RE: [Vo]: Mock paper... NOT!
I've gone thru just about all of Volume 1 of Santilli's 'Il Grande Grido'... all 450+ pages. Quite interesting... it is a collection of all the correspondence between Santilli and various universities, nat'l labs, and scientists, from ~1977 to '83. Thankfully, not many equations! :-) Santilli is basically saying that there is no real evidence that quarks are point-particles. Quarks are the subatomic 'particles' which make up hadrons which are 'composite' particles (e.g., protons and neutrons). His work on applying Lie-admissible algebras to the internal structure of hadrons was at first considered 'epoch-making'... but his escalating efforts to try to get the hadron theoretical community to take it seriously began to rub people the wrong way and he became an outcast. He then established the Hadronic Journal to allow physicists, mathematicians and other scientists an outlet for their work on hadrons. According to him, his and others' theoretical work regarding the applicability of Special Relativity, Pauli Exclusion and Heisenberg's uncertainty, which are applied and have considerable empirical support for electromagnetic forces, have little or no unambiguous evidence that they can be applied to the strong force (within hadrons). In addition, apparently, several mathematicians have proven that there are some serious problems when trying to apply those laws to structures inside of hadrons. Fran and Jones: FYI, I believe I also read in one of the letters that these problems also apply to the Casimir force... What's interesting here is that *IF* the testing of his hadronic reactor (which started this thread thanks to Harry Veeder) is accurate, and two independent labs apparently confirmed what Santilli was expecting, then he may have not only proved that his theoretical model for hadrons is more accurate, but also achieved the equivalent of LENR. In which case, Rossi and all other LENR researchers are working with an inferior model of the nucleus! Geez, just when you thought times couldn't get any more interesting... -Mark -Original Message- From: Mark Iverson-ZeroPoint [mailto:zeropo...@charter.net] Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2012 10:01 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: [Vo]:Mock paper Well, at least Santilli is a degreed physicist with considerable credentials from places like MIT and Harvard; the following Bio is from his Wikipedia page: = Santilli studied physics at the University of Naples and went on to attend the Graduate School in Physics of the University of Turin, graduating in 1966. While studying for his Ph.D., Santilli was granted the Chair in Nuclear Physics at the Avogardo Technical Institute in Turin, Italy. In 1967 he was invited by the University of Miami to conduct research under NASA financial support. Starting in 1968, Santilli was an Associate Professor of Physics at Boston University, teaching physics and mathematics and conducted research for the United States Air Force. During this time, he became a naturalized American citizen. In August 1974 to August 1977, Santilli was a visiting scholar at the Center for Theoretical Physics at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. From September 1977 to August 1981, he was a visiting scholar at the Department of Mathematics, Harvard University under Department of Energy funding jointly with Shlomo Sternberg. = -Mark -Original Message- From: Harry Veeder [mailto:hveeder...@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2012 9:35 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Mock paper If this is true then don't you think Santilli's claims are even more extravagant (to use one of M. Y.' s favorite adjectives) than Rossi's claims? harry On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 12:12 AM, Mark Iverson-ZeroPoint zeropo...@charter.net wrote: Did a quick read of entire paper... Santilli has been around quite awhile, and is a Ph.D. physicist; check out the Wikipedia page on him. The paper is describing his recent tests with his 'hadronic reactor', which is based on his own theories. Apparently, two independent labs were used to analyze the elemental composition of the electrodes before and after each test, and the content of the gases used inside, before and after. Both electrode and gas showed the expected elemental changes. The reactor produce considerable heat which is used to produce steam. In one test, heat production was so intense that it had to be shut down after only a few seconds; or it might have tripped a pressure relief valve first and then was shut down. He is claiming nuclear reactions with no harmful radiation... -Mark -Original Message- From: Harry Veeder [mailto:hveeder...@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2012 6:12 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Mock paper Would someone tell me if this a sincere paper? Perhaps I have grown cynical over the last year, because of Rossi's dismissal of scientific
Re: [Vo]:Mock paper
Would someone tell me if this a sincere paper? Perhaps I have grown cynical over the last year, because of Rossi's dismissal of scientific practice and the new level of secrecy surrounding LENR research, but I'm remain very skeptical. To me the pictures look like dummy apparatuses which mock Rossi work. I have been told that lie could be a short hand for lie-algebra, but it looks like a double entendre. Also the numerous references of independent verifications sounds like a cliche, and I role my eyes whenever someone propose a new kind of matter and names it after themselves. Harry On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 8:06 PM, Harry Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote: A pretend paper mocking LENR research. Harry PROCEEDINGS OF THE THIRD INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON LIE-ADMISSIBLE TREATMENT OF IRREVERSIBLE PROCESSES (ICLATIP - 3) Kathmandu University, Nepal, April (2011) pages 163-177 http://www.santilli-foundation.org/docs/ICNF-3.pdf
Re: [Vo]:Mock paper
On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 6:11 PM, Harry Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote: Would someone tell me if this a sincere paper? Perhaps I have grown cynical over the last year, because of Rossi's dismissal of scientific practice and the new level of secrecy surrounding LENR research, but I'm remain very skeptical. To me the pictures look like dummy apparatuses which mock Rossi work. I have been told that lie could be a short hand for lie-algebra, but it looks like a double entendre. Also the numerous references of independent verifications sounds like a cliche, and I role my eyes whenever someone propose a new kind of matter and names it after themselves. What I get at the link seems entirely serious to a brief browse though I have not read it yet. The home page looks serious also: http://www.santilli-foundation.org/ so, unless someone hacked them, the paper will also be serious, as far as they are concerned anyway.
RE: [Vo]:Mock paper
Did a quick read of entire paper... Santilli has been around quite awhile, and is a Ph.D. physicist; check out the Wikipedia page on him. The paper is describing his recent tests with his 'hadronic reactor', which is based on his own theories. Apparently, two independent labs were used to analyze the elemental composition of the electrodes before and after each test, and the content of the gases used inside, before and after. Both electrode and gas showed the expected elemental changes. The reactor produce considerable heat which is used to produce steam. In one test, heat production was so intense that it had to be shut down after only a few seconds; or it might have tripped a pressure relief valve first and then was shut down. He is claiming nuclear reactions with no harmful radiation... -Mark -Original Message- From: Harry Veeder [mailto:hveeder...@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2012 6:12 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Mock paper Would someone tell me if this a sincere paper? Perhaps I have grown cynical over the last year, because of Rossi's dismissal of scientific practice and the new level of secrecy surrounding LENR research, but I'm remain very skeptical. To me the pictures look like dummy apparatuses which mock Rossi work. I have been told that lie could be a short hand for lie-algebra, but it looks like a double entendre. Also the numerous references of independent verifications sounds like a cliche, and I role my eyes whenever someone propose a new kind of matter and names it after themselves. Harry On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 8:06 PM, Harry Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote: A pretend paper mocking LENR research. Harry PROCEEDINGS OF THE THIRD INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON LIE-ADMISSIBLE TREATMENT OF IRREVERSIBLE PROCESSES (ICLATIP - 3) Kathmandu University, Nepal, April (2011) pages 163-177 http://www.santilli-foundation.org/docs/ICNF-3.pdf
Re: [Vo]:Mock paper
How come none of Santilli's papers are in the LENR-CANR library? eg. http://www.santilli-foundation.org/docs/ICNF-1.pdf Has he attended the ICCF meetings? Has Jed or any of Jed's associates met him? Harry On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 9:19 PM, Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 6:11 PM, Harry Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote: Would someone tell me if this a sincere paper? Perhaps I have grown cynical over the last year, because of Rossi's dismissal of scientific practice and the new level of secrecy surrounding LENR research, but I'm remain very skeptical. To me the pictures look like dummy apparatuses which mock Rossi work. I have been told that lie could be a short hand for lie-algebra, but it looks like a double entendre. Also the numerous references of independent verifications sounds like a cliche, and I role my eyes whenever someone propose a new kind of matter and names it after themselves. What I get at the link seems entirely serious to a brief browse though I have not read it yet. The home page looks serious also: http://www.santilli-foundation.org/ so, unless someone hacked them, the paper will also be serious, as far as they are concerned anyway.
Re: [Vo]:Mock paper
If this is true then don't you think Santilli's claims are even more extravagant (to use one of M. Y.' s favorite adjectives) than Rossi's claims? harry On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 12:12 AM, Mark Iverson-ZeroPoint zeropo...@charter.net wrote: Did a quick read of entire paper... Santilli has been around quite awhile, and is a Ph.D. physicist; check out the Wikipedia page on him. The paper is describing his recent tests with his 'hadronic reactor', which is based on his own theories. Apparently, two independent labs were used to analyze the elemental composition of the electrodes before and after each test, and the content of the gases used inside, before and after. Both electrode and gas showed the expected elemental changes. The reactor produce considerable heat which is used to produce steam. In one test, heat production was so intense that it had to be shut down after only a few seconds; or it might have tripped a pressure relief valve first and then was shut down. He is claiming nuclear reactions with no harmful radiation... -Mark -Original Message- From: Harry Veeder [mailto:hveeder...@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2012 6:12 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Mock paper Would someone tell me if this a sincere paper? Perhaps I have grown cynical over the last year, because of Rossi's dismissal of scientific practice and the new level of secrecy surrounding LENR research, but I'm remain very skeptical. To me the pictures look like dummy apparatuses which mock Rossi work. I have been told that lie could be a short hand for lie-algebra, but it looks like a double entendre. Also the numerous references of independent verifications sounds like a cliche, and I role my eyes whenever someone propose a new kind of matter and names it after themselves. Harry On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 8:06 PM, Harry Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote: A pretend paper mocking LENR research. Harry PROCEEDINGS OF THE THIRD INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON LIE-ADMISSIBLE TREATMENT OF IRREVERSIBLE PROCESSES (ICLATIP - 3) Kathmandu University, Nepal, April (2011) pages 163-177 http://www.santilli-foundation.org/docs/ICNF-3.pdf
Re: [Vo]:Mock paper
Look at the transmutations . Holey sheet! AG On 1/13/2012 4:04 PM, Harry Veeder wrote: If this is true then don't you think Santilli's claims are even more extravagant (to use one of M. Y.' s favorite adjectives) than Rossi's claims? harry On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 12:12 AM, Mark Iverson-ZeroPoint zeropo...@charter.net wrote: Did a quick read of entire paper... Santilli has been around quite awhile, and is a Ph.D. physicist; check out the Wikipedia page on him. The paper is describing his recent tests with his 'hadronic reactor', which is based on his own theories. Apparently, two independent labs were used to analyze the elemental composition of the electrodes before and after each test, and the content of the gases used inside, before and after. Both electrode and gas showed the expected elemental changes. The reactor produce considerable heat which is used to produce steam. In one test, heat production was so intense that it had to be shut down after only a few seconds; or it might have tripped a pressure relief valve first and then was shut down. He is claiming nuclear reactions with no harmful radiation... -Mark -Original Message- From: Harry Veeder [mailto:hveeder...@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2012 6:12 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Mock paper Would someone tell me if this a sincere paper? Perhaps I have grown cynical over the last year, because of Rossi's dismissal of scientific practice and the new level of secrecy surrounding LENR research, but I'm remain very skeptical. To me the pictures look like dummy apparatuses which mock Rossi work. I have been told that lie could be a short hand for lie-algebra, but it looks like a double entendre. Also the numerous references of independent verifications sounds like a cliche, and I role my eyes whenever someone propose a new kind of matter and names it after themselves. Harry On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 8:06 PM, Harry Veederhveeder...@gmail.com wrote: A pretend paper mocking LENR research. Harry PROCEEDINGS OF THE THIRD INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON LIE-ADMISSIBLE TREATMENT OF IRREVERSIBLE PROCESSES (ICLATIP - 3) Kathmandu University, Nepal, April (2011) pages 163-177 http://www.santilli-foundation.org/docs/ICNF-3.pdf
RE: [Vo]:Mock paper
Jed can answer that, but it wouldn't surprise me if he was the guy who threatened Jed with a lawsuit when Jed wanted to include his papers on lenr.org... he is definitely a rogue researcher, and a bit course, but some of that probably comes from the way his work has been treated by mainstream journals. -m -Original Message- From: Harry Veeder [mailto:hveeder...@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2012 9:21 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Mock paper How come none of Santilli's papers are in the LENR-CANR library? eg. http://www.santilli-foundation.org/docs/ICNF-1.pdf Has he attended the ICCF meetings? Has Jed or any of Jed's associates met him? Harry On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 9:19 PM, Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 6:11 PM, Harry Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote: Would someone tell me if this a sincere paper? Perhaps I have grown cynical over the last year, because of Rossi's dismissal of scientific practice and the new level of secrecy surrounding LENR research, but I'm remain very skeptical. To me the pictures look like dummy apparatuses which mock Rossi work. I have been told that lie could be a short hand for lie-algebra, but it looks like a double entendre. Also the numerous references of independent verifications sounds like a cliche, and I role my eyes whenever someone propose a new kind of matter and names it after themselves. What I get at the link seems entirely serious to a brief browse though I have not read it yet. The home page looks serious also: http://www.santilli-foundation.org/ so, unless someone hacked them, the paper will also be serious, as far as they are concerned anyway.
Re: [Vo]:Mock paper
See Lawsuits here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruggero_Santilli A very ugly story- I remember that being a member of the advisory board I have had to pay 12,000 USD fine. The lawsuit did not started but Gene was very upset and stressed by this affair. An even uglier story- Richardson's AQUAFUEL, Leon Toups, magnecules. (1998 - ) However Ruggero is a great mathematician, beyond any doubt. On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 7:20 AM, Harry Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote: How come none of Santilli's papers are in the LENR-CANR library? eg. http://www.santilli-foundation.org/docs/ICNF-1.pdf Has he attended the ICCF meetings? Has Jed or any of Jed's associates met him? Harry On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 9:19 PM, Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 6:11 PM, Harry Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote: Would someone tell me if this a sincere paper? Perhaps I have grown cynical over the last year, because of Rossi's dismissal of scientific practice and the new level of secrecy surrounding LENR research, but I'm remain very skeptical. To me the pictures look like dummy apparatuses which mock Rossi work. I have been told that lie could be a short hand for lie-algebra, but it looks like a double entendre. Also the numerous references of independent verifications sounds like a cliche, and I role my eyes whenever someone propose a new kind of matter and names it after themselves. What I get at the link seems entirely serious to a brief browse though I have not read it yet. The home page looks serious also: http://www.santilli-foundation.org/ so, unless someone hacked them, the paper will also be serious, as far as they are concerned anyway. -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
RE: [Vo]:Mock paper
Well, at least Santilli is a degreed physicist with considerable credentials from places like MIT and Harvard; the following Bio is from his Wikipedia page: = Santilli studied physics at the University of Naples and went on to attend the Graduate School in Physics of the University of Turin, graduating in 1966. While studying for his Ph.D., Santilli was granted the Chair in Nuclear Physics at the Avogardo Technical Institute in Turin, Italy. In 1967 he was invited by the University of Miami to conduct research under NASA financial support. Starting in 1968, Santilli was an Associate Professor of Physics at Boston University, teaching physics and mathematics and conducted research for the United States Air Force. During this time, he became a naturalized American citizen. In August 1974 to August 1977, Santilli was a visiting scholar at the Center for Theoretical Physics at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. From September 1977 to August 1981, he was a visiting scholar at the Department of Mathematics, Harvard University under Department of Energy funding jointly with Shlomo Sternberg. = -Mark -Original Message- From: Harry Veeder [mailto:hveeder...@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2012 9:35 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Mock paper If this is true then don't you think Santilli's claims are even more extravagant (to use one of M. Y.' s favorite adjectives) than Rossi's claims? harry On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 12:12 AM, Mark Iverson-ZeroPoint zeropo...@charter.net wrote: Did a quick read of entire paper... Santilli has been around quite awhile, and is a Ph.D. physicist; check out the Wikipedia page on him. The paper is describing his recent tests with his 'hadronic reactor', which is based on his own theories. Apparently, two independent labs were used to analyze the elemental composition of the electrodes before and after each test, and the content of the gases used inside, before and after. Both electrode and gas showed the expected elemental changes. The reactor produce considerable heat which is used to produce steam. In one test, heat production was so intense that it had to be shut down after only a few seconds; or it might have tripped a pressure relief valve first and then was shut down. He is claiming nuclear reactions with no harmful radiation... -Mark -Original Message- From: Harry Veeder [mailto:hveeder...@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2012 6:12 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Mock paper Would someone tell me if this a sincere paper? Perhaps I have grown cynical over the last year, because of Rossi's dismissal of scientific practice and the new level of secrecy surrounding LENR research, but I'm remain very skeptical. To me the pictures look like dummy apparatuses which mock Rossi work. I have been told that lie could be a short hand for lie-algebra, but it looks like a double entendre. Also the numerous references of independent verifications sounds like a cliche, and I role my eyes whenever someone propose a new kind of matter and names it after themselves. Harry On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 8:06 PM, Harry Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote: A pretend paper mocking LENR research. Harry PROCEEDINGS OF THE THIRD INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON LIE-ADMISSIBLE TREATMENT OF IRREVERSIBLE PROCESSES (ICLATIP - 3) Kathmandu University, Nepal, April (2011) pages 163-177 http://www.santilli-foundation.org/docs/ICNF-3.pdf
