Re: [Vo]:the desktop supernova
On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 8:03 AM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: I do suspect that they would change their position and actions quickly if anyone develops a technique that leads to dangerous weaponry. I hope that this will never be possible and most of the evidence points in that direction. You bring up an interesting point. Any agency would have to suppress things pretty quickly if the cat were not to get out of the bag. The possibility of taking uranium 235, which is relatively common, and subjecting it to a neutron flux has already been mentioned in a different connection. This discussion has pointed up another possible way of weaponizing LENR. In the case where there was nothing too special involved in doing one of these things, anyone around the world would be able to set up a lab in their apartment. This would be pretty destabilizing, and it's hard to see what could be done about it. Eric
Re: [Vo]:the desktop supernova
yes On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 12:47 AM, Jarold McWilliams oldja...@hotmail.comwrote: This is a private message. Are you the same Axil on other energy websites like focus fusion and thorium reactors? On Mar 28, 2012, at 11:02 PM, Axil Axil wrote: *His *technique* is one that will produce, if it works, extremely high temperatures through bubble collapse. Absolutely, this is not cold fusion. That, however, would not be hot enough (I assume) to reach to supernova temperatures. To take the extremely high temperatures of bubble fusion and then say that because it couldn't produce supernova temperatures, it must be cold fusion is ... a reason why I don't write here much any more.* I really don’t want to discourage you from posting here. Your posts here are of great value. I feel your 2010 post on LeClair was your best work. Please continue your great work here. Please check my logic… Let’s first define some terms. A fission bomb is the trigger of a fusion bomb. When the fission bomb is detonated, gamma and X-rays emitted first symmetrically compress the fusion fuel, and then heat it to thermonuclear temperatures. The ensuing fusion reaction of light elements creates enormous numbers of high-speed neutrons, which can then induce fission in materials not normally prone to it, such as depleted uranium. Each of these components is known as a stage, with the fission bomb as the primary or “trigger” and the fusion capsule as the secondary. Hot Fusion of a zoo of heavy elements has never happened on earth. But if it did, large numbers of high speed neutrons would be created. There is no evidence of intense production of high speed neutrons in the LeClair incident. The proof is that there was no detection of residual radioactive isotopes by the hasmat crew that arrive just after the experiment to check the lab. Hot fusion produces neutrons with few exceptions. Since no evidence of their large scale production was detected, by necessity no hot fusion occurred. Cold fusion never produces neutrons because it is proton fusion. This type of fusion will produce only trace amounts of neutrons but they are very low energy and few in number. If large scale transmutation occurred, then cold fusion can be the only possible explanation consistent with the evidence. Furthermore, Cold fusion cannot be configured to produce a compressive field of gamma and x-rays required for a nuclear trigger. Regards: axil * * * * On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 9:10 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.comwrote: At 01:34 PM 3/28/2012, Guenter Wildgruber wrote: On the other hand we are confronted with the situation that anybody, who thinks LENR could be real, is easily located in the mental asylum. Did you read that review I cited? Storms, Status of cold fusion (2010). I assure you that Dr. Storms is not in the mental asylum, nor are the reviewers for Naturwissenschaften, which is the flagship multidisciplinary journal of Springer-Verlag, one of the largest scientific publishers in the world. Mainstream. Not a fringe journal. So which criteria do we have to decide? Articles authorized and put into 'truth-status' by Peer-reviewed journals? Yes. (But truth-status doesn't exist.) To do more than that requires a deep understanding of the field. The reputation of cold fusion is that it could not be replicated. That's utterly inconsistent with what has been published in the peer-reviewed mainstream press, not to mention thousands of conference papers (which, individually, aren't particularly reliable, quality varies greatly, but much sound work has expeditiously been published this way; and you can tell, to some degree by what is later cited in peer-reviewed sources). Experiments? Which maybe faulty. Conducted by idiots with two left hands. Got any in mind? The faulty experiment is one that was not completely reported. Experiments often leave much to be desired, requiring more work. Others criticism them because they didn't do this or that, but often they are simply doing what they can. In hindsight, there is almost always something left out. Corporate and other scammers, who make a cheap profit on -ahem- con-fusion? Not common. Rossi is a possibility. Defkalion, less likely but still quite possible. Commercial interests aren't scientists, though they might employ some. We have no science on Rossi, nothing reported according to the protocols of science. Rossi himself dismissed the very concept of a control experiment. Why should he run a control: he knows, he thinks, what he will see with a control: nothing. But anyone who knows science knows the importance of controls. Rossi dumps X energy into his system. How much steam can you make with X energy? Some, it appears. How much steadm was actually generated? Well, not exactly measured, because and on and on. Posters on an imaginary stage? Everything is possible and has to be weighed
Re: [Vo]:the desktop supernova
On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 11:38 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: I know for a fact that the government can order a patent kept secret. I once patented a spread spectrum transceiver which was placed in a secret vault. It used some new concepts which the air force wanted with held. At the end of fiscal year 2011, there were 5,241 secrecy orders in effect. http://www.fas.org/sgp/othergov/invention/index.html T
Re: [Vo]:the desktop supernova
On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 7:11 AM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 11:38 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.comwrote: I know for a fact that the government can order a patent kept secret. I once patented a spread spectrum transceiver which was placed in a secret vault. It used some new concepts which the air force wanted with held. At the end of fiscal year 2011, there were 5,241 secrecy orders in effect. http://www.fas.org/sgp/othergov/invention/index.html Of all the sponsoring agencies, the Navy has the highest sequestered patent count most years. T
Re: [Vo]:the desktop supernova
Von: Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com An: Guenter Wildgruber gwildgru...@ymail.com CC: Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com Gesendet: 15:57 Mittwoch, 28.März 2012 Betreff: Re: [Vo]:the desktop supernova Guenter, as Abd noted, LeClair produced hot fusion, NOT LENR. Cold fusion clearly causes transmutation which you can learn easily from my book and from ... thanks, Edmund, I will put that into my mind, which is weighing the alternatives. As you surely understand, this is a very important distinction. If we cannot cannot secure this distinction --'good 'LENR versus 'bad' LENR on theoretical grounds, we are in deep trouble. This is what I wanted to throw into the round, to ponder and discuss. Anyway. I have to read Your book. All the best Guenter
Re: [Vo]:the desktop supernova
you don't even need to read a patent. for me the data are already public in scientific papers, reviewed or not. no magic in Rossi and DGT success, just plain engineering from various papers including Celani, Piantelli, Focardi, SPAWAR, Miley,... increasing the COP is just insulating the reaction, or increasing it's density. increasing it's density is both increasing H+ availability with H2 breaker catalyst, and increasing surface and active site density by designing powder. control is just an engineer job, with classic solutions (rocket science is more complex). Go to china, ask a gang of various engineer to help you, you won't be rich, but it will work. the only reason LENR is not everywhere is that the big bosses think it is fake. don't expect to sell LENR to china, like US , they are very protectionist and solution will be local. Anyway even in Europe, Defkalion/Rossi have 1-2 years to make money, and after that they will be put out of business by governments or big corps, by illegal force. 2012/3/29 Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: I know for a fact that the government can order a patent kept secret. I stand corrected. However I do not think this will be a problem with cold fusion for reasons I have discussed previously: The government does not believe cold fusion is real and they would not take action to suppress it until they do. By then it would be too late. (I doubt they want to suppress it in any case.) Security by obscurity does not work in the 21st century. If you fear the government may suppress the patent, you can put a copy of it on the Internet and within a few days thousands of copies will be distributed worldwide. Give me a copy and I can guarantee that. If the government accuses you of distributing secret information you can say oops, my computer was hacked. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:the desktop supernova
Today it would be much more difficult for them to keep it out of the public domain due to the Internet as you suggest. The patent I mentioned was obtained over 20 years ago when spread spectrum was just coming out of the military and into public use. I was quite pleased to hear that the company I shared the patent with is still manufacturing that product which downloads data from locomotives at a modest data rate. Of course they have had to replace a number of components that are now not available. I think the government officials in power most likely do not believe LENR is real and therefore are not too concerned with secrecy. The international work being performed upon the concepts prevents them from having significant control in any case. I do suspect that they would change their position and actions quickly if anyone develops a technique that leads to dangerous weaponry. I hope that this will never be possible and most of the evidence points in that direction. Dave -Original Message- From: Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thu, Mar 29, 2012 9:43 am Subject: Re: [Vo]:the desktop supernova David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: I know for a fact that the government can order a patent kept secret. I stand corrected. However I do not think this will be a problem with cold fusion for reasons I have discussed previously: The government does not believe cold fusion is real and they would not take action to suppress it until they do. By then it would be too late. (I doubt they want to suppress it in any case.) Security by obscurity does not work in the 21st century. If you fear the government may suppress the patent, you can put a copy of it on the Internet and within a few days thousands of copies will be distributed worldwide. Give me a copy and I can guarantee that. If the government accuses you of distributing secret information you can say oops, my computer was hacked. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:the desktop supernova
Here is the bottom line. Le Clair is setting up very hot conditions, conditions where only a plasma could exist, inside the collapsing bubble. If there is a fusion reaction, it's hot fusion, practically by definition. Now, there is a kind of cold fusion which really means hot fusion but short of normal fusion temperatures. It's used for the generation of high-Z elements through collisions. If the collision energy is normal, the resulting fused nucleus is immediately broken up. By lowering the energy (which lowers fusion yield, but there is always *some* yield at lower energies), the resulting nucleus can survive, sometimes, its normal life. (These are all unstable nuclei.) This kind of cold fusion is really a variety of hot fusion, not of what we call cold fusion, which does occur only in condensed matter, it appears. The Le Clair effect isn't cold fusion, period. It isn't LENR, it's high-energy. Relying on rumors, and then logical interpretation of rumors, such as an alleged Hazmat team conclusion, which appears to conflict with what the source for the Hazmat story -- Le Clair -- says about the results, is shaky upon shaky. This isn't deuterium, it's ordinary water. Tap water, he says Get tap water very, very hot, what happens? Depends on the temperature. And I don't really care, because *there is no independent evidence that this happened.* Le Clair is next to incoherent. I advised him, more than a year ago, what to do if this was real. I don't see any sign that he took the advice. He's got zero credibility. Instead of taking steps to establish credibility, he's just repeating his story and his interpretations. That's his choice, but the rest of us will respond -- or not respond -- accordingly. Notice: if he'd simply reported what happened, without adding in his interpretations, he'd have been far more credible. What makes him so immediately detectable as out there is his certainty that he's found this and that, his explanations of his findings, as being due to ZPE, etc. He is sharing his story, what he made up, instead of his experience. It can be hard enough just to share experience, but at least, then, there is some possibility of communication. Could Le Clair have found a way to create extremely hot bubble collapses, hot enough to cause fusion? Sure. Why not? But the behavior of very hot water is pretty well-known. It's a plasma, not condensed matter, and so the quantum mechanics are quite well understood. Others have worked with bubble fusion and heavy water, I think, and report low levels of neutrons, with the understanding that those levels represent the reaction rate. That's controversial, for sure, but nobody is saying it's impossible that has any sense. Unlikely, maybe. Still, bubble fusion was taken seriously, and it was only difficulties in replication that led to lack of widespread acceptance. It's still open as a possibility. At 11:02 PM 3/28/2012, Axil Axil wrote: His *technique* is one that will produce, if it works, extremely high temperatures through bubble collapse. Absolutely, this is not cold fusion. That, however, would not be hot enough (I assume) to reach to supernova temperatures. To take the extremely high temperatures of bubble fusion and then say that because it couldn't produce supernova temperatures, it must be cold fusion is ... a reason why I don't write here much any more. I really dont want to discourage you from posting here. Your posts here are of great value. I feel your 2010 post on LeClair was your best work. Please continue your great work here. Please check my logic Lets first define some terms. A fission bomb is the trigger of a fusion bomb. When the fission bomb is detonated, gamma and X-rays emitted first symmetrically compress the fusion fuel, and then heat it to thermonuclear temperatures. The ensuing fusion reaction of light elements creates enormous numbers of high-speed neutrons, which can then induce fission in materials not normally prone to it, such as depleted uranium. Each of these components is known as a stage, with the fission bomb as the primary or trigger and the fusion capsule as the secondary. Hot Fusion of a zoo of heavy elements has never happened on earth. But if it did, large numbers of high speed neutrons would be created. There is no evidence of intense production of high speed neutrons in the LeClair incident. The proof is that there was no detection of residual radioactive isotopes by the hasmat crew that arrive just after the experiment to check the lab. Hot fusion produces neutrons with few exceptions. Since no evidence of their large scale production was detected, by necessity no hot fusion occurred. Cold fusion never produces neutrons because it is proton fusion. This type of fusion will produce only trace amounts of neutrons but they are very low energy and few in number. If large scale
Re: [Vo]:the desktop supernova
At 10:03 AM 3/29/2012, David Roberson wrote: I think the government officials in power most likely do not believe LENR is real and therefore are not too concerned with secrecy. The international work being performed upon the concepts prevents them from having significant control in any case. The position of the U.S. goverment is a bit unclear. The reality of LENR hasn't been well publicized, even though a turn obviously happened sometime around 2004. I do suspect that they would change their position and actions quickly if anyone develops a technique that leads to dangerous weaponry. I hope that this will never be possible and most of the evidence points in that direction. The context of this discussion is the claim of Le Clair. That's not LENR, I'll keep repeating. This is quite clear. It might be hot fusion, it might be a schizophrenic fantasy, but LENR, it isn't. It isn't Low-energy. The effect is happening from bubble collapse, which means really, really hot. Except for what might happen with rarity on the level of maybe a few times in the history of the universe -- or rarer -- the reactions involved in LENR could not occur in plasma conditions, they require the influence of condensed matter, which can't exist at those temperatures. We still don't know what, specifically, is allowing LENR. There are plenty of theories, but it's quite difficult to investigate. Plasma physics is well known, because you can literally see what is happening. How can you tell what is happening in a palladium lattice? NiH reactions open up some possibilities for exploration, but ... I haven't even seen helium results from Arata's PdD work (which is similar in being gas loaded). It's like we are blind. We need to see much more. More basic science, less jumping up and down from visions of cheap energy, which are not likely to be realized until we have a much better idea of what's actually going on.
Re: [Vo]:the desktop supernova
*At 10:03 AM 3/29/2012, David Roberson wrote: * *I think the government officials in power most likely do not believe LENR is real and therefore are not too concerned with secrecy. The international work being performed upon the concepts prevents them from having significant control in any case. * *The position of the U.S. goverment is a bit unclear. The reality of LENR hasn't been well publicized, even though a turn obviously happened sometime around 2004.* *I do suspect that they would change their position and actions quickly if anyone develops a technique that leads to dangerous weaponry. I hope that this will never be possible and most of the evidence points in that direction. * LENR could pose a significant proliferation threat. First some background. Isotope separation is the process of concentrating specific isotopes of a chemical element by removing other isotopes, for example separating natural uranium into enriched uranium and depleted uranium. This is a crucial process in the manufacture of uranium fuel for nuclear power stations, and is also required for the creation of uranium based nuclear weapons. Plutonium based weapons use plutonium produced in a nuclear reactor, which must be operated in such a way as to produce plutonium already of suitable isotopic mix or grade. While in general chemical elements can be purified through chemical processes, isotopes of the same element have nearly identical chemical properties, which make this type of separation impractical. This process of separating even numbered isotopes from odd numbered transuranic isotopes is the greatest disincentive to rampant proliferation of nuclear weapons technology in the world today There are three types of isotope separation techniques but the one in general use today is directly based on the atomic weight of the isotope. It is hard to separate uranium-235 from the more common uranium-238. On the other extreme, separation of fissile plutonium-239 from the common impurity plutonium-240, while desirable in that it would allow the creation of gun-type nuclear weapons from plutonium, is generally agreed to be impractical because of the closeness of the atomic weights of these two plutonium isotopes. All large-scale isotope separation schemes employ a number of similar stages which produce successively higher concentrations of the desired isotope. Each stage enriches the product of the previous step further before being sent to the next stage. Similarly, the tailings from each stage are returned to the previous stage for further processing. This creates a sequential enriching system called a cascade. There are two important factors that affect the performance of a cascade. The first is the separation factor (the square root of the mass ratio of the two isotopes), which is a number greater than 1. The second is the number of required stages to get the desired purity. The number of times the cascade process may be repeated is based on the purity of the isotope required. This number can get into the tens of thousands. The bomb grade U235 enrichment level starts at about 80%. The equipment needed to do this isotopic separation is large, hugely expensive, power intensive, and highly controlled. As opposed to terror groups, only countries have the money and the nuclear know-how to do isotopic separation. Once you have bomb grade uranium the bomb is relatively easy to build. LENR may provide an easy way to enrich uranium, because it burns even numbered isotopes of an element leaving the odd atomic numbered element behind. For example, U-238 would be converted to Cesium-137 and iodine-131 among other nuclear wastes products, but U-235 would remain unaffected. How far this LENR based enrichment of U-235 would go is not known, but the potential is there. I could replace the nickel in my DGT reactor with pitch blend and in a year or two have some enriched U-235 to experiment with. On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 1:03 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.comwrote: At 10:03 AM 3/29/2012, David Roberson wrote: I think the government officials in power most likely do not believe LENR is real and therefore are not too concerned with secrecy. The international work being performed upon the concepts prevents them from having significant control in any case. The position of the U.S. goverment is a bit unclear. The reality of LENR hasn't been well publicized, even though a turn obviously happened sometime around 2004. I do suspect that they would change their position and actions quickly if anyone develops a technique that leads to dangerous weaponry. I hope that this will never be possible and most of the evidence points in that direction. The context of this discussion is the claim of Le Clair. That's not LENR, I'll keep repeating. This is quite clear. It might be hot fusion, it might be a schizophrenic fantasy, but LENR, it isn't. It isn't Low-energy. The effect is happening
Re: [Vo]:the desktop supernova
At 12:45 AM 3/28/2012, Guenter Wildgruber wrote: Von: Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com An: vortex-l@eskimo.com Gesendet: 1:22 Mittwoch, 28.März 2012 Betreff: Re: [Vo]:the desktop supernova Ed Storms wrote to me: I did not confirm transmutation. In fact, I told LeClair just the opposite. - Jed So maybe the LENR-crowd should get its act together whether there are transmutations or not. Maybe Mr. Wildgruber should get his contexts straight. Transmutation of elements occurs at quite low levels in PdD cold fusion. There is, reported from those experiments, only one high-level transmutation, deuterium - helium-4, i.e., correlated with the heat (at roughly the known yield, by whatever pathway). Tritium is found, at lower levels, and the same with other elements. See the review by Edumund Storms, Status of cold fusion (2010), Naturwissenschaften. (A preprint is hosted on lenr-canr.org). It appears that Le Clair provided Storms with a sample of the material allegedly produced by his disastrous experiments. Storms found no evidence of transmutation in that material, but I'm not sure what tests were performed. Le Clair's story is fantastic, and his explanations are even more out there. As I've written, if Le Clair's story is true, there are huge military implications. This is not merely a method of producing energy, and it would make, for example, a handy nuclear trigger. Do not try this at home. Le Clair did it at home, and, again, if we can believe his reports -- which is highly questionable -- he and his partner nearly died. Or was that last episode at the NRL in Washington? I'm not sure that the stories are straight, but it doesn't matter. (ie not only one-step production of He or Cu, but a spectrum of elements) Then probably it would split into two groups, (plus Randall Mills, who has a theory of his own). As an observer I can only say: There is evidence for both, or a contiunuum. Which worries me. Even good-mannered LENR seems to have some bursts of bad manner. How human. This isn't LENR. Get that straight. If this is real, it's hot fusion, which is precisely why it is so dangerous. Bubble fusion creates very high temperatures in the collapse of the bubbles, and there have been reports of energetic neutrons from bubble fusion, which remain controversial. (Normally, the known temperatures of bubble collapse are still below the temperatures needed for hot fusion.) Le Clair is using cavitation in a particular way that might focus the cavitation energy on a target. Le Clair is an expert on cavitation, apparently. That he is openly talking about this, so long after the events in question, is a sign that there is nothing there. The military would not try to keep this quiet through the inefficient means of ignoring him, i.e., trusting that everyone would think he's crazy. He has a technique which, again, if he's not hallucinating (or lying), has more than once generated strong nuclear effects. This was not some mild LENR effect, visible only through instrumentation. His setup is not expensive, it's purely a matter of knowing what to do. So, even if he's crazy as a loon, he could do it again, he could demonstrate it, and teach it to someone else. No, the military would have investigated, and probably did investigate. They'd have checked out his reports of the paramedics and the Hazmat team, they'd have reviewed his medical records, and they'd have obtained samples from his lab. If there was anything to this, he'd have been ordered to keep quiet about it, the technology would have been appropriated by the goverment, and, yes, they can do that where national security is involved. They'd pay him, and he'd be working for them. And if he refused to cooperate, he'd be imprisoned. And, again, yes, they can do that. Rossi's work is, if real, LENR. What reaction remains unclear. My position on Rossi is that we should continue as if this is *nothing*, while remaining open to evidence to the contrary. Independent evidence. We were told, by Rossi, that it would all be over by last October. Is it over? I think not. We know practically nothing more than we did a year ago this January. Rossi has refused every opportunity for a semi-independent confirmation, not to mention full independent confirmation. His recent threat to sue would be suing someone for stating the obvious, i.e., for drawing and stating obvious conclusions from behavior that Rossi voluntarily engaged in. Some of us, thinking that Rossi may have indeed found something important, have hypothesized, to explain his bizarre behavior, that he has deliberately created the impression of fraud, treading an edge, so that he (1) gets publicity and then possible investment when and as he needs it, and (2) competitors will be discouraged from trying to discover his secrets. What is most likely, in my opinion, is that Rossi did indeed find something
Re: [Vo]:the desktop supernova
*As I've written, if Le Clair's story is true, there are huge military implications. This is not merely a method of producing energy, and it would make, for example, a handy nuclear trigger. Do not try this at home.* Such a statement sounds good initially, but it may tarnish when compared against current military reality. Military requirements are evaluated ageist the current weapons systems in place and the cost effectiveness of how the new agent can improve those systems. After spending $6 trillion on some 30,000 thermonuclear devices, including a network of national labs filled with purpose trained workers who hate LENR with a passion. It might not be prudent to replace that triggering mechanism, especially if it cannot be tested. The need to test thermonuclear devices in a lab setting has cost the country many billions in laser and inertial confinement simulators. The country is facing continuing arms reduction commandments and a trillion dollar cutback in the military budget due to the tea party rebellion. New bomb projects are not at the top of the priority list. On the other hand, the military must free itself from the requirement to use foreign oil. Noting that worldwide demand for oil is increasing at an alarming rate, the Military Advisory Board of the Center for Naval Analyses in its new report, Ensuring America's Freedom of Movement: a National Security Imperative to Reduce America's Oil Dependence, calls for immediate, swift and aggressive action to achieve oil independence. Reducing oil use would expand the nation's foreign policy options, the retired military officials say, because our thirst for oil would no longer tether us as tightly to certain unreliable partners. Our reliance on this single commodity makes us vulnerable … We are held hostage to price fixing by a cartel that includes actors who would do our nation harm, and we are too often called upon to risk the lives of our sons and daughters to acquire fragile oil supplies form this very cartel. The U.S. Navy plans to reduce its dependence on oil by reducing petroleum use in non-tactical vehicles by half, and it will depend on alternative energy to power 50 percent of its energy use by 2020, the secretary of the Navy said. Raymond E. Mabus and former Sen. John Warner testified at Naval Station Norfolk during a Senate Energy Subcommittee on Water and Power hearing aboard the USS Kearsarge. It is critically important that we reform how the Navy and Marine Corps use, produce and procure energy, especially in this fiscally constrained environment, Mabus said. We must use energy more efficiently and we must lead in the development of alternative energy. Otherwise we allow our military readiness to remain at risk. This is how the Rossi reactor fits in. It is an ideal replacement for oil powered boats using mostly electrical power to feed rail guns and other futuristic naval weapons systems. The Navy plans to spend $1 billion next fiscal year for operational and shore energy initiatives. The Navy plans to build a Great Green Fleet that will sail by 2016. It will spend $510 million, along with the Department of Energy to jump start commercial development of the advanced alternative fuels industry This current state of affairs is the reason why the Navy has selected Rossi’s more docile LENR solution over other more extreme alternatives. Regards: Axil On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 10:24 AM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.comwrote: At 12:45 AM 3/28/2012, Guenter Wildgruber wrote: Von: Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com An: vortex-l@eskimo.com Gesendet: 1:22 Mittwoch, 28.März 2012 Betreff: Re: [Vo]:the desktop supernova Ed Storms wrote to me: I did not confirm transmutation. In fact, I told LeClair just the opposite. - Jed So maybe the LENR-crowd should get its act together whether there are transmutations or not. Maybe Mr. Wildgruber should get his contexts straight. Transmutation of elements occurs at quite low levels in PdD cold fusion. There is, reported from those experiments, only one high-level transmutation, deuterium - helium-4, i.e., correlated with the heat (at roughly the known yield, by whatever pathway). Tritium is found, at lower levels, and the same with other elements. See the review by Edumund Storms, Status of cold fusion (2010), Naturwissenschaften. (A preprint is hosted on lenr-canr.org). It appears that Le Clair provided Storms with a sample of the material allegedly produced by his disastrous experiments. Storms found no evidence of transmutation in that material, but I'm not sure what tests were performed. Le Clair's story is fantastic, and his explanations are even more out there. As I've written, if Le Clair's story is true, there are huge military implications. This is not merely a method of producing energy, and it would make, for example, a handy nuclear trigger. Do not try this at home. Le Clair did it at home, and, again, if we can believe his
Re: [Vo]:the desktop supernova
Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com wrote: No, the military would have investigated, and probably did investigate. I doubt it. There are dozens or hundreds of similar reports every year. The military does not have the people or the inclination to investigate them. They'd have checked out his reports of the paramedics and the Hazmat team, they'd have reviewed his medical records, and they'd have obtained samples from his lab. If there was anything to this, he'd have been ordered to keep quiet about it . . . Unless you are serving in the military, it cannot order you to do anything. The U.S. military has no authority over civilians except in war and emergencies, such as floods, when the National Guard has been deployed. Months ago, someone here said that NASA is investigating a claim and they will have to decide whether the government should suppress it, or what policy should be taken. That's absurd. NASA is not a policy making agency. That's like saying the Census Bureau will decide whether to let the population grow. Even if NASA did set policy, no agency can make up unconstitutional rules. , the technology would have been appropriated by the goverment . . . The U.S. government cannot appropriate things at will. There has been some talk here about the government ordering patents to be kept secret. People who know about patents have told me that is a myth. I wouldn't know, but I doubt the government can suppress information. If it did not grant you a patent, you could simply publish the entire patent application on the Internet, perhaps in a foreign country. If you are not enrolled in the military or the CIA, and you have not signed an NDA or other secrecy agreement with a corporation or agency, you can tell anyone you like about just about anything. There are some commonsense rules about revealing military secrets or dangerous chemical and biological formulas, such as the DNA of virulent avian influenza. Other than that it is a free country, and even if it isn't, many other countries are, and the Internet is everywhere. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:the desktop supernova
*This isn't LENR. Get that straight. If this is real, it's hot fusion, which is precisely why it is so dangerous. Bubble fusion creates very high temperatures in the collapse of the bubbles, and there have been reports of energetic neutrons from bubble fusion, which remain controversial. (Normally, the known temperatures of bubble collapse are still below the temperatures needed for hot fusion.)* For the sake of argument, assuming the information we get from LeClair was true, his process cannot be hot fusion. Let us look at this question from the perspective of astrophysics. He talks about transmuting heavy elements far beyond the atomic number of iron. This is beyond the heat range of fusion reactions produced inside the hottest stars even during their last frantic seconds of collapse into a supernova were iron sinks to the heart of a stars center in milliseconds. Only the fusion of a supernova can produce transuranics and rare earth elements. Therefore, since LeClair is still alive and kicking here on earth, any heavy element transmutation reaction he saw (if any) must by necessity of his continued existence be cold fusion. Regards: axil On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 10:24 AM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.comwrote: At 12:45 AM 3/28/2012, Guenter Wildgruber wrote: Von: Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com An: vortex-l@eskimo.com Gesendet: 1:22 Mittwoch, 28.März 2012 Betreff: Re: [Vo]:the desktop supernova Ed Storms wrote to me: I did not confirm transmutation. In fact, I told LeClair just the opposite. - Jed So maybe the LENR-crowd should get its act together whether there are transmutations or not. Maybe Mr. Wildgruber should get his contexts straight. Transmutation of elements occurs at quite low levels in PdD cold fusion. There is, reported from those experiments, only one high-level transmutation, deuterium - helium-4, i.e., correlated with the heat (at roughly the known yield, by whatever pathway). Tritium is found, at lower levels, and the same with other elements. See the review by Edumund Storms, Status of cold fusion (2010), Naturwissenschaften. (A preprint is hosted on lenr-canr.org). It appears that Le Clair provided Storms with a sample of the material allegedly produced by his disastrous experiments. Storms found no evidence of transmutation in that material, but I'm not sure what tests were performed. Le Clair's story is fantastic, and his explanations are even more out there. As I've written, if Le Clair's story is true, there are huge military implications. This is not merely a method of producing energy, and it would make, for example, a handy nuclear trigger. Do not try this at home. Le Clair did it at home, and, again, if we can believe his reports -- which is highly questionable -- he and his partner nearly died. Or was that last episode at the NRL in Washington? I'm not sure that the stories are straight, but it doesn't matter. (ie not only one-step production of He or Cu, but a spectrum of elements) Then probably it would split into two groups, (plus Randall Mills, who has a theory of his own). As an observer I can only say: There is evidence for both, or a contiunuum. Which worries me. Even good-mannered LENR seems to have some bursts of bad manner. How human. This isn't LENR. Get that straight. If this is real, it's hot fusion, which is precisely why it is so dangerous. Bubble fusion creates very high temperatures in the collapse of the bubbles, and there have been reports of energetic neutrons from bubble fusion, which remain controversial. (Normally, the known temperatures of bubble collapse are still below the temperatures needed for hot fusion.) Le Clair is using cavitation in a particular way that might focus the cavitation energy on a target. Le Clair is an expert on cavitation, apparently. That he is openly talking about this, so long after the events in question, is a sign that there is nothing there. The military would not try to keep this quiet through the inefficient means of ignoring him, i.e., trusting that everyone would think he's crazy. He has a technique which, again, if he's not hallucinating (or lying), has more than once generated strong nuclear effects. This was not some mild LENR effect, visible only through instrumentation. His setup is not expensive, it's purely a matter of knowing what to do. So, even if he's crazy as a loon, he could do it again, he could demonstrate it, and teach it to someone else. No, the military would have investigated, and probably did investigate. They'd have checked out his reports of the paramedics and the Hazmat team, they'd have reviewed his medical records, and they'd have obtained samples from his lab. If there was anything to this, he'd have been ordered to keep quiet about it, the technology would have been appropriated by the goverment, and, yes, they can do that where national security is involved. They'd pay him, and he'd
Re: [Vo]:the desktop supernova
At 12:45 PM 3/28/2012, Axil Axil wrote: As I've written, if Le Clair's story is true, there are huge military implications. This is not merely a method of producing energy, and it would make, for example, a handy nuclear trigger. Do not try this at home. Such a statement sounds good initially, but it may tarnish when compared against current military reality. Military requirements are evaluated ageist the current weapons systems in place and the cost effectiveness of how the new agent can improve those systems. After spending $6 trillion on some 30,000 thermonuclear devices, including a network of national labs filled with purpose trained workers who hate LENR with a passion. It might not be prudent to replace that triggering mechanism, especially if it cannot be tested. This is phenomenally naive and narrow thinking. The purpose of military interest would not be in replacing existing nuclear triggers. They don't need to do that. It would be in preventing other players from using new trigger designs. Nuclear proliferation. Very, very dangerous. So, you think that there was a nuclear incident with highly dangerous radiation exposure to two people, hospitalizing them as seriously ill, with radioactive material lying about, of unknown origin, and the authories go ho, hum? You can believe anything you want. Doesn't make it even reasonably likely.
Re: [Vo]:the desktop supernova
At 01:34 PM 3/28/2012, Guenter Wildgruber wrote: On the other hand we are confronted with the situation that anybody, who thinks LENR could be real, is easily located in the mental asylum. Did you read that review I cited? Storms, Status of cold fusion (2010). I assure you that Dr. Storms is not in the mental asylum, nor are the reviewers for Naturwissenschaften, which is the flagship multidisciplinary journal of Springer-Verlag, one of the largest scientific publishers in the world. Mainstream. Not a fringe journal. So which criteria do we have to decide? Articles authorized and put into 'truth-status' by Peer-reviewed journals? Yes. (But truth-status doesn't exist.) To do more than that requires a deep understanding of the field. The reputation of cold fusion is that it could not be replicated. That's utterly inconsistent with what has been published in the peer-reviewed mainstream press, not to mention thousands of conference papers (which, individually, aren't particularly reliable, quality varies greatly, but much sound work has expeditiously been published this way; and you can tell, to some degree by what is later cited in peer-reviewed sources). Experiments? Which maybe faulty. Conducted by idiots with two left hands. Got any in mind? The faulty experiment is one that was not completely reported. Experiments often leave much to be desired, requiring more work. Others criticism them because they didn't do this or that, but often they are simply doing what they can. In hindsight, there is almost always something left out. Corporate and other scammers, who make a cheap profit on -ahem- con-fusion? Not common. Rossi is a possibility. Defkalion, less likely but still quite possible. Commercial interests aren't scientists, though they might employ some. We have no science on Rossi, nothing reported according to the protocols of science. Rossi himself dismissed the very concept of a control experiment. Why should he run a control: he knows, he thinks, what he will see with a control: nothing. But anyone who knows science knows the importance of controls. Rossi dumps X energy into his system. How much steam can you make with X energy? Some, it appears. How much steadm was actually generated? Well, not exactly measured, because and on and on. Posters on an imaginary stage? Everything is possible and has to be weighed by common sense, which seems to be a rare feature nowadays. I tried to involve as much common sense as possible, as everybody in this list tries. I have come to some preliminary conclusions or hypotheses, which worry me, I must confess. That means nothing if you aren't specific. And i hope, that the very insightful people in this list give me indications, where I err. Your comment is very much appreciated, to be sure. Fodder for thinking. what more can I ask for? best regards anyway You're welcome. The point here was that Le Claire is not claiming cold fusion (though he has claimed that cold fusion is really his effect -- but his effect is obviously, if real, hot fusion, plain old thermonuclear fusion, very dangerous unless the levels are super-low, as they are with, for example, piezo-electric devices that are used to generate neutrons by fusing a little deuterium.
Re: [Vo]:the desktop supernova
At 04:05 PM 3/28/2012, Axil Axil wrote: This isn't LENR. Get that straight. If this is real, it's hot fusion, which is precisely why it is so dangerous. Bubble fusion creates very high temperatures in the collapse of the bubbles, and there have been reports of energetic neutrons from bubble fusion, which remain controversial. (Normally, the known temperatures of bubble collapse are still below the temperatures needed for hot fusion.) For the sake of argument, assuming the information we get from LeClair was true, his process cannot be hot fusion. First of all, when I wrote if real, I was not assuming that every report was accurate, only that the broad outlines were real. Let us look at this question from the perspective of astrophysics. He talks about transmuting heavy elements far beyond the atomic number of iron. This is beyond the heat range of fusion reactions produced inside the hottest stars even during their last frantic seconds of collapse into a supernova were iron sinks to the heart of a stars center in milliseconds. Only the fusion of a supernova can produce transuranics and rare earth elements. I think that's true. Therefore, since LeClair is still alive and kicking here on earth, any heavy element transmutation reaction he saw (if any) must by necessity of his continued existence be cold fusion. That does not follow. Le Clair claims to have created crystals that are accelerated to relativistic velocities. The collision temperature for these crystals would be extremely high, and could indeed be supernova-level. That doesn't mean that the whole environment was at that temperature. He claims to have nearly died, by the way. But I have no idea why Le Clair thinks he got trans-uranic elements. He's said a lot of stuff. His *technique* is one that will produce, if it works, extremely high temperatures through bubble collapse. Absolutely, this is not cold fusion. That, however, would not be hot enough (I assume) to reach to supernova temperatures. To take the extremely high temperatures of bubble fusion and then say that because it couldn't produce supernova temperatures, it must be cold fusion is ... a reason why I don't write here much any more.
Re: [Vo]:the desktop supernova
Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com wrote: So, you think that there was a nuclear incident with highly dangerous radiation exposure to two people, hospitalizing them as seriously ill, with radioactive material lying about, of unknown origin, and the authories go ho, hum? If the authorities believe this is true I am sure they would be interested. Officials in the military and elsewhere would definitely investigate. However, I doubt they believe it. Ed Storms told me he thinks they may have been exposed to radiation but it is impossible to say how much. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:the desktop supernova
I know for a fact that the government can order a patent kept secret. I once patented a spread spectrum transceiver which was placed in a secret vault. It used some new concepts which the air force wanted with held. Dave -Original Message- From: Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Wed, Mar 28, 2012 4:51 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:the desktop supernova [snip]... , the technology would have been appropriated by the goverment . . . The U.S. government cannot appropriate things at will. There has been some talk here about the government ordering patents to be kept secret. People who know about patents have told me that is a myth. I wouldn't know, but I doubt the government can suppress information. If it did not grant you a patent, you could simply publish the entire patent application on the Internet, perhaps in a foreign country. If you are not enrolled in the military or the CIA, and you have not signed an NDA or other secrecy agreement with a corporation or agency, you can tell anyone you like about just about anything. There are some commonsense rules about revealing military secrets or dangerous chemical and biological formulas, such as the DNA of virulent avian influenza. Other than that it is a free country, and even if it isn't, many other countries are, and the Internet is everywhere. - Jed ..
Re: [Vo]:the desktop supernova
*His *technique* is one that will produce, if it works, extremely high temperatures through bubble collapse. Absolutely, this is not cold fusion. That, however, would not be hot enough (I assume) to reach to supernova temperatures. To take the extremely high temperatures of bubble fusion and then say that because it couldn't produce supernova temperatures, it must be cold fusion is ... a reason why I don't write here much any more.* I really don’t want to discourage you from posting here. Your posts here are of great value. I feel your 2010 post on LeClair was your best work. Please continue your great work here. Please check my logic… Let’s first define some terms. A fission bomb is the trigger of a fusion bomb. When the fission bomb is detonated, gamma and X-rays emitted first symmetrically compress the fusion fuel, and then heat it to thermonuclear temperatures. The ensuing fusion reaction of light elements creates enormous numbers of high-speed neutrons, which can then induce fission in materials not normally prone to it, such as depleted uranium. Each of these components is known as a stage, with the fission bomb as the primary or “trigger” and the fusion capsule as the secondary. Hot Fusion of a zoo of heavy elements has never happened on earth. But if it did, large numbers of high speed neutrons would be created. There is no evidence of intense production of high speed neutrons in the LeClair incident. The proof is that there was no detection of residual radioactive isotopes by the hasmat crew that arrive just after the experiment to check the lab. Hot fusion produces neutrons with few exceptions. Since no evidence of their large scale production was detected, by necessity no hot fusion occurred. Cold fusion never produces neutrons because it is proton fusion. This type of fusion will produce only trace amounts of neutrons but they are very low energy and few in number. If large scale transmutation occurred, then cold fusion can be the only possible explanation consistent with the evidence. Furthermore, Cold fusion cannot be configured to produce a compressive field of gamma and x-rays required for a nuclear trigger. Regards: axil * * * * On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 9:10 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.comwrote: At 01:34 PM 3/28/2012, Guenter Wildgruber wrote: On the other hand we are confronted with the situation that anybody, who thinks LENR could be real, is easily located in the mental asylum. Did you read that review I cited? Storms, Status of cold fusion (2010). I assure you that Dr. Storms is not in the mental asylum, nor are the reviewers for Naturwissenschaften, which is the flagship multidisciplinary journal of Springer-Verlag, one of the largest scientific publishers in the world. Mainstream. Not a fringe journal. So which criteria do we have to decide? Articles authorized and put into 'truth-status' by Peer-reviewed journals? Yes. (But truth-status doesn't exist.) To do more than that requires a deep understanding of the field. The reputation of cold fusion is that it could not be replicated. That's utterly inconsistent with what has been published in the peer-reviewed mainstream press, not to mention thousands of conference papers (which, individually, aren't particularly reliable, quality varies greatly, but much sound work has expeditiously been published this way; and you can tell, to some degree by what is later cited in peer-reviewed sources). Experiments? Which maybe faulty. Conducted by idiots with two left hands. Got any in mind? The faulty experiment is one that was not completely reported. Experiments often leave much to be desired, requiring more work. Others criticism them because they didn't do this or that, but often they are simply doing what they can. In hindsight, there is almost always something left out. Corporate and other scammers, who make a cheap profit on -ahem- con-fusion? Not common. Rossi is a possibility. Defkalion, less likely but still quite possible. Commercial interests aren't scientists, though they might employ some. We have no science on Rossi, nothing reported according to the protocols of science. Rossi himself dismissed the very concept of a control experiment. Why should he run a control: he knows, he thinks, what he will see with a control: nothing. But anyone who knows science knows the importance of controls. Rossi dumps X energy into his system. How much steam can you make with X energy? Some, it appears. How much steadm was actually generated? Well, not exactly measured, because and on and on. Posters on an imaginary stage? Everything is possible and has to be weighed by common sense, which seems to be a rare feature nowadays. I tried to involve as much common sense as possible, as everybody in this list tries. I have come to some preliminary conclusions or hypotheses, which worry me, I must confess. That means nothing if you aren't
Re: [Vo]:the desktop supernova
This is a private message. Are you the same Axil on other energy websites like focus fusion and thorium reactors? On Mar 28, 2012, at 11:02 PM, Axil Axil wrote: His *technique* is one that will produce, if it works, extremely high temperatures through bubble collapse. Absolutely, this is not cold fusion. That, however, would not be hot enough (I assume) to reach to supernova temperatures. To take the extremely high temperatures of bubble fusion and then say that because it couldn't produce supernova temperatures, it must be cold fusion is ... a reason why I don't write here much any more. I really don’t want to discourage you from posting here. Your posts here are of great value. I feel your 2010 post on LeClair was your best work. Please continue your great work here. Please check my logic… Let’s first define some terms. A fission bomb is the trigger of a fusion bomb. When the fission bomb is detonated, gamma and X-rays emitted first symmetrically compress the fusion fuel, and then heat it to thermonuclear temperatures. The ensuing fusion reaction of light elements creates enormous numbers of high-speed neutrons, which can then induce fission in materials not normally prone to it, such as depleted uranium. Each of these components is known as a stage, with the fission bomb as the primary or “trigger” and the fusion capsule as the secondary. Hot Fusion of a zoo of heavy elements has never happened on earth. But if it did, large numbers of high speed neutrons would be created. There is no evidence of intense production of high speed neutrons in the LeClair incident. The proof is that there was no detection of residual radioactive isotopes by the hasmat crew that arrive just after the experiment to check the lab. Hot fusion produces neutrons with few exceptions. Since no evidence of their large scale production was detected, by necessity no hot fusion occurred. Cold fusion never produces neutrons because it is proton fusion. This type of fusion will produce only trace amounts of neutrons but they are very low energy and few in number. If large scale transmutation occurred, then cold fusion can be the only possible explanation consistent with the evidence. Furthermore, Cold fusion cannot be configured to produce a compressive field of gamma and x-rays required for a nuclear trigger. Regards: axil On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 9:10 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com wrote: At 01:34 PM 3/28/2012, Guenter Wildgruber wrote: On the other hand we are confronted with the situation that anybody, who thinks LENR could be real, is easily located in the mental asylum. Did you read that review I cited? Storms, Status of cold fusion (2010). I assure you that Dr. Storms is not in the mental asylum, nor are the reviewers for Naturwissenschaften, which is the flagship multidisciplinary journal of Springer-Verlag, one of the largest scientific publishers in the world. Mainstream. Not a fringe journal. So which criteria do we have to decide? Articles authorized and put into 'truth-status' by Peer-reviewed journals? Yes. (But truth-status doesn't exist.) To do more than that requires a deep understanding of the field. The reputation of cold fusion is that it could not be replicated. That's utterly inconsistent with what has been published in the peer-reviewed mainstream press, not to mention thousands of conference papers (which, individually, aren't particularly reliable, quality varies greatly, but much sound work has expeditiously been published this way; and you can tell, to some degree by what is later cited in peer-reviewed sources). Experiments? Which maybe faulty. Conducted by idiots with two left hands. Got any in mind? The faulty experiment is one that was not completely reported. Experiments often leave much to be desired, requiring more work. Others criticism them because they didn't do this or that, but often they are simply doing what they can. In hindsight, there is almost always something left out. Corporate and other scammers, who make a cheap profit on -ahem- con-fusion? Not common. Rossi is a possibility. Defkalion, less likely but still quite possible. Commercial interests aren't scientists, though they might employ some. We have no science on Rossi, nothing reported according to the protocols of science. Rossi himself dismissed the very concept of a control experiment. Why should he run a control: he knows, he thinks, what he will see with a control: nothing. But anyone who knows science knows the importance of controls. Rossi dumps X energy into his system. How much steam can you make with X energy? Some, it appears. How much steadm was actually generated? Well, not exactly measured, because and on and on. Posters on an imaginary stage? Everything is possible and has to be weighed by common sense, which seems to
Re: [Vo]:the desktop supernova
Odd, when you click on the February press releases, you get March: http://www.nanotech-now.com/2012-february-press.htm although the January link gives January. T
Re: [Vo]:the desktop supernova
On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 2:28 AM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: *From the PieEconomics web site as follows:* ** *2/22/12: A new NanoSprire **press release*http://www.nanotech-now.com/news.cgi?story_id=44551 * states: Nanospire has announced that its investigative study on fusion created by cavitation in water has come to an end. It's good that they have stopped testing for now. During the nuclear fusion reaction that occurred when they did their test, Hundreds of wave trains and vortices appeared everywhere and are permanently burned into walls, objects and trees surrounding the lab. [See Krivit's second link, above.] Well, according to Google maps (25 Jesse Daniel DR, Buxton, ME) the Buxton Vehicle Registration is located about five hundred feet from the lab, so I hope none of the people getting their cars registered got irradiated when the desktop supernova occurred.* This is BS. Here is the original blog post: http://pieeconomics.blogspot.com/p/cold-fusion-comedy.html The quote is at the bottom of the post. Here is the actual press release: http://www.1888pressrelease.com/nanospire-inc-successfully-harnesses-cavitation-zero-point-pr-372884.html Looks like Mr. Zweig has taken some liberties with the truth. T
Re: [Vo]:the desktop supernova
On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 7:53 AM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote: Looks like Mr. Zweig has taken some liberties with the truth. My apologies to Mr. Zweig. I misread his blog statement. The claims of tree damage come from a letter sent to Krivit: http://blog.newenergytimes.com/2011/01/31/new-energy-times-issue-36-letters/ by LeClair (half way down). If true (I would love to see photographs), Mr. Zweig is right to be concerned about the health of the public in nearby public facilities. T
RE: [Vo]:the desktop supernova
This is the very interesting quote by LeClair. The experiment gave off powerful crested cnoid de Broglie Matter wave soliton wave packages that were doubly periodic and followed the Jacobi Elliptic functions exactly, mostly in the form of large doubly-periodic vortices. Hundreds of wave trains and vortices appeared everywhere and are permanently burned into walls, objects and trees surrounding the lab. -Mark LeClair, Nanospire I don't know. crested cnoid de Broglie Matter wave soliton wave packages. too many hi-falutin' words all in one sentence! What are LeClair's credentials? From his own statement, he worked at the. Lockheed Missiles and Space Fluid Dynamics Group, I'm not afraid to say that my knowledge of physics and mathematics rivals anyone else in the field. Given that he's probably a pretty sharp cookie, his statement about the wave trains and vortices being permanently burned into walls, objects and trees surrounding the lab is really quite astounding. I'd like to see some piccys of the walls, objects and trees. Interesting legal conundrum. If he gets sued for causing health problems to people living or working nearby, or even property damage to neighboring buildings, and government or expert witness physicists testify that he couldn't possibly be causing any nuclear reactions, then how does one connect his activities with the claimed negative health affects and property damage? -Mark From: Terry Blanton [mailto:hohlr...@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2012 7:30 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:the desktop supernova On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 7:53 AM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote: Looks like Mr. Zweig has taken some liberties with the truth. My apologies to Mr. Zweig. I misread his blog statement. The claims of tree damage come from a letter sent to Krivit: http://blog.newenergytimes.com/2011/01/31/new-energy-times-issue-36-letters/ by LeClair (half way down). If true (I would love to see photographs), Mr. Zweig is right to be concerned about the health of the public in nearby public facilities. T
Re: [Vo]:the desktop supernova
I would not want to be anywhere within a mile of that monster device. Dave -Original Message- From: Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tue, Mar 27, 2012 10:29 am Subject: Re: [Vo]:the desktop supernova On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 7:53 AM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote: Looks like Mr. Zweig has taken some liberties with the truth. My apologies to Mr. Zweig. I misread his blog statement. The claims of tree damage come from a letter sent to Krivit: http://blog.newenergytimes.com/2011/01/31/new-energy-times-issue-36-letters/ by LeClair (half way down). If true (I would love to see photographs), Mr. Zweig is right to be concerned about the health of the public in nearby public facilities. T
Re: [Vo]:the desktop supernova
Von:Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com An: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Gesendet: 8:28 Dienstag, 27.März 2012 Betreff: [Vo]:the desktop supernova From the PieEconomics web site as follows: 2/22/12: A new NanoSprire press releasestates: Axil et al. This is one of several factoids which made me think, that there is no clear distinction between 'friendly' LENR and quite hostile Variants. Anyone comparing this to a fear of speed of trains in the mid 19th century is confused by inapplicable metaphors. 'Progress' is a sensible issue and has to be evaluated anew by each set of evidence. The whole LENR broght me to the preliminary conclusion, that there is sort of a dirty/irregular effect, working on the nanoscale with a LARGE effect, but also silently working in the mesoscale, as Pianatelly. This is quite disturbing. I currently do not know, how deeply it should distrurb (me), but it definitely does. In a general sense, our conceptions of how matter interacts, is questioned, and the battlefield, whatever that is, is projected down to the nanoscale. This is what my inner philosopher has to comment on that. Amen.
Re: [Vo]:the desktop supernova
Krivit is such a robot. He wrote: http://blog.newenergytimes.com/2011/01/31/new-energy-times-issue-36-letters/ [Ed: I apologize for inappropriately attributing your word choice to your educational background. I never believed you accomplished fusion. You are misstating facts. Based on what you described and have shown to me, I believe you have accomplished a clear demonstration of low-energy nuclear reactions. Your work appears worthy of much credit and support, though your claim of fusion at room temperature does not. I applaud and support your courage and persistence, and I encourage your continuing success.] end of quotation from Steve Krivit- Le Clair is explicitly claiming nuclear fusion, and claiming clear evidence for that. It's not LENR, period, if the reports are true. And if they are not true, it's serious delusion or worse. This is not cold fusion or LENR. Bubble fusion, which this would be, in general, if it happens, is hot fusion, not LENR, and if Krivit doesn't know that, he's been asleep for years, dreaming. Le Clair is claiming that LENR phenomena are really cavitation phenomena inducing hot fusion. They aren't. If they were, the high neutron generation rates that Le Clair is claiming would have been evident, it's called the dead graduate student effect. Le Clair came out more than a year ago with these reports. Nobody has verified any of it. Some samples have apparently been analyzed that Le Clair provided. Nothing unusual. As I wrote about a year ago, if this were real, the military would be all over it. Apparently they aren't. There are people informed who would inform the military.
Re: [Vo]:the desktop supernova
Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote: *From the PieEconomics web site as follows:* *Hundreds of wave trains and vortices appeared everywhere and are permanently burned into walls, objects and trees surrounding the lab. [See Krivit's second link, above.] Well, according to Google maps (25 Jesse Daniel DR, Buxton, ME) the Buxton Vehicle Registration is located about five hundred feet from the lab, so I hope none of the people getting their cars registered got irradiated when the desktop supernova occurred.* This is BS. Here is the original blog post: http://pieeconomics.blogspot.com/p/cold-fusion-comedy.html Here is the actual press release: http://www.1888pressrelease.com/nanospire-inc-successfully-harnesses-cavitation-zero-point-pr-372884.html Looks like Mr. Zweig has taken some liberties with the truth. I am not sure who said what here. The quote about walls, objects and trees does appear to be an exaggeration. Fer sure. But that press release has some alarming stuff in it: The radiation emitted by the reactor left nuclear tracks, burned the hole pattern of the core into the clear PVC core enclosure, activated high neutron absorption cross-section 39Cl (56 minute half-life) in the chlorine of the PVC core enclosure and transmuted the water in the reactor into nearly all the other elements. The experiment also accidentally resulted in acute radiation sickness beginning the day after the August 25, 2009 experiments for both investigators Mark LeClair and Sergio Lebid and lasted for more than a year. Acute radiation sickness?!? Are they sure about that? Who diagnosed it? I suppose if someone showed up at the hospital with symptoms of acute radiation exposure, there would be an investigation and something in the mainstream news. Google finds news of this only in blogs. If I were seriously ill for a year I would not continue with the project. Not in the same lab. I would hope to move the thing to a national lab or somewhere similar, with proper safety. Note that this report says the transmutations were confirmed by a number of people including Ed Storms. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:the desktop supernova
*I seem to remember that early on Rossi claimed a nuclear based origin to his reaction and that he put himself in real danger when he tried to look for the cause without lead shielding.* * * *This may have been before the time he perfected his nickel micro-powder.* * * *Rossi has devoted himself for a number of years now in an attempt to tame his reactor; to make it safe for home use. * * * *It is the nickel micro-powder that thermalizes the gamma rays in the Rossi and DGT reactors.* * * *I bet that when DFT tried to burn glass, they received a burst of gamma rays. * * * *The Rossi reaction is a complex one and if an important component of that process is not in place, bad things will happen.* * * * * On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 5:33 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote: *From the PieEconomics web site as follows:* *Hundreds of wave trains and vortices appeared everywhere and are permanently burned into walls, objects and trees surrounding the lab. [See Krivit's second link, above.] Well, according to Google maps (25 Jesse Daniel DR, Buxton, ME) the Buxton Vehicle Registration is located about five hundred feet from the lab, so I hope none of the people getting their cars registered got irradiated when the desktop supernova occurred.* This is BS. Here is the original blog post: http://pieeconomics.blogspot.com/p/cold-fusion-comedy.html Here is the actual press release: http://www.1888pressrelease.com/nanospire-inc-successfully-harnesses-cavitation-zero-point-pr-372884.html Looks like Mr. Zweig has taken some liberties with the truth. I am not sure who said what here. The quote about walls, objects and trees does appear to be an exaggeration. Fer sure. But that press release has some alarming stuff in it: The radiation emitted by the reactor left nuclear tracks, burned the hole pattern of the core into the clear PVC core enclosure, activated high neutron absorption cross-section 39Cl (56 minute half-life) in the chlorine of the PVC core enclosure and transmuted the water in the reactor into nearly all the other elements. The experiment also accidentally resulted in acute radiation sickness beginning the day after the August 25, 2009 experiments for both investigators Mark LeClair and Sergio Lebid and lasted for more than a year. Acute radiation sickness?!? Are they sure about that? Who diagnosed it? I suppose if someone showed up at the hospital with symptoms of acute radiation exposure, there would be an investigation and something in the mainstream news. Google finds news of this only in blogs. If I were seriously ill for a year I would not continue with the project. Not in the same lab. I would hope to move the thing to a national lab or somewhere similar, with proper safety. Note that this report says the transmutations were confirmed by a number of people including Ed Storms. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:the desktop supernova
Von: Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com An: vortex-l@eskimo.com Gesendet: 23:52 Dienstag, 27.März 2012 Betreff: Re: [Vo]:the desktop supernova The Rossi reaction is a complex one and if an important component of that process is not in place, bad things will happen. Agree. In addition, this applies to ALL LENR-reactions, absent a theory. Remember the eventuality of tiny black holes during the last CERN Higgs-Boson search. The skeptics have been silenced by -what?-: the sum of current theory. Remember that! Ultimately a sensible combination of theory and practice decides, what is acceptable. I currently do not see this in the LENR-field. Guenter.
Re: [Vo]:the desktop supernova
*As I wrote about a year ago, if this were real, the military would be all over it. Apparently they aren't. There are people informed who would inform the military.* *http://newenergytimes.com/v2/news/2011/36/3616ideologies.shtml* Cold Fusion Versus LENR: Competing Ideologies By Steven B. Krivit** *The right government manager in the right spot could impose his agenda on the selection of the Rossi reactor over the LeClair reactor and hide the LeClair reactor under the rug.* * * *This retired government manager may have a current commercial relationship with Rossi. After all, a trillion dollars is good motivation. * * * *The Navy may be satisfying their interest in LENR through Rossi.* * * *I only know what is rumored on the NET. You are close to the tap root of LENR truth; what is your opinion?* * * * * On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 5:48 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.comwrote: Krivit is such a robot. He wrote: http://blog.newenergytimes.**com/2011/01/31/new-energy-** times-issue-36-letters/http://blog.newenergytimes.com/2011/01/31/new-energy-times-issue-36-letters/ [Ed: I apologize for inappropriately attributing your word choice to your educational background. I never believed you accomplished fusion. You are misstating facts. Based on what you described and have shown to me, I believe you have accomplished a clear demonstration of low-energy nuclear reactions. Your work appears worthy of much credit and support, though your claim of fusion at room temperature does not. I applaud and support your courage and persistence, and I encourage your continuing success.] end of quotation from Steve Krivit- Le Clair is explicitly claiming nuclear fusion, and claiming clear evidence for that. It's not LENR, period, if the reports are true. And if they are not true, it's serious delusion or worse. This is not cold fusion or LENR. Bubble fusion, which this would be, in general, if it happens, is hot fusion, not LENR, and if Krivit doesn't know that, he's been asleep for years, dreaming. Le Clair is claiming that LENR phenomena are really cavitation phenomena inducing hot fusion. They aren't. If they were, the high neutron generation rates that Le Clair is claiming would have been evident, it's called the dead graduate student effect. Le Clair came out more than a year ago with these reports. Nobody has verified any of it. Some samples have apparently been analyzed that Le Clair provided. Nothing unusual. As I wrote about a year ago, if this were real, the military would be all over it. Apparently they aren't. There are people informed who would inform the military.
Re: [Vo]:the desktop supernova
Ed Storms wrote to me: I did not confirm transmutation. In fact, I told LeClair just the opposite. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:the desktop supernova
The experiment gave off powerful crested cnoid de Broglie Matter wave soliton wave packages that were doubly periodic and followed the Jacobi Elliptic functions exactly, mostly in the form of large doubly-periodic vortices. Hundreds of wave trains and vortices appeared everywhere and are permanently burned into walls, objects and trees surrounding the lab. I can assure you, I would not want to be near a cnoid de Broglie Matter wave soliton wave package. This is giving me fond memories of the language used in the first Star Trek series. Eric
Re: [Vo]:the desktop supernova
Von: Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com An: vortex-l@eskimo.com Gesendet: 1:22 Mittwoch, 28.März 2012 Betreff: Re: [Vo]:the desktop supernova Ed Storms wrote to me: I did not confirm transmutation. In fact, I told LeClair just the opposite. - Jed So maybe the LENR-crowd should get its act together whether there are transmutations or not. (ie not only one-step production of He or Cu, but a spectrum of elements) Then probably it would split into two groups, (plus Randall Mills, who has a theory of his own). As an observer I can only say: There is evidence for both, or a contiunuum. Which worries me. Even good-mannered LENR seems to have some bursts of bad manner. How human. Guenter
