Jed,
Good points all but I think there has been a long standing
"chemical" component involved here ever since the day of Langmuir. There
appears to be a need for the hydrogen to go from monatomic to diatomic
states -maybe not the simple oscillation proposed with the atomic hydrogen
vorl bek wrote:
> > First of all, "ignition" is only an analogy here. Nothing is or
> > can be ignited or burned in the chemical sense. There is no
> > oxygen. There is no fuel. No chemical changes occur in the cells.
>
> Thanks, I needed that reminder. Now I see that pretty much anything
> goes
> vorl bek wrote:
>
>
> > > The electric heating power is apparently used to suppress the
> > > reaction, not to enhance it.
> >
> > I have never heard of any material acting that way. If heat
> > from the electric heater is used to ignite the nickel, how
> > would continuing to heat it after it
vorl bek wrote:
> > The electric heating power is apparently used to suppress the
> > reaction, not to enhance it.
>
> I have never heard of any material acting that way. If heat from
> the electric heater is used to ignite the nickel, how would
> continuing to heat it after it ignites suppress
> The electric heating power is apparently used to suppress the
> reaction, not to enhance it.
I have never heard of any material acting that way. If heat from
the electric heater is used to ignite the nickel, how would
continuing to heat it after it ignites suppress the reaction? And
how would n
Jed,
I totally agree with your assessment of the review and the quibble over the
seemingly anomalous heat gain when power is first removed - the anomaly
supports the claim of an ongoing LENR reaction in the reactor where control has
suddenly been handed over to a secondary agitator / signal gene
6 matches
Mail list logo
