Please excuse if this duplicates prior conversations.
From:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_(properties)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Specific_heat_capacity
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H2o
http://hypertextbook.com/facts/2007/DmitriyGekhman.shtml
The following approximate values for
On 01/21/2011 01:37 AM, Harry Veeder wrote:
Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
On 01/20/2011 01:29 AM, Harry Veeder wrote:
Would weighing the entire apparatus before and after reveal
a concealed chemical reaction?
I don't think so. The sort of reaction proposed here replaces
the reactants
Horace,
Welcome back and nice citation! It does make me reconsider my past
verbalization of equivalent acceleration vs spatial velocity inside a bulk
material. I take it the velocity of this fast electron would appear unchanged
to a local observer but are they referring to the almost
OOPS - part of the answer already in your citation the scientists found that
the battery's relativistic effects arise mainly from the lead dioxide in the
positive electrode so the question should have been is the fast electron part
of lead dioxide bond or almost free electrons in the lattice?
I have done a ballpark analysis of the hidden chemical fuel scenario
for Rossi's one-hour test. I have looked at the water heater
specifications in my house and also a tabletop butane cook stove. I
conclude that chemical fuel cannot be the source of this heat, for a
number of reasons. To
On 01/21/2011 11:13 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
I have done a ballpark analysis of the hidden chemical fuel scenario
for Rossi's one-hour test. I have looked at the water heater
specifications in my house and also a tabletop butane cook stove. I
conclude that chemical fuel cannot be the source
To all concerned, or to anyone harboring lingering doubts about the Bologna
demo .
There is a surprising simple and extremely convincing way to *remove all
doubt* that this device is real.
It is so simple that the simple fact that it has not been published yet, is
suspicious in itself. (there
Jones, since you brought this up, I'd like to ask a question about the
copper.
According to the handy dandy periodic table on my desktop (Kalzium),
copper has two stable isotopes, with 34 and 36 neutrons, respectively.
Next best is 38 neutrons, with a half life of about 62 hours, and it's
Many of you have seen Director Chu's HuffPo column.
It was no surprised that Chu overlooks the Bologna demo. After all, he came
out publicly against Mills years ago, so his prejudices (and dare we say
'close-mindedness) was already apparent at the start of his reign. However,
he is smart enough
From: Stephen A. Lawrence
* So, what's the story here? How can the neutron balance work out? How
can he have ended up with 30% of the nickel transmuted into (reasonably
stable) copper?
The short answer is that this percentage must be way off, or there has been
a mis-translation. it is
That device working for 6 months has produced approx. 50,000 kWhours heat.
Can this be explained by the reaction of transmutation of Ni to Cu?
Considering first 300 grams of nichel...? Rossi can tell how much
Ni is uesd - if he will. Am important rough energy balance anyway.
Peter
On Fri, Jan 21,
Here's a handy-dandy Table of Nuclides
http://atom.kaeri.re.kr/
Regards
Steven Vincent Johnson
www.OrionWorks.com
www.zazzle.com/orionworks
Peter,
The amount of copper found is of low comparative importance.
The *isotope shift* from the natural ratio after 6 months is extremely
important. This can only be determined by specialized equipment.
It is so important to establishing proof of a nuclear reaction, or to
changing
After some digging I think I got close to the source of the 30% copper
assertion. The following items are from Rossi's blog. First:
Question from William:
William
January 20th, 2011 at 9:01 AM
http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=360cpage=5#comment-19862
... /elided his first
Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
Jed, you apparently didn't read the message I sent on this in response
to one of your earlier posts.
Thermite provides sufficient energy density, consumes no air, and
produces only solid ash.
I did miss that. Thermite burns very rapidly and produces extremely
On 01/21/2011 01:12 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
Jed, you apparently didn't read the message I sent on this in
response to one of your earlier posts.
Thermite provides sufficient energy density, consumes no air, and
produces only solid ash.
I did miss that.
Jones Beene wrote:
Many of you have seen Director Chu's HuffPo column.
That is:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/steven-chu/discover-and-deliver-the-_b_811723.html
A Huffpost Super User commented on Rossi demo.
I doubt Chu will read the comments. I doubt he wrote the column!
- Jed
It is in the same forum.
http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=62
From: Stephen A. Lawrence sa...@pobox.com
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Fri, January 21, 2011 1:03:24 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Removing All Doubt
After some digging I think I got close to the
Jones Beene wrote:
If he claims the entire sample has been lost, he will lose all credibility
in my book. ALL. No one loses such a sample. He is essentially dead in the
water, in the eyes of 99% of Physics, if this sample is unaccounted for now.
I believe the samples have been sent out for
On 01/21/2011 01:43 PM, noone noone wrote:
It is in the same forum.
http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=62
Thank you!
It is nuclear, completely nuclear, and only nuclear?
Or nuclear- is only a secondary phenomenon?. A Heat balance is a must.
The same in classical cold fusion, it is good to believe the helium story
but not easy to prove
Peter
On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 7:48 PM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:
Do you have Skype, MSN, Yahoo, etc? Would you like to chat?
From: Stephen A. Lawrence sa...@pobox.com
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Fri, January 21, 2011 1:51:36 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Removing All Doubt
On 01/21/2011 01:43 PM, noone noone wrote:
It is in
Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
4) I read a comment on another forum claiming that in one of your
cells after six months of operation the remaining nickel powder was
30% copper. Can you confirm this?
Andrea Rossi
January 20th, 2011 at 10:14 AM
I discuss with pleasure but chat is incompatible with my multitasking
life style. In meantime I am writing my blog (Search No 2/439)
But I answer any e-mail asa soon as I can. I have a bad experience with
chat. Excuse me.
Peter
On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 8:59 PM, noone noone
I took the No to mean Currently, there is no independent confirmation.
Harry
From: Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Fri, January 21, 2011 2:15:45 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Removing All Doubt
Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
4) I read a
Regardless of the exact amount transmuted, there is an explanation of
all this given on Rossi's website. (/When all else fails, read the
documentation!/)
http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=62
He says that Ni^x + p - Cu^(x+1) does, indeed, typically produce an
unstable result, but it
On 01/21/2011 01:59 PM, noone noone wrote:
Do you have Skype, MSN, Yahoo, etc? Would you like to chat?
Got Skype downloaded but never installed it.
I'm already spending too much time on this. Thank you very much for
the offer.
Of course the simple thing to do would be to use Earthtech's
calorimeter:
http://www.earthtech.org/capabilities/vwfc/
Best regards,
Horace Heffner
http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
Read the documentation if you believe it.. It is kind of forced explanation.
OK, what is the energy realeased by this reaction?
On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 9:35 PM, Stephen A. Lawrence sa...@pobox.comwrote:
Regardless of the exact amount transmuted, there is an explanation of all
this given on
On 01/21/2011 02:39 PM, Horace Heffner wrote:
Of course the simple thing to do would be to use Earthtech's calorimeter:
http://www.earthtech.org/capabilities/vwfc/
Nuh, uh.
No experiment ever works when it's inside that thing.
I think it's cursed.
Best regards,
Horace Heffner
WARNING TO ALL OUR READERS: THE REPORT OF THE UNIVERSITY OF BOLOGNA WILL
BE DELIVERED MONDAY , JAN 24, ANYTIME.
YOU WILL FIND IT ON THE JOURNAL OF NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND WE ALREADY GIVE
TO EVERYBODY TO REPRODUCE IT EVERYWHERE, FOR ANY PURPOSE, FREE.
WARM REGARDS,
THE BOARD OF ADVISERS OF THE
On 01/21/2011 03:55 PM, Roarty, Francis X wrote:
Hi Stephan
You state If a tiny fraction of the nickel is transmuted each
second, and if nearly all the transmutation events produce unstable
copper which eventually decays back to (higher weight) nickel, and if
it takes multiple steps to
From Jed:
WARNING TO ALL OUR READERS: THE REPORT OF THE UNIVERSITY OF
BOLOGNA WILL BE DELIVERED MONDAY , JAN 24, ANYTIME.
YOU WILL FIND IT ON THE JOURNAL OF NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND WE
ALREADY GIVE TO EVERYBODY TO REPRODUCE IT EVERYWHERE, FOR
ANY PURPOSE, FREE.
WARM REGARDS,
THE BOARD OF
What about this reaction:
Ni (mass 60, 32 neutrons, pres. 26,223%) + Tritium (mass 3, 2 neutrons,
pres. synt) -- Cu (mass 63, 34 neutrons, pres. 69,17%) + gamma radiation.
On 21-1-2011 22:10, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
On 01/21/2011 03:55 PM, Roarty, Francis X wrote:
Hi Stephan
You
On 01/21/2011 04:45 PM, Man on Bridges wrote:
What about this reaction:
Ni (mass 60, 32 neutrons, pres. 26,223%) + Tritium (mass 3, 2
neutrons, pres. synt) -- Cu (mass 63, 34 neutrons, pres. 69,17%) +
gamma radiation.
Where's the tritium come from?
And why the fake name Man on Bridges?
Tritium is Hydrogen ;-)
No fake name it's an anagram of my name.
On 21-1-2011 22:48, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
On 01/21/2011 04:45 PM, Man on Bridges wrote:
What about this reaction:
Ni (mass 60, 32 neutrons, pres. 26,223%) + Tritium (mass 3, 2
neutrons, pres. synt) -- Cu (mass 63, 34
In reply to Stephen A. Lawrence's message of Fri, 21 Jan 2011 14:35:44 -0500:
Hi,
[snip]
If a tiny fraction of the nickel is transmuted each second, and if
nearly all the transmutation events produce unstable copper which
eventually decays back to (higher weight) nickel, and if it takes
multiple
On 01/21/2011 04:50 PM, Man on Bridges wrote:
Tritium is Hydrogen ;-)
Tritium is a vanishingly rare isotope of hydrogen. There is essentially
none in the gas injected into the reactor.
So, where do you think sufficient quantities of tritium come from to
play an interesting role here?
No
On 01/21/2011 04:53 PM, mix...@bigpond.com wrote:
In reply to Stephen A. Lawrence's message of Fri, 21 Jan 2011 14:35:44 -0500:
Hi,
[snip]
If a tiny fraction of the nickel is transmuted each second, and if
nearly all the transmutation events produce unstable copper which
eventually
In reply to Stephen A. Lawrence's message of Fri, 21 Jan 2011 14:35:44 -0500:
Hi,
[snip]
In
particular, there should probably be a really large fraction of Ni^59
present (31 neutrons), with a 75 ky half-life, and I'd think that would
make the sample pretty hot. Or so it seems; I haven't done the
Hello Stephen,
I know it's rare, that's why it says pres. synt; while the scientists
claim they need to refuel every six months.
Kind regards from the Netherlands,
Rob Dingemans (a.k.a. man on bridges ;-)
On 21-1-2011 22:55, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
On 01/21/2011 04:50 PM, Man on
In reply to Peter Gluck's message of Fri, 21 Jan 2011 19:31:09 +0200:
Hi,
[snip]
That device working for 6 months has produced approx. 50,000 kWhours heat.
Can this be explained by the reaction of transmutation of Ni to Cu?
Considering first 300 grams of nichel...? Rossi can tell how much
Ni is
In reply to Jones Beene's message of Fri, 21 Jan 2011 09:48:47 -0800:
Hi,
[snip]
The *isotope shift* from the natural ratio after 6 months is extremely
important. This can only be determined by specialized equipment.
It is so important to establishing proof of a nuclear reaction, or to
Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
If he still is the only one who knows the secret ingredient at that
point, then I would definitely start fearing for Rossi's personal
safety. There are some very big players out there who would probably
not be too happy about being kept in the dark over how to make
On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 11:53 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:
In my dreams I see a Damascus road type of instant ‘conversion’ of Biblical
proportions (Paul) for Director Chu.
Many believe Saul/Paul was struck by ligntning. THAT would convert me, too.
T
On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 2:42 PM, Stephen A. Lawrence sa...@pobox.com wrote:
No experiment ever works when it's inside that thing.
I think it's cursed.
LOL! Me, too.
Ackshully, it's too small.
T
Rossi should escrow the ingredients with a stipulation that it is
released to his trustee upon his death.
T
On 01/21/2011 05:57 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
If he still is the only one who knows the secret ingredient at that
point, then I would definitely start fearing for Rossi's personal
safety. There are some very big players out there who would probably
not be too
On Jan 21, 2011, at 10:42 AM, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
On 01/21/2011 02:39 PM, Horace Heffner wrote:
Of course the simple thing to do would be to use Earthtech's
calorimeter:
http://www.earthtech.org/capabilities/vwfc/
Nuh, uh.
No experiment ever works when it's inside that thing.
On Jan 21, 2011, at 8:31 AM, Peter Gluck wrote:
That device working for 6 months has produced approx. 50,000
kWhours heat.
Can this be explained by the reaction of transmutation of Ni to Cu?
Considering first 300 grams of nichel...? Rossi can tell how much
Ni is uesd - if he will. Am
Article uses Robert Park as an authority on the subject.
http://news.discovery.com/tech/cold-fusion-claims-resurface.html
Harry
From Harry,
Article uses Robert Park as an authority on the subject.
http://news.discovery.com/tech/cold-fusion-claims-resurface.html
As predicted by Mr. Rothwell, it would appear that the majority of
popular news organizations willing to stick their necks out and file a
brief report on the
Lest we forget the travelogue aspect of this story
The choice of this magnificent old city for the Rossi demo has a few
lingering overtones for curious observers, yet to be noted in print.
The fact the University of Bologna, founded in 1088, is the oldest operating
University in the World
On 22-1-2011 2:23, Horace Heffner wrote:
Note that a lot more output possibilities are feasible than just
copper, but let's get on with assuming copper is the only output.
Those aneutronic strong force copper producing reactions involving 4
or fewer proton fusions with Ni are:
62Ni28 + p*
The DN paper is an exercise in logical fallacies. And it shows how facts can
be ignored. Only the press says that what happened is cold fusion
i.e. fusion at cold, due to its (the press') inherent sensationalism. The
world is infinitely interesting, the press wants to describe it as even more
On Jan 21, 2011, at 7:06 PM, Man on Bridges wrote:
Horace,
Based upon natural presence and absence of radiation I would
probably go for this on:
62Ni28 + p* -- 63Cu29 + 6.122 MeV [-1.984 MeV] (B_Ni:28)
62Ni28 : pres. 3.634 %
1H1 : pres. 99.985 %
63Cu29 : pres. 69.17 %
Kind regards,
MoB
no more demos before the start up...
That's elementary wonder management - miracles are not repeatable
and the next miracle must be much greater (1MeV!) than the former.
There are exceptions as San Gennaro's blood- fine application of
non-newtonian viscosity.
To remain at miracles. I think that
In reply to Man on Bridges's message of Sat, 22 Jan 2011 05:06:04 +0100:
Hi,
[snip]
Based upon natural presence and absence of radiation I would probably go
for this on:
62Ni28 + p* -- 63Cu29 + 6.122 MeV [-1.984 MeV] (B_Ni:28)
62Ni28 : pres. 3.634 %
1H1 : pres. 99.985 %
63Cu29 : pres. 69.17 %
In reply to Peter Gluck's message of Sat, 22 Jan 2011 06:40:13 +0200:
Hi,
[snip]
The DN paper is an exercise in logical fallacies. And it shows how facts can
be ignored. Only the press says that what happened is cold fusion
i.e. fusion at cold, due to its (the press') inherent sensationalism. The
Stremmenos E. Christos, HNi reaction theory, Italian with Google
translation and amateur editing: Rich Murray 2011.01.22
[ I hope someone will improve my amateur translation... ]
Ch. Stremmenos
January 20th, 2011 at 12:45 PM
Ch Stremmenos
January 20th, 2011 at 24:45 PM
La censura del mio
On Jan 21, 2011, at 10:03 PM, mix...@bigpond.com wrote:
In reply to Man on Bridges's message of Sat, 22 Jan 2011 05:06:04
+0100:
Hi,
[snip]
Based upon natural presence and absence of radiation I would
probably go
for this on:
62Ni28 + p* -- 63Cu29 + 6.122 MeV [-1.984 MeV] (B_Ni:28)
True, Robin, but Cold Fusion was D + D fusion, this one cannot be
Peter
On Sat, Jan 22, 2011 at 9:05 AM, mix...@bigpond.com wrote:
In reply to Peter Gluck's message of Sat, 22 Jan 2011 06:40:13 +0200:
Hi,
[snip]
The DN paper is an exercise in logical fallacies. And it shows how facts
can
62 matches
Mail list logo
