented a
 dog a pony show.  Companies will let you in if you have something.  Once
 again my timing was not right and the coal industry had other priorities.
  The detector they had was good enough.  I was 20 years to late with this
 product.   I have no video of this.

  Next I wrote books; one in physics, one in electronics, and one
 in computer science.  These products are out but they only generate $40 per
 month.  They are not a commercial success.  I thank you amazon and the many
 other who have helped me.


 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

  Now I am into recyclable bottle detectors.  I have a technical problem.

  Dear President Obama.  It is not easy to start a
 small business in today's environment.

  Frank Z

Re: [Vo]:BLP Video 2hours from January 28th Demonstration

[Ken Deboer]

OT: 3D printer

Just thought it may be of interest at some point, last week I saw that
carbon fibres can now be printed 3D.
A related item is that EERE (DOE) is going to fund research into biomass,
 'green', production of carbon fibres (think nanotubes, graphene) to the
tune of $12 million.

regards ,
ken
(PS.  Enjoying the discussions on theory and all; Go, team)




On Mon, Feb 3, 2014 at 12:54 PM, Ron Kita chiralex.k...@gmail.com wrote:

 Greetings Vortex-L,

 Not sure IF this is new:
 http://www.blacklightpower.com/whats-new/

 2 plus hours of Dr Mills.

 Respectfully,
 Ron Kita, Chiralex
 Doylestown PA   31 F snow

Re: [Vo]:Biofuel from Algae in Minutes

[Ken Deboer]

I agree entirely with your assessment, James.   10 years ago I was
intimately engaged in biofuels,raising my own and  even starting the first
Company in the state to get a biofuel production plant up. However, in
collaboration with various colleagues in academia and commerce, after a
year of discussions, conferences etc we very deliberately gave up the whole
idea.  A  couple smallish biodiesel plants did form around this time, and
all went belly  up very soon, for the very good economic (and also
environmental) reasons you mention.  Most people now are convinced that
biofuels may very well make a nice small niche market in some places, but
never a major fuel contributor. (Cold fusion cars need no biofuel!)
cheers, ken


On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 11:37 AM, James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote:

 BTW:  For a humorous insight into the DoE grant process, the UofMI
 technology was paired with the aforementioned biomass production technology
 in the proposal to the DoE's Algaoleum initiative but the proposal was
 rejected.  The reason given for rejecting the proposal was that the biomass
 production technology (Algasol's patented photobioreactor) it was prone to
 contamination of the algae species.

 For the punch-line, here is an excerpt from that proposal:

 Structurally, the PBRs are enclosed flexible bags made out of polymer
 film... the Algasol PBRs are inherently independent of each other; each can
 serve as its own laboratory vessel.


 I mean, come on



 On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 12:16 PM, James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote:

 Indeed, it was the U of Michigan crew.


 On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 11:17 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.netwrote:

  Was this old story related to the grant in question ?



 http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/04/100422153943.htm



 Not sure how this “new” technology from PNNL is very different.





 *From:* James Bowery



 Coincidentally I had just, literally a minute ago, sent off a query
 about this PNNL work to some coinvestigators in a grant proposal to the DoE
 for the production of biocrude because the PNNL process sounded so similar,
 I wanted to find out if there was any distinction.



 The biggest problem remains the sufficiently economic production of
 biomass -- and to the best of my knowledge after looking at that problem
 for the past 20 years -- there is only one technology capable for that.



 Brad Lowe wrote:

 Some links:
 http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/12/131218100141.htm

 http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/12/18/Scientists-Manufacture-Crude-Oil-The-End-of-Peak-Oil
 http://www.genifuel.com/

Re: [Vo]:Biofuel from Algae in Minutes

[Ken Deboer]

Maybe so, but burning ANYthing for energy forever, is not a great idea.


On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 12:06 PM, James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote:

 The short list of algal biomass production cost problems:

 1) Capital cost per area of capturing insolation.
 2) Operation of energy to sufficiently concentrate biomass from the growth
 medium.
 3) Insurance against hail and other damaging weather conditions, to the
 capital equipment capturing insolation..

 There are more but these have been the blocking factors in all systems
 that have actually gone to the trouble of demonstrating how much biomass
 they produce per investment.



 On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 12:55 PM, James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote:

 The biomass production cost problem has been solved.  I don't know when
 the world will wake up.


 On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 12:47 PM, Ken Deboer barlaz...@gmail.com wrote:

 I agree entirely with your assessment, James.   10 years ago I was
 intimately engaged in biofuels,raising my own and  even starting the first
 Company in the state to get a biofuel production plant up. However, in
 collaboration with various colleagues in academia and commerce, after a
 year of discussions, conferences etc we very deliberately gave up the whole
 idea.  A  couple smallish biodiesel plants did form around this time, and
 all went belly  up very soon, for the very good economic (and also
 environmental) reasons you mention.  Most people now are convinced that
 biofuels may very well make a nice small niche market in some places, but
 never a major fuel contributor. (Cold fusion cars need no biofuel!)
 cheers, ken


 On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 11:37 AM, James Bowery jabow...@gmail.comwrote:

 BTW:  For a humorous insight into the DoE grant process, the UofMI
 technology was paired with the aforementioned biomass production technology
 in the proposal to the DoE's Algaoleum initiative but the proposal was
 rejected.  The reason given for rejecting the proposal was that the biomass
 production technology (Algasol's patented photobioreactor) it was prone to
 contamination of the algae species.

 For the punch-line, here is an excerpt from that proposal:

 Structurally, the PBRs are enclosed flexible bags made out of polymer
 film... the Algasol PBRs are inherently independent of each other; each can
 serve as its own laboratory vessel.


 I mean, come on



 On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 12:16 PM, James Bowery jabow...@gmail.comwrote:

 Indeed, it was the U of Michigan crew.


 On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 11:17 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.netwrote:

  Was this old story related to the grant in question ?



 http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/04/100422153943.htm



 Not sure how this “new” technology from PNNL is very different.





 *From:* James Bowery



 Coincidentally I had just, literally a minute ago, sent off a query
 about this PNNL work to some coinvestigators in a grant proposal to the 
 DoE
 for the production of biocrude because the PNNL process sounded so 
 similar,
 I wanted to find out if there was any distinction.



 The biggest problem remains the sufficiently economic production of
 biomass -- and to the best of my knowledge after looking at that problem
 for the past 20 years -- there is only one technology capable for that.



 Brad Lowe wrote:

 Some links:
 http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/12/131218100141.htm

 http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/12/18/Scientists-Manufacture-Crude-Oil-The-End-of-Peak-Oil
 http://www.genifuel.com/

Re: [Vo]: ATTENTION: request for expertise...

[Ken Deboer]

Glad to see interest stilll in the very much needed noninvasive glucose
testing and wish you all much success.   While I didn't work directly with
methods for glucose tests or with diabetes particularly,  I did work, a
long time ago for sure, on related subjects and found maybe some things you
might want to keep in mind as you test the reliability and variability of
glucose and blood flow measurements. In a word, blood flow, on
which accurate blood analysis depends,  is maddeningly variable, as y'all
are probably keenly aware.   For that reason, I'd suggest you pay close
attention to the biological sources, as wells as purely the instrumental
sources.I am not terribly surprised that you only got 20% reliability,
Harry.   Temp, circadian rhythms, diets, sleep, various associated
diseases, mental state, you name it, alll produced in our work very
troublesome results, and in fact, nothing ever got published.


On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 10:59 AM, MarkI-ZeroPoint zeropo...@charter.netwrote:

 Ol' Bab,
 Beg to differ:  our noninvasive tech would allow you to test 100 times a
 day
 if you wanted, without ANY pain, ever, and for pennies/test. The device
 would cost a third of what you spend on test-strips each year, and it'll
 last for 3 to 5 years; do the math...
 -Mark

 -Original Message-
 From: David L Babcock [mailto:ol...@rochester.rr.com]
 Sent: Saturday, October 26, 2013 6:28 AM
 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
 Subject: Re: [Vo]: ATTENTION: request for expertise...

 Beg to differ:  We are having a mad desire for CHEAPER blood testing.
 $1.20/stab is too much at 3 to 4 per day.  Medicare only covers 2.

 The pain?  Very little, often none.

 Ol' Bab



 On 10/25/2013 1:15 PM, Terry Blanton wrote:
  I ran across this article which might be of interest:
 
  http://www.pddnet.com/news/2013/10/measuring-blood-sugar-light
 
  On Sun, Oct 9, 2011 at 2:29 AM, Mark Iverson-ZeroPoint
  zeropo...@charter.net wrote:
  Attention all in the Vort collective:
 
  I hope you all don't mind if I take a few bytes of bandwidth to
  request some help with the RD I've been working on... which is
  noninvasive blood glucose measurement using RF/microwaves.  The
  attached pic shows the results for just one of the diabetics tested;
  for this one we could get a good calibration on 82 data points (taken
  in Feb 2010), and then the calibrated equation accurately estimated
  the remaining 120 samples which were taken thru March.  Follow-up
  testing in June also gave good results with little degradation.
  Predictive accuracy over time is a major accomplishment in this work.
 
  We have a database of ~87GB, most of which was on five Type-1
  diabetics over the course of 2 months; clinical lab-grade blood
  chemistries for most of that data.  During RF scans we are also
  taking skin temperature every 100 millisecs...
 
  Our investor has given us until the end of the year to improve our
  calibration/predictive algorithms as much as possible before we
  market the technology for the next phase of development.  We are
  currently at
  +-20% accuracy for ~80% of our samples (~1000 samples on the 5 test
  subjects).  The technology is not optimized, so this may be all we
  can hope for with the current sensor design and algorithms.  But, we
  need to use the time left to make whatever improvements we can...
 
  I am in search of some very bright individuals with expertise in
  mathematical modeling and bioelectromagnetics; perhaps statistics,
  but targeted toward medical device testing.  Knowledge of RF
  Scattering Parameters (S-Params) which come out of a modern Network
  Analyzer (Agilent
  PNA-5230) would also be very helpful. We already have some very
  extensive MatLab code which builds mathematical models, one term at a
  time, and it may be better to add to this rather than creating from
  scratch.  IF you're very competent and like a real challenge, and
  want a break from the E-Cat fiasco, then please contact me @:
  m...@rfstx.com
  or
  markiver...@charter.net
 
  There are now 366 million diabetics in the world, and they have been
  in need of a truly painless way to measure their blood sugar.  You
  could be one of the keys to solving the challenges which make this a
 reality for them...
 
  Thanks for your time...
 
  Now back to your regularly scheduled E-Cat frustration!
  :-)
  -Mark Iverson
 
 

[Vo]:new topic

[ken deboer]

  Perhaps I'm the last person on this planetary orbit to find this out, but
I just discovered a new free Journal. Scientific Reports.  Authors pay
through the nose, but content is open. It's peer reviewed from Nature Pub.
Group.  A sample title is Direct nitrogen fixation at the edges of
graphene nanoparticles as efficient electrocalalyst for energy conversion.
 by I-Y Zeon et al,  Scientific Reports, July 23, 2013.
Interesting.

Re: [Vo]:MFMP on a possible independent report of DGT's Hyperion

[ken deboer]

Re:  Bets

Nicely put, Steven. RIP.
ken


On Sat, Jul 27, 2013 at 12:28 PM, DJ Cravens djcrav...@hotmail.com wrote:

 yes, there is market inefficiency due to risk aversion.
 Black swans exist.

 D2


 --
 From: orionwo...@charter.net
 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
 Subject: RE: [Vo]:MFMP on a possible independent report of DGT's Hyperion
 Date: Sat, 27 Jul 2013 13:09:49 -0500


 From Blaze:



 ...



  In terms of my credentials though, which might be more interesting,  I
 spent about the

  last 8 years or so on Intrade making buckets of money on making big bets
 on highly

  improbable events like this which came true.   The opportunities for
 profit there were

  incredible. Some examples, I made money on Obama on McCain winning their

  primaries by making early bets (admittedly though I had hedged a bit,
 but was over

  all long on them).



 Buckets of money. you say.



 It's obvious to me that it takes a large and well-integrated skill set to
 make buckets of money betting on improbable events. (On a related note,
 one of my mutual funds is a contra fund. It often seems to do better than
 the average fund.)



 On a related topic, earlier in my life I tried my hand in the commodity
 markets. I suspect trading commodities shares many similarities with the
 kind of skill set you have acquired. In a sense, the commodities you bet on
 are futures. It's anyone's guess whether the types of futures you buy into
 will ripen or go sour when it comes time to cash in.



 As for me and my commodity trading adventures, I'll grant you that it was
 a fun and exciting time for me... while it lasted. Eventually, I lost all
 the money I had set aside for this adventure. I'm sure I lost it all due to
 my own lack of having acquired a sufficient collection of skill sets, and
 the fact that I didn't possess an appropriate psychological propensity for
 immediate trading, and finally not having timely data in which to make
 proper assessments on whether to bury or short the commodity.



 I did manage to eventually rationalize my financial losses as having
 acquired some valuable experiences in the art of trading futures. It’s not
 for the faint of heart! Of course, while I paid my tuition fees I flunked
 the course. On cannot pass at everything they dabble in. ;-) In the
 aftermath I eventually learned that many professional commodity traders
 manage to stay in business because there's a constant influx of newbies
 (just like me) who come in with the goal of making money. What typically
 happens, however, is that the vast majority of these newbies end up
 transferring bulk of their bank accounts into the accounts of the
 professionals. An irony that did not escape me was the fact that the only
 way the professionals tend to stay in business is to constantly sell to
 naive newbies a manufactured hope that there is money to be made in trading
 futures. In fact, that's how all forms of professional gambling manage to
 survive. Granted, an extremely small percentage of brand new newbie
 traders actually DO end up become good at the skill, but as someone was
 known to have sed: A sucker is born every minute.



 In the end I think the biggest [moral] lesson I learned completing this
 particular course was to ask myself, what kind of a contribution was I
 actually making to the world? The more I thought about it, not very much. I
 then asked myself, what if I *had* become successful? What would I have
 then been able to put my grave stone?



 *STEVEN VINCENT JOHNSON*

 1952 - 2031



 HIs contribution to the world was that

 he made a lot of money extracting it from the wallets of others

 who were also trying to make a lot of money

 attempting to do the same thing to him.

 * * *

 RIP



 Just as in the fine art of betting, commodity trading works by profiting
 from the losses of others. Inculcating this realization did not set well
 with me. In a sense I actually became relieved of the fact that I had lost
 money. It meant that I had not profited from the financial losses of
 others. I realize this was a rationalization on my part. Nevertheless, my
 own losses left me with a clearer conscience.



 Based on my own memories I will grant you that it probably IS a rush to
 realize how smart one must be in order to take money (willing so) from
 others, and to be able to do it in a perfectly legal way! The fact is that
 a capitalistic economy needs transactional activity of this sort in order
 for the markets to remain dynamic and liquid. So... in a sense, THATS, the
 service traders and betters are contributing to the system. Hey! It's
 just money. ...hopefully, YOUR, money, and not mine. Nothing personal!



 For some inexplicable reason, I don’t think I personally would feel
 comfortable advertising the acquisition of such a skill set on my
 gravestone.



 But by all means, have fun with your buckets of money.



 Regards,

 Steven Vincent Johnson

 svjart.OrionWorks.com

 

Re: [Vo]:interview re a sensitive subject

[ken deboer]

Re Eric's question, what species.  The species I had in mind (armchair
style) specifically are chimps, bonobos and elephants. I remember odd bits
of information (yes, several on TV, in fact) relating how strange
elephants, for example, act at times when a herd member dies, even a long
time later. I recall seeing pictures of chimps, all alone, doing slow,
dreamy dances, pointing to the sky, or tracing their fingers 'thoughtfully'
along a rock wall.  Just about everyone who has seen examples of animals
doing disturbing things like this, get the eerie feeling, that these guys
are thinking pretty deep stuff.  For any biologist, it is no stretch,
knowing the deepest biological similarities, (i.e. 98% DNA homology with
the great apes) to imagine what a thin line there is.   It shouldn't be
construed that, notwithstanding that I am a (old) physiologist, that I have
any especial expertise in ethology, ecology, neurobiology or similar animal
psychology disciplines upon which to base my speculations on the mental
development of species, nor have I read any substantial amount of this
literature. It will be one of Man's most fascinating adventures, however,
to see the biological (physical) bases of human and animal intelligence
explicated by neurobiological measurements in the not far off future.  One
paper I did run into the other day that jibes with other, similar
literature I encountered over the decades,  may interest some is   : Lynn,
Franks, and Savage-Rumbaugh, 2008.  Precursors of morality in the use of
the symbols good and bad in two bonobos and a chimpanzeeLanguage 
Communication 28:213-224.
best regards, ken


On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 1:29 AM, Alain Sepeda alain.sep...@gmail.comwrote:

 It remind me the doctor who wahs taking care of Kim Jung Hill (or
 another...who died recently...).
 He said that that man was normal.

 It is a place where prisoners in reeducation camp are executed by bath in
 melted metal (heard in a TV document talking of Mengele replicators from
 WW2 to now).
 they execute people that have tried to escape and that Chinese police
 bring back to death (when local mafia do not enslave them).

 This man was normal, sensible to cinema... he live in a system of deep
 terror were not being monstrous mean you will be monstrously treated. You
 cannot judge why people may collaborate with horror, if you ignore the fear.

 Science, with less physical violence, is a similar network of communities.
 You are not bathed in melted steel, but covered with horse manure, and
 executed by public panel and scientific press.

 I'm a corp executive, and I know professionally, like many economists know
 for countries, that the problem is not the individuals (who have
 intelligence, risk analysis capacities, good will, empathy)  but the
 organization, with intelligent individual who adapt to the psychiatric
 hospital they live in.

 What thomas Kuhn explain is that it is required for the normal science
 to explore the known land ... Without the blinders, scientist would lose
 much time in questioning all.
 You need scientific terrorists to explore beyond the frontier.
 Taleb says that it is the job of entrepreneur, garage inventors,
 practitioners, lab or field engineers, and other lower species that really
 do the job.

 the crisis today is not because of bad normal science, but because on a
 huge monolithic, rationalized, big science . we need small island of
 science, independent funding criteria, various independent journals with
 independent policies...
 not a cartel of opinion leaders, some planet-wide comon criteria to judge
 what is good or bad...

 globally taleb says that big animal, like western science, are fragile.

 LENR may put it at risk, like AGW... people will lose confidence in that
 big monopoly of truth.
 Big science think it is too big to fail, but I'm afraid it is too big to
 save.
 Science culture, like banks, or nuclear plant, tankers, have to be small
 so a catastrophe have a minor impact. There will always hapen catastrophe,
 good or bad, just have not to break the system.



 2013/6/21 James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com

 When normal is insane, what does extremism mean?


 On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 12:49 AM, Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.comwrote:

 Dear Ken,

 special thanks for your nice answer. It is my duty to
 write an editorial regarding the feedback of my Scientism
 paper.
 Peter


 On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 8:31 AM, Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.comwrote:

 On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 3:27 PM, ken deboer barlaz...@gmail.comwrote:

 our near relatives ... clearly possess ... manifestations of high
 mental activity, ... even a primitive and undeveloped sense of mysticism 
 or
 protoreligion.


 I'm curious in what species this has been discovered.

 Eric




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

Re: [Vo]:interview re a sensitive subject

[ken deboer]

 I'm not sure if this is the right way to reply to Peter's  recent blog
guess I'll find out.

Dear Peter,
   Your little essay was rather nicley framed and appropriate at any time.
I especially smiled at your explanation of extremism, which I think has
some truth to it.  Scientism, mysticism, and many other isms, are as you
say, very often taken beyond extremism and constitutes a 'bad' and inimical
twist in the affairs of man.  Like many of you, I have encountered mad
scientists' who proclaim their truth and insist that it, and it alone
should be followed pretty much exactly.  They are, in actual fact, simply
then acting as idealogues.   They take their place among the myriad other
ideologues, mostly religious, but also various other, too often fanatical
cults, groups, organizations, beurocracies, etc who throughout history have
maintained themselves in more or less control of large segments of society
(or energietically tried to).  In a word, scientists are people;  with all
that that entails and implies.

   As a biologist, it is expected that I see our species in context of our
planet's living world.  Man as a species (nowperforce the God species)
possesses the  magic emergent property of complex mental, non-material,
activity, self awareness, culture, etc.  We all know that this gift
is bound by, comes from, and relies solely on, the common earthly
biological system;  in fact, it all resides in the evolved central nervous
system that was inherited out of parts of the Universe.

   However, Everyone does not, in fact,  know this; or we do not believe
it, or are forgetful of it.  It is so very curious that this most
important, really  most obvious feature of our whole existence is so
oblivously taken for granted and for the most part forgotten entirely for
long stretches, or entirely.  Similarly, we all 'know' that some of our
fellow animals also have capable central nervous systems, and our near
relatives are, in fact, exceedingly smart. They clearly possess sefl
awareness, culture, and many other manifestations of high mental activity,
usch as society, compassion, even a primitive and undeveloped sense of
mysticism or protoreligion.  It is quite an obvious biological fact that
some of these animals are well equipped to, infutre, evolve exactly the
same kind and level of mental acrobatics as humans-- and they surely
will!

  It should be  obvious too, that Life consists of  moment-to-moment
continous series of external stimuli interacting with our nervous systems.
In essence, for us and our cousins, everything begins and relies on the
incomprehensibly complex multitude of neruonal firings going on inside our
head.  In the end, some of these 'firings' leads some wolves to coordinate
with others to decide to kill a moose for their all important well being.
Some other neural patterns, in humans, results in a loud prayer to their
preferred God, or in shooting a grouse for dinner, or in mass murders,  etc
etc.
   So, as has been eloquently expounded by generations of poets, mystics,
religious and other writers, we do, as a human species have a fairly clear
view of ourselves floating, apparently alone, on a globe in a huge
unverse.  Significantly, what people also have (along with many of the less
far-along species, like wolf packs, chimpanzee bands, or elephants and
others) is a seemingly intermittent, hazy floating, and often subconscious
, understanding that we are alive and that our continued existence is bound
up with our surroundings,  or our pack, or band or tribe, or flock.

   To Peter's plaint then, my point might be that we of mankind are all of
a feather, and will hang together, or separately.  In the meantime,
however, the incredible variation among individuals ensures that messy
evolution (biological as well as socia) will continue to happen;   Thus
unfortunately ensuring that the lives of individuals, and their
interactions will continue to be, at various times and places bloody, or
brutish, sometimes sublime, sometimes pleasant, but commonly uneven and
uncertain. I believe we are making progess but--.



On Sun, Jun 16, 2013 at 5:31 AM, Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com wrote:

 Dear Readers,

 I have just published:
 http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2013/06/lenr-and-scientism.html
 It is a proof that I don't fear sensitive, somewhat even nasty subjects
 and I try to
 make an interview with you all regarding the present and the future of
 LENR.
 I hope to learn from your feedback. Please surprise me with your
 promptitude and sincerity
 Peter

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

Re: [Vo]:I confess

[ken deboer]

RE;   Font
 I for one can readily tolerate font EXCURSIONS.  Especially since the
earlier thread on it was absolutely hilarious.  Alan's instant classic
like a car full of screaming clowns was itself worth twice the size. Made
my day


On Wed, Jun 5, 2013 at 10:41 AM, DJ Cravens djcrav...@hotmail.com wrote:

 if you think some else's font is to large it is best to be
 forgiving/understanding and then change your screen magnification.  You
 never know what they may have to use to type/read



 --
 Date: Thu, 6 Jun 2013 00:31:33 +1200
 Subject: Re: [Vo]:I confess
 From: berry.joh...@gmail.com
 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com

 Well that didn't last long.
 Comic Sans must be your default.

 Also your font is still a bit large.

 Not that there is anything wrong with that.

 John

 On Wed, Jun 5, 2013 at 11:45 PM, Roger B rogerbi...@hotmail.com wrote:

 So, my idea is still viable?   (:-)

 Roger

 --
 Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2013 01:38:47 -0400

 Subject: Re: [Vo]:I confess
 From: hveeder...@gmail.com
 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com

Re: [Vo]:Rossi E-Cat HT shows excess heat from H gas + Ni powder making Cu over days, three cautious multiday runs: Rich Murray 2013.05.22

[ken deboer]

I'm confused by the title  you use, H gas + Ni powder making Cu over
days.  I'm not aware any copper, or any other transmutation product,  was
looked for or found. I confuse easily, so please enlighten.


On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 12:01 AM, MarkI-ZeroPoint zeropo...@charter.netwrote:

 Hi Rich,

 Yeah, it’s pretty much consumed bandwidth in the Collective since it came
 out…

 -Mark 

 ** **

 *From:* Rich Murray [mailto:rmfor...@gmail.com]
 *Sent:* Wednesday, May 22, 2013 10:49 PM
 *To:* vortex-L@eskimo.com; Rich Murray
 *Subject:* [Vo]:Rossi E-Cat HT shows excess heat from H gas + Ni powder
 making Cu over days, three cautious multiday runs: Rich Murray 2013.05.22*
 ***

 ** **

 Rossi E-Cat HT shows excess heat from H gas + Ni powder making Cu over
 days, three cautious multiday runs: Rich Murray 2013.05.22


 http://rmforall.blogspot.com/2013/05/rossi-e-cat-ht-shows-excess-heat-from-h.html
 

 ** **

 ** **

 So far, three days of vigorous discussions on several Net forums have not
 found any of the usual flaws...

 ** **

 Six months of study are planned for this summer.

 ** **

 For business reasons, no details are public about catalysts,  special
 waveforms of input electric power for internal heating resistors, and
 possible nuclear reactions are given, so theorists have little to work with.
 

 ** **

 If new unknown nuclear physics exists, capable in small devices of melting
 steel in runaway thermal excursions, governments have a mandate to ensure
 that the physics is immediately studied in a crash program to assess the
 implications for national security and profound rapid human progress.

 ** **

 ** **

 Figs. 1-2. Two images from the test performed on Nov. 20th 2012.

 ** **

 Here, the activation of the charge (distributed laterally in the reactor)
 is especially obvious.

 ** **

 The darker lines in the photograph are actually the shadows of the
 resistor coils, which yield only a minimal part of the total thermal power.
 

 ** **

 The performance of this device was such that the reactor was destroyed,
 melting the internal steel cylinder and the surrounding ceramic layers. **
 **

 ** **

 The long term trials analyzed in the present report were purposely
 performed at a lower temperatures for safety reasons.

 ** **

 Fig. 3 shows a thermal video frame from the IR camera: the temperature of
 859 °C refers to Area 2 (delimited by the “cross hairs”), whereas the
 average temperature recorded for the body of the device, relevant to the
 rectangle indicated as Area 1, is 793 °C.

 ** **

 http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1305/1305.3913.pdf

 free 29-page text with color photos and graphs

 ** **

 Indication of anomalous heat energy production in a reactor device

 containing hydrogen loaded nickel powder.

 Giuseppe Levi

 Bologna University, Bologna, Italy

 Evelyn Foschi

 Bologna, Italy

 Torbjörn Hartman, Bo Höistad, Roland Pettersson and Lars Tegnér

 Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden

 Hanno Essén

 Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden

 ** **

 ABSTRACT

 ** **

 An experimental investigation of possible anomalous heat production in a
 special type of reactor tube named E-Cat HT is carried out. 

 ** **

 The reactor tube is charged with a small amount of hydrogen loaded nickel
 powder plus some additives.

 ** **

 The reaction is primarily initiated by heat from resistor coils inside the
 reactor tube.

 ** **

 Measurement of the produced heat was performed with high-resolution
 thermal imaging cameras, recording data every second from the hot reactor
 tube. 

 ** **

 The measurements of electrical power input were performed with a large
 bandwidth three phase power analyzer.

 ** **

 Data were collected in two experimental runs lasting 96 and 116 hours,
 respectively.

 ** **

 An anomalous heat production was indicated in both experiments.

 ** **

 The 116-hour experiment also included a calibration of the experimental
 set-up without the active charge present in the E-Cat HT.

 ** **

 In this case, no extra heat was generated beyond the expected heat from
 the electric input.

 ** **

 Computed volumetric and gravimetric energy densities were found to be far
 above those of any known chemical source. 

 ** **

 Even by the most conservative assumptions as to the errors in the
 measurements, the result is still one order of magnitude greater than
 conventional energy sources.

 ** **

 ** **

Re: [Vo]:MODERATOR: J. Cude, extensive Rule 2 violations

[ken deboer]

I'd venture to make a suggestion, or request.   Not to disparage or
discourage all that goes on here, but to encourage also maybe a slight veer
to the left (right?).  Admittedly, I have not read anywhere near all the
papers available (and don't understand most of  them very well anyway) but
It seems like it could be fruitful to initiate a new 'Symposium'  that the
experts could occasionally contribute a piece to
.  I'd like to hear more about the nature of the NAE and also what kinds of
new (and old) methods and knowledge from  a plethora of aspects could
profitably be conjectured about.  e.g. what do we really know about
Celani's 'prepared' wire,  or Parchamanazad's Pd lattices, Piantelli;s
etc.  Especially interesting, I think, would be to bring in a raft of
findings from the recent literature on Material Science, especially nano,
and metallurgy, nanophotonics, 'manufactured' atom structures, and the
like.
(Hopefully soon we might also be able to even tear into one of Rossi's cats
and reverse engineer the nano and/or microparticles),



On Sun, May 12, 2013 at 1:30 PM, Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.com wrote:

 On Sun, May 12, 2013 at 11:39 AM, leaking pen itsat...@gmail.com wrote:

 The standard skepticism that any scientist should have, wishing to
 explore, to look at the evidence, to experiment and refine, is , from what
 I've seen, welcome here. What is not is blindly saying, THis cannot be
 true, and then, THEN, after deciding something is false, going about poking
 every hole in it possible.  Should the same arguements be made from a point
 of, Did you consider this, did you take that into account, how can we
 refine this and make it a BETTER model, then there wouldnt be an issue, I
 believe.


 Right.

 To be concrete, I think the issue is primarily one about attention to
 detail and to questions of burden of evidence.  It's fine to be skeptical
 of the tritium evidence, for example.  But if one is going to argue against
 it, one is going to have a lot of work to do.  One will have to show how
 each tritium result in each experiment was wrong or questionable, in
 specific detail; i.e., the burden of evidence (on this list, at any rate)
 will be on the person arguing against tritium having been found in some
 LENR experiments.  We assume here that in general LENR researchers are
 competent overall.  One should just accept this as a ground rule.  This is
 not at all to say that all of the tritium findings have been reliable or
 that all or even perhaps many of the experiments were done well.  It's
 simply that one can't get away with a facile statement to the effect that
 there is no reliable evidence that the tritium findings are not
 contamination, etc. and expect it to advance anyone's understanding.  It's
 just a dogmatic assertion, since there are specific reasons to think it's
 wrong.

 It's fine if the burden of evidence elsewhere would not permit one to
 refer to the LENR tritium findings.  The point is that the burden of
 evidence *here* allows one to do so, and in order to modify or unseat the
 general conclusion that tritium has been found in some LENR experiments,
 one is going to have to do quite a bit of work in connection with the
 specific details of specific experiments. The burden of evidence is
 reversed here, and there is no free lunch for someone who wishes to argue
 against tritium.

 Eric

Re: [Vo]:Hagelstein's editorial 2

[ken deboer]

Sidenote:
I'm reminded of one of the great one-liners (and I believe it was uttered
by someone on this list if I;m not mistaken:

The difference between connecting the dots and conflation  is spin


On Fri, May 10, 2013 at 7:34 AM, Joshua Cude joshua.c...@gmail.com wrote:

 Rothwell wrote: Cude and others conflate many different assertions and
 issues. They stir everything into one pot. You have to learn to
 compartmentalize with cold fusion, or with any new phenomenon or poorly
 understood subject. 


 That's nonsense. It's the believers who are forever using tritium and
 neutrons at ridiculously low levels to prove PF were right. The skeptics
 are skeptical of both, but are fully aware that even if low level neutrons
 a la SE Jones were valid, it wouldn't prove PF right. That's why Jones got
 into nature and PF didn't. Turned out, Jones retracted, until he made
 claims again. But they're marginal too.



  In this case, the tritium findings by Storms and soon after at TAMU and
 NCFI proved beyond doubt that cold fusion is a real, nuclear phenomenon.
 After they published that 1990 it was case closed. Every scientist on earth
 should have believed it.


 Unfortunately computer programmers don't get to tell every scientist on
 earth how to make scientific judgements. Morrison followed the field in
 detail until 2001, and he had the background and experience to make
 credible judgements and he was skeptical. So did Huizenga. And I'd put more
 credence in the Gell-Manns who considerd it briefly than the Rothwells or
 Storms who devoted their lives to it, but can't tell a likely charlatan
 (Rossi) from a scientist or inventor.


 And if the tritium was so conclusive, why were the results so variable,
 and given the variability, why has tritium research stopped before anyone
 settled anything about it? That's not the behavior of scientists. It's the
 behavior of pathological scientists.


  The excess heat results proved that it is not a chemical effect, in the
 normal sense. Perhaps it is a Mills effect. Again, there is so much
 evidence for this, at such high s/n ratios, it is irrefutable.


  The helium results support the hypothesis that this is some sort of
 deuterium fusion, at least with Pd-D. There is no doubt about the helium,
 but no one has searched for helium or deuterium from Ni-H cells.


  All the other claims are fuzzy, in my opinion. There is not as much
 evidence for them.


 All the results are fuzzy, and the levels are determined by the quality of
 the experiment. Heat levels comparable to inputs, or chemical background,
 or typical artifacts. Helium levels comparable to atmospheric background.
 Neutrons and tritium, for which instruments are far more sensitive, appear
 at guess what, far lower levels.


  The point is, DO NOT CONFUSE THESE QUESTIONS. Do not conflate them!


 Gee. Someone learned a new word, and is gonna get all the mileage he can
 from it.

Re: [Vo]:RE: From Russia, with love

[ken deboer]

No, Eric, this is not tiresome to us poor unwashed voorts.  Except when it
occassionaly degenerates into a pissing contest, it is entirely interesting
to see ideas (many immediately shot down) spin out. It seems to me that
eventually some new useful insight, or synthesis might give either a
combatant or cheerleader another idea.


On Sun, May 5, 2013 at 7:06 PM, Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.com wrote:

 On Sun, May 5, 2013 at 3:38 PM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.comwrote:

 Eric, you need to do some calculations. The CR-39 is an accumulator. The
 flux, which determines power , is very small during these studies even
 though the final result looks large.  At no time could heat be detected
 from the reactions producing these products.


 This suggests that the CR-39 experiments have in general been done in
 connection with null results -- i.e., trials in which there was no reason
 to think there was excess heat.  This is interesting on several levels,
 since there were pits in the chips.  But if there was no clear excess heat,
 we have little reason to conclude we have learned anything from the
 CR-39 experiments about the alpha particle flux when there is excess heat.

 I fear that this thread may be becoming tiresome for the poor Vorts.  I
 will mull over the information you have provided.

 Eric

Re: EXTERNAL: RE: [Vo]:Serendipity, Hexavalency and E-Cat

[ken deboer]

greetings all,
 I would like to echo Fran's comment. As one of the interested,
enthusiastic, alert Vort cheerleaders, I'd encourage all you young (ish)
players capable of playing the game to keep right on (nicely!).   I am a
scientist, but an old retired biologist who, like many are Physics
challenged and Mathematically helpless in this game.  Having just read Dr.
Hagelstein's excellent essay on Theory -making, I'd encourage all to also
give his wise counsel serious heed. PLAY  BALL!


On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 10:48 AM, Roarty, Francis X 
francis.x.roa...@lmco.com wrote:

  Jones, Axil,

 Like many here yours, Robin’s, Ed’s and Jed’s are all
 “must reads” for insight and out of the box ideas.. please don’t suspect
 any malice on the part of either of yourselves… yours is an exchange of
 ideas that benefit all.. please don’t take offense or change your recipies
 for posting .. the tone is very productive right where you have it.

 Best Regards

 Fran

 ** **

 *From:* Jones Beene [mailto:jone...@pacbell.net]
 *Sent:* Monday, April 08, 2013 10:14 PM
 *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com
 *Subject:* EXTERNAL: RE: [Vo]:Serendipity, Hexavalency and E-Cat

 ** **

 ** **

 Axil says:


 What is the difference between “connect the dots” and “conflate”. I
 believe it is spin…What gives you the license to ”connect the dots” and
 then allows you to accuse me of conflating a relationship between two
 experimental results.

 No one on this forum needs a license to try to promote cutting-edge
 scientific discovery, nor to find hidden relationships if they are
 historical, nor to challenge any conclusion that others make. But please do
 so with facts or logic, not vague generalities. And do not expect you own
 contentions to go unchallenged when they are so not supported by the
 references cited, as with gamma thermalization. In fact I welcome your
 challenges and that is one of the reasons I post here. If you are too
 thin-skinned to welcome challenges from others, my suggestion is to go
 elsewhere.

 Correspondingly, I do not “accuse” you of anything other than occasionally
 not understanding the papers you cite. Several times recently you have
 cited papers that completely negate the point you were trying to make.
 Deliberately conflating relationships which do not exist should always be
 challenged, but instead of defending, or retracting, a silly error
 (confusing a bosonic Josephson junction with a quasi-particle room
 temperature BEC) you seem to want to respond with some kind of appeal to
 unfairness. 

 I only connected two dots whereas you conflated six items
 some rejected by science as invalid. 

 No, you did not connect any dots at all. You confused a bosonic Josephson
 junction with a room temperature BEC (of quasiparticles) when in fact LENR
 involves temperature way above room temperature and quasiparticles cannot
 form Josephson junctions at all. You did this in order to promote an
 outlandishly incorrect hypothesis that the BJJ is involved in
 “thermalization of gammas” which is something that never happens to begin
 with.

 I want to see a specific experiment that explicitly shows such a direct
 relationship between these six items before you are allowed to “connect the
 dots”.

 What six items are you talking about? I am happy to address your concerns,
 but note: if there was an obvious relationship in Rossi’s previous work
 with Petroldragon to the E-Cat, then someone would likely have seen it
 before now – going on several years. At any rate, this was a suggestion and
 not a claim.

 IOW, I’m suggesting a possible historical connection, with the explicit
 proviso of “if there was a thermal anomaly with Petroldragon” - which is a
 bit different from promoting an absurdity - misquoting references, and then
 whimpering that you are being treated unfairly. 

 Jones

 ** **

Re: [Vo]:Hydrogen from plant sugar breakthrough reported

[ken deboer]

  Jones,  right on in your assesment of the value of this 'breakthrough'.
As an early (reformed)  biomass fuel worker, I've seen a lot of 'advances'
heralded.   All suffer from the same basic flaws, the worst of which you
correctly noted. On a very small, local scale, I can buy some of these
biomass schemes, but .
kend


On Fri, Apr 5, 2013 at 1:59 PM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:


 Brad Lowe wrote:

 Scientists at Virginia Tech are working on a breakthrough
 energy technology to convert plant sugars to hydrogen with efficiencies 
 100%.


 http://scienceblog.com/62111/game-changer-in-alternatve-energy/

 This could further evidence of an alarming trend in Sci-News these days.

 You can call it U-hype - University hyperbole in the extreme. Universities
 need funding and PR helps to get it.

 Think about the unsaid part of this story - from the cynic's POV

 The good: Xylose is a main building block for cellulose, so one does not
 need to use food grain to get it but...
 The bad: Most common trees like pine are at most 10% xylose and even then
 it
 is not easy to extract.
 The real bad: xylose (HOCH2(CH(OH))3CHO) is composed of hydrogen at a mass
 percentage of about 7%.
 The ugly: You cut down a 1000 pound tree and you get only 7 pounds of
 hydrogen, at most. What happens to the other 993 pounds ? Yup, it does have
 burnable carbon, doesn't it, so do you waste that or not?

 Oops... business as usual.

 Wouldn't we be far better off using wind energy to split water to get the
 hydrogen - and not have to burn the 993 pounds of waste timber to get the 7
 pounds of hydrogen ?

 Inside every cynical person, there is a disappointed idealist.
 -George Carlin

[Vo]:new topic

[ken deboer]

Hello all,
Many might have missed this recent study on brain transmission between
rats.  As an old biologist, this is especially fascinating and certainly
will have future impact.
A summary at aln...@vicon-mail.com

Cheers, ken deboer

Re: [Vo]:Tech Predictions

[ken deboer]

ken deboer
New Topic:

Just happened upon a new patent , US app 20130044847 APPARATUS AND METHOD
FOR LOW ENERGY NUCLEAR REACTIONS' by Dan Steinberg of Blacksburg,
Virginia.   Obviously relevant but I am totally unqualifed to make any
useful comments on it.  'Who are these guys?'



On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 11:41 AM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.comwrote:

 Chris Zell chrisz...@wetmtv.com wrote:

 **
 Use a little imagination.  They can can accuse LENR advocates as aiding
 terrorists.  They can plant child porn on their computers.


 They can do all kinds of things, and they already have. People such as
 Robert Park have deliberately and destroyed the reputations of
 distinguished scientists, fired many scientists, and interfered with
 funding. They have had members of Congress demand researchers' tax returns
 and personal papers. However, there is a limit to how they can do, because
 the information has spread far and wide.

 People have downloaded 2.6 million copies of the papers at LENR-CANR.org.
 There are copies of the LENR-CANR library in every nation listed on the
 Internet, except North Korea, and I expect they have made copies
 surreptitiously. There is no way that information can hidden. If it becomes
 generally known that cold fusion is real, millions more copies of the
 technical information will be downloaded. The facts about cold fusion will
 be obvious to every chemist and engineer on earth. The authorities can lie
 to some extent, but they cannot lie so much that they deceive every expert
 when accurate information is readily available, and cannot be suppressed or
 erased.



 They can make an example of any one of them by murdering one of them and
 pretending it was a suicide - or just a random crime that never gets
 solved.


 There are 4,700 authors in the LENR-CANR.org library database. Do you
 think the authorities are capable of killing off that many people? Even
 if they did kill them all, the information would still be in millions of
 computers worldwide. In any case, killing a dozen would attract enormous
 attention to the field.

 This is real life, not a third-rate made-for-TV thriller.

 - Jed

Re: [Vo]:[OT, sort of] To all you researchers and mad scientists

[ken deboer]

Amen.
ken deboer

On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 12:57 PM, OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson 
orionwo...@charter.net wrote:

 Sunday Sermon

 ** **

 To all of you researchers and mad scientists pouring your best blood,
 sweat  tears into unraveling the mysteries behind the LENR process, please
 accept our sincerest acknowledgment of the fact that we know how difficult
 the task has been for you. We understand how frustrating this unsung quest
 must often feel. We know you are the unsung heroes of the late 20th and
 early 21st centuries. 

 ** **

 We appreciate the fact that your work has often been tedious and
 time-consuming. Not only do you receive very little acknowledgment from
 most of your peers, the very peers who ought to be cheering you on, some of
 them seem to have gone out of their way to place and your work directly in
 their cross hairs for public ridicule. As such, we sympathize with the fact
 that you often receive very little respect. 

 ** **

 There must be times when you have felt desperate about your circumstances,
 when you have hungered for a sliver of data that would tell you Yes! This
 is it! You are finally making progress!, or when you have simply desired
 to occasionally experience the tiniest modicum of respect from your peers.
 It is only human to realize the fact that we all need to receive some form
 of validation, in order to keep us sufficiently motivated to plow through
 the rough times ahead. We know you are doing your best trying to unravel a
 misunderstood miracle with little or no help from your peers.

 

 All these slings and arrows... which must be managed on a shoestring
 budget. It could cause many to ask themselves: Is there an easier way to
 manage this project? Could I possibly cut corners somewhere?

 ** **

 Some of us who work areas of tech  support can only give you the tiniest
 bit of advice that we hope you will take to heart:

 ** **

 http://dilbert.com/strips/comic/2013-01-20/

 ** **

 Please, please, PLEASE do not outsource your work!

 ** **

 /Sunday Sermon

 ** **

 Regards,

 Steven Vincent Johnson

 www.OrionWorks.com

 www.zazzle.com/orionworks

Re: [Vo]: . . . intellectual embarrassment is tattooed to the naysayers forever . . .

[ken deboer]

Pretty low bar.
ken deboer

On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 2:09 PM, mix...@bigpond.com wrote:

 In reply to  James Bowery's message of Mon, 10 Dec 2012 10:00:29 -0600:
 Hi,

 This appears to be the corollary of my definition of a dictatorship. A
 country
 is a dictatorship when it takes measures to prevent it's citizens from
 leaving.

 [snip]
 A Republican form of government has the primary duty, above all others, is
 to ensure it is practical for consenting adults to leave its jurisdiction
 to form a new government, laying its foundation on such principles and
 organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to
 effect their Safety and Happiness.
 
 Regards,

 Robin van Spaandonk

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

Re: [Vo]:Independent validation of Carlos Ortez Web Proceedure

[ken deboer]

This is strange.  A few days ago someone posted about a new zeolite
replicator carlos ortiz . at http:/lenr.cwahi.net.  On that site he
outlined experiments a la Nick reiter but with a few extra twists.  I could
not find any results he had, especially results like neu.tron says, which
is, of course, the latest Rossi outcome. If ortiz gave that out as his own
results, he would be the biggest fraud since Piltdown. If he actually has
his own results it would be interesting to know. ken deboer

On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 11:03 AM, Akira Shirakawa
shirakawa.ak...@gmail.comwrote:

 On 2012-12-07 18:42, Jed Rothwell wrote:

 What is this? Details please. Who is Ortez?


 Have a look at the following link. Notice something?

 http://www.e-catworld.com/**2012/10/leonardo-corp-**
 releases-new-hot-cat-report/http://www.e-catworld.com/2012/10/leonardo-corp-releases-new-hot-cat-report/

 Cheers,
 S.A.

Re: [Vo]:Steven Jones: Excess heat is real, but probably not nuclear

[ken deboer]

Interesting stuff (even to a completely ignorant one like me).  Have y'all
heard of  the work at Rice Univ. by Halas et al vaporizing (cold) water
directly in a couple seconds by various nanoparticles. In ACS Nano.

On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 3:43 PM, MarkI-ZeroPoint zeropo...@charter.netwrote:

 I just remembered something that ties in with the 430Khz… and anomalous
 effects with water and piezos.

 ** **

 When I was involved with the International Tesla Society back in the 80s,
 we would meet once a month to discuss fringe topics, and a few of the group
 were hacking together some experiments… nothing earth shattering ever came
 of their work that I know of.

 ** **

 One of the regulars was a very introverted guy, physics degree, who was
 quite intelligent; worked in the semiconductor industry.  He told us about
 something he’d heard of a way to ‘aetherize’ water… went from liquid to
 ‘nothing’ w/o boiling… Had to use a fused quartz cylindrical tube (6”L by
 ~1.5” I.D.), water (pure?), 500+W signal generator hooked up to piezo
 transducer which was glued/epoxied to one open end of the quartz tube.
 Fill tube with water, but had to calc the wavelength of the sound wave and
 keep the water level at least at a multiple of the wavelength… what was the
 frequency  ~*41Khz to 43Khz*!  Just a coincidence, I’m sure…

 ** **

 Could it be done at any frequency so long as the height of the water
 column was a multiple of the wavelength of the sound waves generated by the
 piezo transducer?  Don’t think so… but we never got as far as trying it.  I
 moved out of the area and shortly thereafter the Tesla Society went
 belly-up.  Never heard anything more about it…

 ** **

 Oh, the story was that it wasn’t a good idea to put your hand over the
 quartz tube when operating…. When the water ‘aetherized’, it pretty much
 instantly disappeared from the quartz tube, apparently as an
 ‘aether-bullet’, and put a hole thru whatever was in the ‘line of fire’
 (e.g., the ceiling and roof)…  yeah, that’s what I thought too, but the
 vids that Jones posted about Davey and WITTS, makes me wonder if that
 spherical stainless steel contraption is somewhat related… just slightly
 out-of-tune so as not to aetherize the water.

 ** **

 It’s all about resonance…

 ** **

 -Mark Iverson

 ** **

 *From:* Jones Beene [mailto:jone...@pacbell.net]
 *Sent:* Wednesday, November 21, 2012 2:10 PM
 *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com
 *Subject:* RE: [Vo]:Steven Jones: Excess heat is real, but probably not
 nuclear

 ** **

 Curiously, 430 kHz is also in the range which is considered to be
 ultrasound…

 ** **

 That frequency turns up as a signature of one form of LENR, according to
 recent revelations - and it would be a mistake to over-generalize from that
 alone; but … there are a number of principles of reciprocity which turn up
 in electromagnetism, so it is not at stretch to imagine that this frequency
 would be of interest when used as input. 

 ** **

 *From:* David Roberson 

 ** **

 Thinking of acousticsIf the hemispheres are very accurately machined
 then any ultrasonic excitement of the surface that is symmetrical will form
 waves that collide at the center of the device.  

 ** **

Re: [Vo]:Bladeless Turbine

[ken deboer]

Just a note re: bladeless turbines
A couple years ago I helped a local inventor test his prototype new
bladeless turbine. It was a simple little, hand made, 6 inch deal that we
got spinning over 15000 rpm with a little steam boiler.  He has a patent on
it #7824149, and is building now a larger, better model.  For someone
interested in maybe finding a simple turbine to hook to lenr, it might be
worthwhile to keep it in mind and check it out.  The fellow moved to
Wisconsin and can be contacted at cbrewer...@yahoo.com.
regards, ken

On Sat, Nov 10, 2012 at 11:15 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:

 Good comment, possibly from pitch-polers or other wind-bag oracles:

 oh good lord... a turbine that puts huge wind force stresses and
 resonant stresses on a tower...

 kinda like what I saw out on the Bay the other day - Larry'$ multi-million
 fail:

 http://www.wired.com/magazine/wp-content/images/19-09/ff_americascup2_f.jpg




 -Original Message-
 From: Terry Blanton

 Bizarre!

  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H2IeCJiddQg
 
 
  Harry
 

Re: [Vo]:Reasons to be optimistic we will win the political battle

[ken deboer]

Jed, I agree (almost) completely with all you said here; very well put.
However, while I agree the main 'CF' industry will be by mid- and large
corps, I do still believe that there will be a rather large, worldwide,
'underground' micro-lenr industry. Not quite cottage, but local full
service lenr dealers and installers.  Some of these may carry 'off brand'
or locally made small scale, lenr devices special built for local
or idiiosyncratic uses. Some of these might very well be the current
replicators/players who lose out in the upcoming market wars. Many
opportunities here
0:)

On Fri, Nov 9, 2012 at 9:19 AM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:

 Despite my recent messages, I do not wish to give the impression I am
 pessimistic. I would not be working all these years promoting cold fusion
 if I thought there was little chance of success. However, you cannot win a
 political battle unless: you are prepared to win, and determined to win;
 you think carefully about strategy and tactics; and you move quickly to
 change your approach when circumstances change or a new opportunity arises.

 Moving quickly means --

 I do not think that cold fusion cells can be manufactured by people at
 home. I assume they will be high-tech devices. However if it turns out I'm
 wrong, I would be delighted and I would hope that people take advantage of
 that to launch a cottage industry cold fusion revolution. It might be
 similar to what is happening now with cheap replicator devices. In other
 words my strategy would be to depend upon midsize and large corporations to
 manufacture the devices because I assume for technical reasons that is the
 only practical way to do it, but I would love to be proved wrong.


 I made a list of reasons why I expect a long brutal political battle. If
 it turns out the opposition rolls over and placed dead, no one would be
 more delighted than me! I'm not hoping for a battle; I am preparing for
 one. There is a big difference.

 I listed some of the advantages the opposition is likely to have. Mainly
 money and political power. Here are some important advantages on our side.
 Some have now, and some we may soon have, which will grow grow stronger,
 while the opposition grows weaker. We have history on our side:


 Greed works in our favor too. Corporations, venture capitalists and many
 others will be determined to make money with cold fusion. They will defy
 large corporations. Microsoft clobbered IBM in the 1980s, even though it
 started off much smaller.

 Institutional inertia is on our side. IBM did not begin to respond to
 Microsoft and the personal computer revolution until it was almost too late
 and the company was on the verge of bankruptcy. As I said, a low profile
 works to our advantage.

 I do get sick of the low-profile approach, though. We are terribly weak
 now. When I talk to Mizuno or Prelas now, I am appalled at how easily their
 work was suppressed by a few nitwits. Stopping cold fusion in the 1990s was
 like taking candy from a baby. Robert Park makes a few phone calls and
 boom! -- six months of planning and funding requests go into the trashcan.
 A publisher abruptly cancels a book; a session at ACS is cancelled. This
 has happened over and over again, far more often than people realize. Both
 sides are trying to cover up the extent of it because the opponents don't
 want people to know how often they have interfered in academic freedom, and
 cold fusion researchers hope that Lucy will not snatch away the football
 next time. Researchers have been like mice fleeing from a wolf. Their only
 hope has been to hide. That is how things have been but it does not mean we
 will always be so weak. The funding at U. Missouri will not be cancelled,
 despite frantic efforts by opponents.

 We will have powerful allies too, especially the Pentagon. They do not
 want to see the Chinese army supplied with cold fusion powered equipment
 while we are stuck with fossil fuel. As I pointed out in my book, this
 would be similar to the Opium Wars or the battle between the ironclad
 Merrimack and U.S. Navy wooden ships. In these cases you had a 20-year gap
 in technology. This is something the Pentagon understands. If the
 Confederacy had been able to deploy a fleet of 50 ironclad ships more
 maneuverable than the Merrimack, they would have broken the Union blockade
 and won the Civil War. The cost would have been trivial compared to
 fighting the battle of Gettysburg and the siege of Richmond. Fortunately,
 the Confederacy was not capable of making such a fleet. They were not
 capable of making breech loaded repeating rifles, precision long-range
 artillery or Gatling guns. The Union did build fleets of ironclad
 steamships, and these other things, and much else. It was just beginning to
 deploy Gatling guns when the war ended. If the war had gone on another few
 months, Gatling guns firing 200 rounds a minute would have massacred
 soldiers the way they did in 1914.

 We may soon have 

Re: [Vo]:Whence Willard?

[ken deboer]

Thank you so much, lorenheyer, from all us whitey Americans for your
numerous stupendously brilliant expositions on how life really is.  Now
please go back down your sick wormhole, or whatever, for, oh, a hundred
years or so. We'll let you know when it's OK.
On Sat, Nov 3, 2012 at 10:35 AM, lorenhe...@aol.com wrote:

 Lets forget the White Demo Rats for now, and concentrate more on a somewhat
 evil menacing horrrific looking species of parasitic cockroach. It's
 (im)proper scientifically  called  Africahoonus Amoongus or more simply A
 Fricken American Hating Thugly Ugly Mugly Cruddy Scuzzy Slug Bug.
 Currently, very
 little is actually known about it, but seems to have one purpose, which is
 to extract as much as possible out of it's victims, and/or the human
 population.
This creepy
 crawly parasitic menace tends to be highly destructive, and also seems to
 have the ability to inflict it's victims with an overwhelming feeling of
 guilt.  It would appear as tho this all-knowing high  mighty King
 Cockroach is
 ordained or blessed with the power to decide whether or not human beings
 have
 contributed enough of their vital fluids or livelyhood to the
 infested-nation now taking place.
Be warned, if you have been
 fortunate enough not to have set eyes upon this ghastly hideous grotesque
 rather clammy cold disease spreading creature, you'll need to be
  prepared. It
 will likely send chills down your spine, and may even make you convulse (as
 oppose to converse) and/or until you choke  vomit. The first time I
 inadvertently saw this irreprehensible looking over-grown parasitic
 insect, I
 wanted to take smash the TV set w/ a baseball batt, but then I realized
 that
 that is exactly what this dark multi-limbed invader wants.

   Also, you should
 be aware that The Whitey House has been infested with a army of
 sub-cockroaches, who're under the spell of the King Cockroach, which goes
 by the name of
 BO or the Prz ya, daaas ihhh suckah!.   Now, BO duh Preeez,
 gives off a very distinky odor, which really shouldn't be confused with too
 many of the other shadowy dark creatures, which may resemble it. The burnt
 black color (for me) tends to make me think of what a typical poor excuse
 of a
 human being might look after an unclear holocause.

   Well, thats all for now, maybe we'll
 talk again after the E-L-E-C-T-I-O-N, that enables  a Truly Respectable 
 Free American Human Being to be voted in, as opposed to a low life punk a$$
 overgrown honky dinkey donkey monkey w/ a thugly nose  flaring nostrils 
 phony attitude w/ dog-eaten purple lips of a two-bit Illegal Alien that
 only
 aspires to remain in-power as the Country's Ruling Dictator.
 Thank
 you.  Respectfully,  Loren. /HTML

Re: [Vo]:bad news

[ken deboer]

Dr. Gluck, maybe not all that bad of news.  I agree, the idea of growing
your own fuel is dead. Ecologically, even economically, impossible under
our current world situation. Bioethanol as gasoline additives will become
increasingly disastrous. For a few years I grew my own biodiesel for my
tractor. I grew camelina, which is an ecologically great crop for my poor
farm (central Montana, USA). I crushed it and made biodiesel.   A few other
Montana farmers did it also. We all quit. While we might have broke even
dollar-wise, the real cost (ecological and otherwise)  was much too high.
So, we can bid a sad farewell to a once good sounding idea, and move on to
better solutions.
BTW, I'm surrounded by cheap coal and now oil, which have their own loud,
and controlling advocates who will rule the roost until we (hopefully
sooner than later) get lenr or ? .
Hopefully yours, ken

On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 7:30 AM, Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com wrote:

 Dear Colleagues,

 For your information:

 *Bioenergy: The Broken Promise: *
 http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/10/121009121446.htm

 An idea has failed. I remember some 10 years ago many people
 planning to cultivate rapeseed on land not good for agriculture here
 and great progresses in bio-diesel.

 We have to take care that our Idea should succeed.

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

Re: [Vo]: Experimental Results with Nickel and Sodium Carbonate

[ken deboer]

Jack,
I think you went the wrong way with the total BTU inputted.  should be 36
wh X ~3 btu/w  = ~100 btu.
ken
On Thu, Oct 4, 2012 at 5:13 AM, Jack Cole jcol...@gmail.com wrote:

 I think I have pretty high heat loss as it is open to the air.  Here are
 some pretty conservative calculations assuming no heat loss and complete
 conversion of electrical input to heat.  Please check my math / conversions
 to see if I am doing this correctly.

 1 BTU is the amount of heat needed to raise 1 lb of water 1 degree F.

 A power supply at 12 V and 1 amp gives 12 wh.

 1 BTU = .293 wh (see wikipedia BTU)

 A temperature change of 60F for 3.718 oz requires the following BTUs.

 3.178 oz / 16 oz = .199

 60 * .199 = 11.92 BTUs required to change the temp 60F assuming no heat
 loss.

 Running 3 hours gives a total input of 36 wh.  So convert 36 wh to BTU.

 36 * .293 = 10.5 BTUs total input

 I calculate COP by BTUs required to raise the temp 60F / input BTU.

 COP = 11.92 / 10.5 = 1.135

 Have I done the correct process with these calculations?

 On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 10:32 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.comwrote:

 The temperature the bath reaches depends upon the input power you deliver
 to the system as well as any excess heat that may be generated by the
 electrodes and the ability of your system to trap heat.  If you are
 delivering 12 watts to your device and getting a temperature rise of 60 F
 from ambient then you must have relatively low heat loss unless of course
 you are seeing lots of heat being generated.

  The maximum temperature seen thus far with my present experimental
 setup was 130 F with an ambient of 74 F.  I had 28.7 watts of drive at that
 time.  I am using a large electrolyte bath that is open to the air and one
 benefit is that I can dissipate a large amount of power before my
 electrolyte reaches boiling.  This allows me to increase the current
 density significantly.  It is currently within the bounds of the successful
 level for the palladium deuterium systems.

  Dave

 -Original Message-
 From: Jack Cole jcol...@gmail.com
 To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
 Sent: Wed, Oct 3, 2012 10:00 pm
 Subject: Re: [Vo]: Experimental Results with Nickel and Sodium Carbonate

  It seems like from the experiments I've run that if you want heat, put
 enough borax in so that it settles to the bottom.  Then put your electrodes
 down into the borax powder in the bottom.  Eventually, the borax powder
 disappears leaving yellowish nearly transparent crystals on the electrodes
 and in the bottom of the cell.  It is easy to get 120+F temps with an air
 temperature of 60F using 12V @ 1amp.

 On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 5:55 PM, Paul Stout paulst...@att.net wrote:

  My anode is a motor brush so its surface area is larger than that of
 the nickel coin.
 I have increased the current to 400 milliamps.  With the active and
 control beakers in series, the power supply is at 30 volts to drive that
 current.
 -
 I was hoping to avoid the higher currents, which could mask any
 anomalous heat being generated.

 Paul




 On 10/3/2012 1:57 PM, Jack Cole wrote:

 I had a lot of heat, whether it is anomalous or not, I don't know. I
 think it is somehow resistance heating through the borax or chemistry with
 creating boric acid.  Just a speculation.  I had heat 130F (I say it this
 way because my thermometer was electroplated or something causing it to
 register 20F too high.  It read 158 or so at the max).  To get more heat,
 you need an anode with as much surface area as your nickel.  I used 12V at
 1 amp.

 On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 11:17 AM, Paul Stout paulst...@att.net wrote:

 I have increased the current in my setup to 200 milliamps.  It has been
 running at that current level for more than 12 hours now and no anomalous
 heat has shown up yet.
 -
 Has anybody been able to replicate Chuck Sites results?  I have not
 seen any claims to that yet.
 -
 Paul

Re: [Vo]:Replication of Chuck Sites Nickel/Boron Experiment

[ken deboer]

Very interesting, indeed.  How much water are you using? If everything were
100% efficient, and you were inputting 12 watts/hr = ~40 btu/hr, over 3
hours you would have 120 btu, which theoretically could raise 1 pound of
water 120 F.
Best regards, kend

On Mon, Oct 1, 2012 at 10:38 AM, Jack Cole jcol...@gmail.com wrote:

 Thanks Jed, glad to do it.

 Small update:

 7 am Temp 55F Start
 9 am Temp 110F
 10 am  Temp 129F
 11:20 am Temp 146F

 Outside temp started at 55F and was at 57F at 11:20 am.

 I'll keep running until the temp levels off.  At that point, I'll work on
 setting up a control cell.  The water has turned brown, so I presume
 something is also happening with the copper (either in the nickels or the
 exposed portion of copper wire attaching to the electrode).



 On Mon, Oct 1, 2012 at 10:00 AM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.comwrote:

 Thanks for doing this!

 - Jed