2009/10/28, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com:
...I believe that Earthtech has a very accurate
calorimeter. If they got no excess heat, that would make their
finding of no radiation quite understandable!
Not so. Detecting excess heat takes far more nuclear events than
detecting
An interesting Moon article:
Title: Found: first 'skylight' on the moon
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn18030-found-first-skylight-on-the-moon.html
http://tinyurl.com/ykgfsrd
Excerpt:
Finding such an opening could be a boon for possible human exploration
of the moon (see What NASA's
Which can make a delta T of even 1/2 to one degree C. - seemingly low to the
outside observer, but really rather significant, when you consider the
actual number of nuclear events per second for the small amount of reactant.
Earthtech could possibly detect massive radiation if they would look for
At 08:40 AM 10/29/2009, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
At 03:43 AM 10/29/2009, Michel Jullian wrote:
2009/10/28, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com:
...I believe that Earthtech has a very accurate
calorimeter. If they got no excess heat, that would make their
finding of no radiation quite
On Oct 28, 2009, at 10:25 AM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
Uh, if what I'm planning on doing with a smoke detector is illegal,
please point me to the law. Note that I could supply calibrated
detectors, so if I can do it, if it's fine for me, it can be done
for my customers. If I buy
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/science/physics/article6892300.ece
After starting it with a bang, which promptly turned into a whimper,
scientists have quietly powered up the Large Hadron Collider for a
second time.
The preliminary run was low key compared with the ill-fated switch-on
in
On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 9:06 AM, OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson
svj.orionwo...@gmail.com wrote:
I suspect this article is likely to generate rampant speculation
debate among a dedicated group of followers within the UFO community
who remain convinced that pre-existing artificial underground
On Oct 29, 2009, at 5:21 AM, Jones Beene wrote:
Which can make a delta T of even 1/2 to one degree C. - seemingly
low to the
outside observer, but really rather significant, when you consider the
actual number of nuclear events per second for the small amount of
reactant.
Earthtech could
Terry sez:
Ackshully, rampant speculation preceded this announcement due to the
LCROSS debacle:
http://www.enterprisemission.com/SmokingGun.htm
http://www.enterprisemission.com/SmokingGun2.htm
Enjoy!
Let the games begin!
Regards
Steven Vincent Johnson
www.OrionWorks.com
For those who want to explore the criticisms of Relativity theory, there is a
journal that focuses
on that. From their Editorial Policy:
Galilean Electrodynamics aims to publish high-quality scientific papers that
discuss challenges to
accepted orthodoxy in physics, especially in the realm of
One thing worth emphasizing (in regard to UV lensing) is the effectiveness
of a properly sized pinhole array.
EUV is universally absorbed meaning that every possible transparent window
is problematic. Everyone except the nonwindow or pinhole. But the sizing
is critical. As is placement.
The
2009/10/28 Michel Jullian michelj...@gmail.com:
Putting the Mylar inside seems a good idea. Instead of glue, one could
use a rubber gasket between the mylar and the inside of the wall, so
there would be no risk of ripping the mylar. The cathode wire support
could be U shaped so that it presses
Regarding the gasket or glue material, the following resource can be useful:
http://www.darcoid.com/images/Image/Tab/PERLAST/Elastomer%20guide%20chemical%20compatibility.pdf
search for lithium chloride (they don't reference palladium chloride
nor anything palladium unfortunately). Since there
Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
As to calorimetry, it's one thing to accurately measure total excess
heat, it's another to identify heat itself at the cathode.
The cathode is the only conceivable source of excess heat in these
systems. This has been verified by many different methods, such as
I wrote:
However one good professional expensive experiment is worth 1000
amateur ones, in my opinion. . . . If you cannot afford electronic
gadgets you are probably coming to this field 19 years too late to
make a useful contribution. Amateur experiments have caused more
harm than good . .
2009/10/29 Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com:
...
Heat is the principal signature of the reaction
...Do not look for other signatures until you have confirmed
the principal signature.
Why? Nuclear track counts in a _dry_ SSNTD as in the 2009 SPAWAR
paper
Michel Jullian wrote:
Why? Nuclear track counts in a _dry_ SSNTD as in the 2009 SPAWAR
paper http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/MosierBosscharacteri.pdf , and
as Abd is planning now following Horace's advice, are much easier to
measure, much more sensitive, and much less disputable proofs of
Jed, a point of information, from this non-scientist:
I understand that you are saying that heat, above all else, is the required
product, and that any other products are of secondary importance when it
comes to asserting that the effect has been produced.
Separately, you are saying that
2009/10/29 Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com:
Michel Jullian wrote:
Why? Nuclear track counts in a _dry_ SSNTD as in the 2009 SPAWAR
paper http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/MosierBosscharacteri.pdf , and
as Abd is planning now following Horace's advice, are much easier to
measure, much more
At 10:28 AM 10/29/2009, Horace Heffner wrote:
I am not going to provide legal advice other than to say you need
professional legal advice.
I need professional advice about dozens of things, and I'm not going
to get it I've done business and other stuff for forty years and
so far, I've
FYI
These people know a lot about detecting neutrons.
http://www.bubbletech.ca/
http://www.bubbletech.ca/radiation_detectors.html
Harry
Michel Jullian wrote:
Nuclear reactions were first discovered in the late 19th century because
they produce excess heat.
Are you sure? I thought they were discovered because a solid state
detector was impressed (Becquerel's photographic plate).
Yes, and the electrometer. I didn't quite
from
http://www.bubbletech.ca/radiation_detectors_files/bubble_detectors.html
Bubble Detectors are the most sensitive, accurate, neutron dosimeters
available. Used for over 15 years by nuclear facilities, research
institutes, military personnel, and the medical community, Bubble
Detectors
Xcuse me as another non-scientist butts in,
From Lawry:
Jed, a point of information, from this non-scientist:
I understand that you are saying that heat, above all else,
is the required product, and that any other products are of
secondary importance when it comes to asserting that the
What does one cost?
-Original Message-
From: Harry Veeder [mailto:hvee...@ncf.ca]
http://www.bubbletech.ca/radiation_detectors_files/bubble_detectors.html
Bubble Detectors are the most sensitive, accurate, neutron dosimeters
available.
Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
As Bob Dylan wrote, if you ain't got nothin, you got nothin to lose.
On the other hand, if the bucks start pouring in the door, hey, an
attorney should get some. How likely is that? I can see the headlines:
Cold Fusion Fad Hits High Schools, Physicists Hysterical
At 02:30 PM 10/29/2009, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
As to calorimetry, it's one thing to accurately measure total
excess heat, it's another to identify heat itself at the cathode.
The cathode is the only conceivable source of excess heat in these
systems. This has been
Lawrence de Bivort wrote:
I understand that you are saying that heat,
above all else, is the required product, and
that any other products are of secondary
importance when it comes to asserting that the effect has been produced.
Not importance, exactly. Nature makes no
distinction about
Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
So finding no radiation or other products, by
MIT, as a huge example, meant practically
nothing. All they showed, in fact, was that they
did not manage to cause the effect.
On the contrary I think they probably did cause
the effect at MIT, and also CalTech and
2009/10/29 Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com:
What I meant by my comment was that
measuring elevated temperature of a cathode is an *indicator* of excess
heat. But the possibility would remain that some condition in the
electrolyte close to the cathode raises the resistance there, so
On Oct 29, 2009, at 8:40 AM, Jones Beene wrote:
One thing worth emphasizing (in regard to UV lensing) is the
effectiveness
of a properly sized pinhole array.
EUV is universally absorbed meaning that every possible
transparent window
is problematic. Everyone except the nonwindow or
At 12:07 PM 10/29/2009, you wrote:
Michel Jullian wrote:
Why? Nuclear track counts in a _dry_ SSNTD as in the 2009 SPAWAR
paper http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/MosierBosscharacteri.pdf , and
as Abd is planning now following Horace's advice, are much easier to
measure, much more sensitive,
reported to me at about 700 Euro
At 01:55 PM 10/29/2009, you wrote:
What does one cost?
-Original Message-
From: Harry Veeder [mailto:hvee...@ncf.ca]
http://www.bubbletech.ca/radiation_detectors_files/bubble_detectors.html
Bubble Detectors are the most sensitive, accurate, neutron
Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
But the possibility would remain that some condition in the electrolyte
close to the cathode raises the resistance there, so the Joule heat would be
dissipated there, thus making the cathode appear hotter. But I think it
unlikely. Shanahan might disagree.
It does
Steven Krivit wrote:
Why? Nuclear track counts in a _dry_ SSNTD as in the 2009 SPAWAR
paper http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/MosierBosscharacteri.pdf , and
as Abd is planning now following Horace's advice, are much easier to
measure, much more sensitive, and much less disputable proofs of
I wrote:
However, as you see in the text you quoted, I said that in my opinion CR-39
is not more sensitive or less disputable. That is not quite the same as
less convincing.
The key point is that heat detection is more reliable. More likely to
happen. For experiments that attempt to measure
At 03:01 PM 10/29/2009, Jed Rothwell wrote:
I wrote:
However one good professional expensive experiment is worth 1000
amateur ones, in my opinion. . . . If you cannot afford electronic
gadgets you are probably coming to this field 19 years too late to
make a useful contribution. Amateur
See
http://radlab.nl/radsafe/archives/9812/msg00010.html,
a mail from a Health Physicist at Princeton who
wanted to return some smoke detectors to the manufacturer.
As some of you speculated, the foils are indeed special form,
and the manufacturer has just sent me a copy of the special form
At 03:21 PM 10/29/2009, Michel Jullian wrote:
2009/10/29 Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com:
...
Heat is the principal signature of the reaction
...Do not look for other signatures until you have confirmed
the principal signature.
Why? Nuclear track counts in a _dry_ SSNTD as in the 2009
Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
So ... I don't expect it, but suppose I figure out how to get serious
excess heat, my cat pees in the tube and, damn, it works, and I can
reproduce it with some uric acid or whatever, sheer luck. I shouldn't
publish? But, sure, publication of sloppy work that makes
At 04:07 PM 10/29/2009, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Michel Jullian wrote:
Why? Nuclear track counts in a _dry_ SSNTD as in the 2009 SPAWAR
paper http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/MosierBosscharacteri.pdf , and
as Abd is planning now following Horace's advice, are much easier to
measure, much more
Very interesting.
Thank you.
Jed,
From what do you base your opinion that excess heat is a more convincing
proof of a LENR reaction than Nuclear track counts in a _dry_ SSNTD as
in the 2009 SPAWAR
paper?
I did not say less convincing, although as far as I know, so far fewer
people
I searched the forums on this site,
http://www.fusor.net/board/index.php?site=fusor
(the search function is at top of page)and found this in
the forum _Neutron - Radiation detection_ in a post from this year:
--
The quote for 8 detectors is
8 x BD-PND
Thank you for the correction Harry
At 07:57 PM 10/29/2009, you wrote:
I searched the forums on this site,
http://www.fusor.net/board/index.php?site=fusor
(the search function is at top of page)and found this in
the forum _Neutron - Radiation detection_ in a post from this year:
At 06:01 PM 10/29/2009, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
As Bob Dylan wrote, if you ain't got nothin, you got nothin to
lose. On the other hand, if the bucks start pouring in the door,
hey, an attorney should get some. How likely is that? I can see the headlines:
Cold Fusion
At 06:30 PM 10/29/2009, Jed Rothwell wrote:
On a practical level, as I understand it, heat is likely to be the
useful product, in any case,
In my case, science is the useful product!
That is true. But as Ed Storms and many others have pointed out --
correctly, I am sure -- particles may
At 05:19 PM 10/29/2009, Jed Rothwell wrote:
It may be that some cold fusion reactions produce heat but no
neutrons. I doubt the opposite can occur: neutrons but no heat. It
may be that the heat is so low it cannot be detected, but I expect
the neutrons would also be very hard to detect in that
At 06:46 PM 10/29/2009, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
So finding no radiation or other products, by
MIT, as a huge example, meant practically
nothing. All they showed, in fact, was that
they did not manage to cause the effect.
On the contrary I think they probably did
At 07:02 PM 10/29/2009, Michel Jullian wrote:
2009/10/29 Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com:
What I meant by my comment was that
measuring elevated temperature of a cathode is an *indicator* of excess
heat. But the possibility would remain that some condition in the
electrolyte close
49 matches
Mail list logo
