In reply to Jones Beene's message of Thu, 15 May 2014 15:26:56 -0700:
Hi Jones,
What do you make of the following message from the archives?
http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l%40eskimo.com/msg90378.html
-Original Message-
From: mix...@bigpond.com
Well, there is also a possible
I've made a short analysis of that announce, and the connections with
LENr-cities/LENR-Cars
http://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/index.php/Thread/338-LENR-Invest-Fund-I-LLC-raises-205-000-in-May/
I don't have confirmation, but connecting some wire I have an idea of what
is the money for.
Not a huge
Hi Robin,
Sounds more like Randell Mills than Storms ... and now that you mention it,
I remember being surprised to hear this from Ed at the time - since it
raises more questions than it answers. The HUGE unsolved problem is that
with deuterium as the active gas, two deuterons cannot shed
Nice Work Alain
Bob
- Original Message -
From: Alain Sepeda
To: Vortex List
Sent: Saturday, May 17, 2014 1:54 AM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Increasing probability of Rossi being real upwards, to 35%
I've made a short analysis of that announce, and the connections with
The D's may be able to shed they mass energy via SPIN COUPLING, IF they
combine to form a virtual He with a high spin state/energy that can be
distributed to many other particles in the QM system, including the
electrons, all without gammas being emitted. Again the question is the
coupling.
-Original Message-
From: Bob Cook
Jones--You seem to conclude spin coupling is possible, why not in this
case.
Bob - Spin coupling should easily be possible for a low to intermediate
range of energies per atom - my guess is that it is sub-eV range, possibly
milli-eV, but even if it
On Sat, May 17, 2014 at 12:55 PM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:
Can you find anything in the literature that would indicate the very high
levels of energy transfer via spin coupling which would be necessary? That
would be a good start. After all, we are talking about nuclear spin
Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com wrote:
I wish you'd believe me he did not get the result in that way. :)
Ask him. If Kim tells me he observed experiments himself, I will believe it.
I will still consider him naive. Even if he observed experiments, he could
not have checked the flow rate.
I didn't ever mention he merely got data or just observed it.
--
Daniel Rocha - RJ
danieldi...@gmail.com
The problem is that, it is how easy is to make HENI, as DGT calls the high
yield cold fusion. The mere seeing of it for one month, or a few weeks,
you can figure out. This is why Rossi is so paranoid.
2014-05-17 15:21 GMT-03:00 Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com:
I didn't ever mention he
Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com wrote:
I didn't ever mention he merely got data or just observed it.
Ah. I thought that is what you were referring to. I do not know what you
mean, if not that.
Anyway, there is no data. There are only meaningless numbers from a
mistake. Or from fraudulent
Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com wrote:
The problem is that, it is how easy is to make HENI, as DGT calls the high
yield cold fusion.
Apparently it is not easy. Not for DGT, anyway. They have not made
anything. No one has ever seen their system work. Or if someone has, the
report is being
Jed, do you really understand how the two valve one flowmeter works
and can be used to multiply the flow reading/recordings ?If not, please ask
a company that manufactures flowmeters and you will learn that reverse flow
is not recorded. The trick is what the French call trouvaille.The Italians
say
Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com wrote:
Jed, do you really understand how the two valve one flowmeter works
and can be used to multiply the flow reading/recordings ?If not, please
ask a company that manufactures flowmeters and you will learn that reverse
flow is not recorded.
If the reverse
How can a flowmeter give counts- and 1 Liter per minute is much when
nothing goes through it? I just tell that this trick cannot be used to
obtain
increased number of counts with consistent values as recorded during the (
hours demo I was watching till late night.
And please do not say DGT has no
Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com wrote:
How can a flowmeter give counts- and 1 Liter per minute is much when
nothing goes through it?
You tell me! You are the one with insider information. Ask Xanthoulis or
Hadjichristos. They were the ones who insisted that Gamberale set up the
system that
On Sat, May 17, 2014 at 12:54 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.comwrote:
They were the ones who insisted that Gamberale set up the system that way.
When he tried to install additional equipment to confirm the flow rate,
they ordered it removed without discussion. They stopped him from doing
Jones--Thanks for your ideas.
One feature of QM systems that I have assumed is that the differential
energy gaps between states increase and align with magnetic field strength.
In other words the quanta of energy available when changing from one state
to another can be whatever you want
True, and the nature of the problem was not estabilished. For example, it
could be an understimation of the flux or an overstimation. It could be
anything. But it did not mean at all that it could necessarily be 0.
2014-05-17 18:15 GMT-03:00 Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.com:
He acknowledged
The magnetic fields in the nucleus may be more than 800 times the field
strength for EM spin coupling we know about. The energy would be
comparable, since the energy of a rotating magnetic moment I believe is
proportional to the strength of the field.
Bob
- Original Message -
From:
In reply to Jones Beene's message of Sat, 17 May 2014 07:11:07 -0700:
Hi,
[snip]
Hi Robin,
Sounds more like Randell Mills than Storms ... and now that you mention it,
I remember being surprised to hear this from Ed at the time - since it
raises more questions than it answers. The HUGE unsolved
-Original Message-
From: mix...@bigpond.com
I don't think Ed was necessarily claiming that the method of energy loss
was through conversion of electron mass.
Well Robin, he did say the energy in his theory was shed as photons. There
are only two possibilities for the source -
On Sat, May 17, 2014 at 4:10 PM, mix...@bigpond.com wrote:
I agree, however I think the claim was that they do lose a significant
portion
of their own mass, though I'm not at all clear on how that is supposed to
happen.
This is how I understand Ed's theory. The mass-energy that is converted
Jones,
I believe that the term gamma ray is reserved for photons that originate from
the nucleus. The energy of these rays is not the criteria.
One would suppose that the energy contained within the radiation emitted by the
nucleus is determined by the energy steps between the stored quanta.
Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.com wrote:
With all confidence, you repeat Gamberale's assertion that Defkalion
prevented Gamberale from doing common sense tests, as though it were
established fact. What is the basis for your confidence?
There is corroboration. In retrospect this is the only
Well, you have a contradiction, if he bragged stealing intellectual
property (which Rossi doesn't have and is unable to acquire!), he'd have
something working! Aren't you the one tarnishing your own reputation?
--
Daniel Rocha - RJ
danieldi...@gmail.com
On Sat, May 17, 2014 at 7:43 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
It Defkalion did not prevent these tests, I think it is up to them to
publish a statement explaining why the tests were not done until after
ICCF18. Let them tell their version of the story. If they do not respond, I
Eric,
If your description of the process is accurate then one must assume that the
nucleons become attracted and bound to each other as the fusion progresses.
This must be true because it will take energy equal to that which is radiated
in order to tear them apart again.
Perhaps the extreme
On Sat, May 17, 2014 at 7:57 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:
If your description of the process is accurate then one must assume that
the nucleons become attracted and bound to each other as the fusion
progresses.
Personally, I do not set much store in Ed's theory. I'm no
Really? In Italy, he was granted. Only there. An it is extremely unlikely
that he will get anywhere which will render the rest of what you wrote is
completely meaningless regarding intellectual property.
You are really the one without sense Jed. You are driving a tower of
speculations over your
Dave--
I am thinking along the same lines that you suggest below.
Bob
- Original Message -
From: David Roberson
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Saturday, May 17, 2014 7:39 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Nuclear isomer
Jones,
I believe that the term gamma ray is reserved for
31 matches
Mail list logo
