RE: [Vo]:OT (But Not Entirely) - Wisconsin Public Employees Continue Protesting. State Senators AWOL

I've uploaded tons of video clips so it's a bid daunting. You Tube is still processing them. I haven't had time to organize them. For a quick view of inside the capital I would recommend the following clips: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8S3f_3GWoqY

Re: [Vo]:Revised version Celani reports on gamma emission from Rossi device

Jed said, "Notice in the update he [ Celani ] sent to me today, he refers to this as a "wonderful device." I think he is pretty much convinced it is real, despite his complaints about the test and the fact that Rossi prevented him from taking a [ gamma ] spectrum. Melich and I are also "pretty m

RE: [Vo]:OT (But Not Entirely) - Wisconsin Public Employees Continue Protesting. State Senators AWOL

I forgot to post my You Tube channel account: I have downloaded countless videos of the capital protests from Tuesday, Wednesday, and Thursday. I plan on attending Friday's demonstrations as well. Crowds have gotten bigger each day. Tens and thousands are now marching. Check out:

Re: [Vo]:Revised version Celani reports on gamma emission from Rossi device

Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: > According to Celani, observers were not allowed into the room until the > experiment began to "work": > > The device did not work at first. He and others were waiting impatiently in > a room next to the room with the device. > > I don't think he said they were "not

Re: [Vo]:OT (But Not Entirely) - Wisconsin Public Employees Continue Protesting. State Senators AWOL

Yes, this is wonderful! I hope democracy erupts freely at all levels in our society. Rich On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 7:40 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > Off topic or not, thanks for the vivid eye-witness report. > - Jed >

Re: [Vo]:OT (But Not Entirely) - Wisconsin Public Employees Continue Protesting. State Senators AWOL

Off topic or not, thanks for the vivid eye-witness report. - Jed

Re: [Vo]:A note from Biberian about the biological transmutation session

But the good news: http://www.laht.com/article.asp?ArticleId=387067&CategoryId=13003 T

[Vo]:A note from Biberian about the biological transmutation session

Bear with me on this one. Funny how - when you are focused on LENR, the typical National Geographic animal story begins to looks like anomalous energy. http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2011/02/110217-bears-hibernation-war m-sleep-animals-science/ . juxtaposed against: "Anomalous Heat Ge

[Vo]:OT (But Not Entirely) - Wisconsin Public Employees Continue Protesting. State Senators AWOL

The city of Madison, and the rest of the state of Wisconsin is experiencing something akin to its own Cairo, Egypt, moment. It's happening right now. http://www.cnn.com/2011/US/02/17/wisconsin.budget/index.html?hpt=T2 It is now day three of messy, raunchy, ear splitting loud, state-wide pro

Re: [Vo]:Experts have concerns about an upcoming Wiley physics textbook

He certainly could qualify for this to some degree: http://www.wiley.com/WileyCDA/Brand/id-9.html T

[Vo]:A note from Biberian about the biological transmutation session

Aside from the main session at ICCF-16, there were 3 rump sessions, one before and two after. The third was: "A one day Workshop on the Biological Nuclear Transmutations : Historical Perspective and Applications" http://www.iscmns.org/iccf16/course_on_transmutation.htm I did not attend. Biberia

[Vo]:Experts have concerns about an upcoming Wiley physics textbook

Here is a letter I just sent to four editors at Wiley, with a copy to Steve Krivit. I suppose Krivit may not be pleased with it. Let me explain some of the background below the message -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - To Author Services Editors -- I do not know the right person to address this to.

RE: [Vo]:Revised version Celani reports on gamma emission from Rossi device

Debbie, "It is very frustrating that someone with an ID-capable detector didn't collect something." That is not a given. There could easily have been data collected but not disclosed. Celani may have been covering his tracks with what seems to be a persistent effort to explain to journali

Re: [Vo]:Revised version Celani reports on gamma emission from Rossi device

On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 5:54 PM, Joshua Cude wrote: > Gotta run. I'll catch up in 3 or 4 days. Don't take my absence as a > concession. Concession to what? We are truthseekers, not competitors. If you are an eternal septic, you will never be convinced. Albedo5 (who ran the septic forum on Comp

Re: [Vo]:Revised version Celani reports on gamma emission from Rossi device

Gotta run. I'll catch up in 3 or 4 days. Don't take my absence as a concession. JC On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 2:27 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > Joshua Cude wrote: > > >> Well, it is if an experiment can be easily designed to make such >> suspicions impossible. As would be the case here, if the claim

Re: [Vo]:Revised version Celani reports on gamma emission from Rossi device

If you want a natural emitter that would do a burst that would saturate a small NaI detector, that's easy. You would have to have access to something like a Cs137 or Co60/Co57 source, or even something as common as Tc99m, but any medical imaging facility or drilling outfit would have something. T

[Vo]:More about ICCF-16

Okay, the abstracts are uploaded, as noted. I hope to have the paper from Robert Duncan by next week. The conference proceedings will be published by Biberian in his electronic journal. Here are a few of my own comments about the conference. The first day of the conference was mainly devoted to

Re: [Vo]:Revised version Celani reports on gamma emission from Rossi device

Also, the fact that both meters were pegged. That sounds more like an event, and less like the momentary exposure of a shielded catalyst. On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 4:43 PM, Jones Beene wrote: > From: albedo5 > > > > If we had a spectrum, we would know what it was - or more to the point, > what

RE: [Vo]:Revised version Celani reports on gamma emission from Rossi device

From: albedo5 If we had a spectrum, we would know what it was - or more to the point, what it wasn't. I really, REALLY want a spectrum. Just one. Hmm . could it be simply a matter of deduction ? . connect the dots with Celani being specifically the only party being disallowed, hi

Re: [Vo]:Revised version Celani reports on gamma emission from Rossi device

If we had a spectrum, we would know what it was - or more to the point, what it wasn't. I really, REALLY want a spectrum. Just one. On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 3:52 PM, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: > > > On 02/17/2011 03:27 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > > > ... I meant you do not have to trust Rossi. Yo

Re: [Vo]:Revised version Celani reports on gamma emission from Rossi device

On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 3:52 PM, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: > Why was that?  It seems very strange. (Image of Rossi, a la Bear Gryllis, with a firesteel trying to start his "fire".) firesteel.com T

Re: [Vo]:Revised version Celani reports on gamma emission from Rossi device

I wrote: The scientific method demands that an arbitrary limit be placed on objections. It is a matter of opinion how much proof is needed, and how many objections should be met, but you cannot leave the question undecided indefinitely. . . . In this case, I think we need to start drawing so

Re: [Vo]:Revised version Celani reports on gamma emission from Rossi device

On 02/17/2011 03:27 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > > ... I meant you do not have to trust Rossi. You do have to trust Levi, > Celani and Dufour and some other people. They might be conspiring > together to fool us. If they can keep a secret, it would be easy for > them to fool us. I have no actual pro

Re: [Vo]:Revised version Celani reports on gamma emission from Rossi device

Joshua Cude wrote: > Well, it is if an experiment can be easily designed to make such suspicions > impossible. As would be the case here, if the claims were true. > Seriously, It is nearly impossible to design a demonstration that will eliminate all suspicions, in all people. Some people, such

Re: [Vo]:Revised version Celani reports on gamma emission from Rossi device

On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 11:54 AM, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: > > > On 02/17/2011 11:41 AM, Joshua Cude wrote: > > > > On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 10:08 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > >> >> I do not think this demo required any trust. >> > > But you said, if you trust... then there's no point. > > > Calm

Re: [Vo]:Revised version Celani reports on gamma emission from Rossi device

Joshua Cude wrote: > The professors tested and calibrated this machine for 6 weeks. They would >> have discovered that it has a large hidden thermal mass. > > > They did. It takes 30 minutes to bring the temperature up to the level > needed to deliver water at 100C. > They reportedly had diffic

Re: [Vo]:Revised version Celani reports on gamma emission from Rossi device

On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 12:54 PM, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: > > > If there *are* investors, on the other hand, then the demo is a much > tougher sell, IMO, because when there's a pile of money involved, even > seemingly far-fetched explanations can no longer be discarded out of hand. > There a

Re: [Vo]:Revised version Celani reports on gamma emission from Rossi device

On 02/17/2011 11:41 AM, Joshua Cude wrote: > > > On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 10:08 AM, Jed Rothwell > wrote: > > > I do not think this demo required any trust. > > > But you said, if you trust... then there's no point. Calm down, Joshua. Jed meant there's no need

Re: [Vo]:Revised version Celani reports on gamma emission from Rossi device

On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 10:08 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > > I do not think this demo required any trust. > But you said, if you trust... then there's no point.

Re: [Vo]:Revised version Celani reports on gamma emission from Rossi device

On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 9:35 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > Joshua Cude wrote: > > I suspect it is designed to have large thermal mass (maybe in hot oil, or >> even water under pressure), so that after the power is turned off, the >> thermal mass keeps the output at the bp for some time. That way, th

Re: [Vo]:Revised version Celani reports on gamma emission from Rossi device

Joshua Cude wrote: If we are simply to trust people's claims, then what's a demo for? > I do not trust Rossi's claims. I trust that Levi can read a weight scale, and that Dufour is telling me the truth when he says the pipe was too hot to tough. I trust that the power meter was working. > If

Re: [Vo]:Revised version Celani reports on gamma emission from Rossi device

Jones Beene wrote: That is not the case with Rossi. He has funds in hand to build a MW unit, he > says that this plan is underway, and essentially is telling skeptics: stuff > it. > These are good points. They are not the same kind of evidence as Dufour feeling a hot pipe. They are more the kind

Re: [Vo]:Revised version Celani reports on gamma emission from Rossi device

On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 9:22 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > Peter Gluck wrote: > >> However a good report must answer in advance to all the possible (and >> impossible too) questions of the amateur and professional skeptics. >> > That is impossible. Skeptics can come up with an unlimited number of > s

Re: [Vo]:Revised version Celani reports on gamma emission from Rossi device

Joshua Cude wrote: I suspect it is designed to have large thermal mass (maybe in hot oil, or even water under pressure), so that after the power is turned off, the thermal mass keeps the output at the bp for some time. That way, they can claim it is self-sustaining, even though it's just cooli

Re: [Vo]:Revised version Celani reports on gamma emission from Rossi device

Peter Gluck wrote: However a good report must answer in advance to all the possible (and impossible too) questions of the amateur and professional skeptics. That is impossible. Skeptics can come up with an unlimited number of skeptical objections, especially after they assume that the researcher

Re: [Vo]:Revised version Celani reports on gamma emission from Rossi device

On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 8:45 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > Joshua Cude wrote: > > >> With 1 kW, you can raise the temperature of the water at 300 mL/min about >> 50C to give 65C or so, definitely too hot to touch. >> > > That is true, but the power was not 1 kW. It was 400 W. It was 1 kW at the > be

RE: [Vo]:Revised version Celani reports on gamma emission from Rossi device

Those are good points but the most important thing of all is being left unsaid: NO TIN CUP 100% of all the inventors in the past - who have tried to pull of scams have been seeking immediate funding. That is not the case with Rossi. He has funds in hand to build a MW unit, he says that

Re: [Vo]:ICCF16 Abstracts

Okay, the book is now uploaded here: Srinivasan, M., ed. *ICCF16, 16th International Conference on Condensed Matter Nuclear Science, Abstracts*. 2011, ISCMNS. http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/Srinivasaniccfthinte.pdf I guess the publisher is ISCMNS. The LENR-CANR name came out of kind strange. - Je

Re: [Vo]:Revised version Celani reports on gamma emission from Rossi device

On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 8:35 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > Joshua Cude wrote: > > And a good way to measure car speed is with a speedometer. But if someone >> claims have driven 250 mph in a chevy Volt, I'm gonna suspect the honesty >> first, and the speedometer second. >> > > If you suspect that Le

Re: [Vo]:Revised version Celani reports on gamma emission from Rossi device

On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 8:45 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > Joshua Cude wrote: > > >> With 1 kW, you can raise the temperature of the water at 300 mL/min about >> 50C to give 65C or so, definitely too hot to touch. >> > > That is true, but the power was not 1 kW. It was 400 W. It was 1 kW at the > be

Re: [Vo]:Revised version Celani reports on gamma emission from Rossi device

On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 8:45 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > Joshua Cude wrote: > > >> With 1 kW, you can raise the temperature of the water at 300 mL/min about >> 50C to give 65C or so, definitely too hot to touch. >> > > That is true, but the power was not 1 kW. It was 400 W. It was 1 kW at the > be

Re: [Vo]:Revised version Celani reports on gamma emission from Rossi device

Peristaltic pumps of exactly this size deliver flows between a few microliters and 2000 ml/minute, depending on the ID of the tube and the number of pulses per minute. However a good report must answer in advance to all the possible (and impossible too) questions of the amateur and professional ske

Re: [Vo]:Revised version Celani reports on gamma emission from Rossi device

Joshua Cude wrote: > With 1 kW, you can raise the temperature of the water at 300 mL/min about > 50C to give 65C or so, definitely too hot to touch. > That is true, but the power was not 1 kW. It was 400 W. It was 1 kW at the beginning of the experiment, but a flow calorimeter or hot water heat

Re: [Vo]:Revised version Celani reports on gamma emission from Rossi device

Joshua Cude wrote: And a good way to measure car speed is with a speedometer. But if someone > claims have driven 250 mph in a chevy Volt, I'm gonna suspect the honesty > first, and the speedometer second. > If you suspect that Levi and the others at U. Bologna are not honest, then nothing they

Re: [Vo]:Revised version Celani reports on gamma emission from Rossi device

On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 7:45 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > Joshua Cude wrote: > > >> Questioned by who? For what reason? Lots of people have questioned lots of >>> things, but there is no rational reason to doubt the flow rate. >>> >>> >>> How about a commercial pump that looks exactly like the one

[Vo]:ICCF16 Abstracts

Srinivasan sent me the ICCF16 Abstracts. I will upload them soon. I am having some minor technical problems with computers. - Jed

Re: [Vo]:Revised version Celani reports on gamma emission from Rossi device

Here are a couple of additional comments from Celani: a) The NaI (Tl) gamma detector had an energy range from 25 to 2000 keV; b) Celani asked, in several public mail to Rossi, that for a conclusive SCIENTIFIC demonstration of such wonderful device, the maximum temperature of the outgoing water ha

Re: [Vo]:Revised version Celani reports on gamma emission from Rossi device

Joshua Cude wrote: > Questioned by who? For what reason? Lots of people have questioned lots of >> things, but there is no rational reason to doubt the flow rate. >> >> >> How about a commercial pump that looks exactly like the one in the > picture, with a max flow rate less than half of what is

Re: [Vo]:February 13th A. Rossi interview from "22passi" blog

On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 12:55 AM, Charles HOPE wrote: > Murray should apologize to Earthtech for making derogatory comments on > Rossi's experiment that were quotes of Cude's criticism? Not at all. I am saying that Murray should have copied the following to EarthTech. He left them without "the