Re: [Vo]:Discover article about cold fusion
2012/10/19 James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com Of course, we must always remember that theory precedes phenomenon. Irony I hope? Real I'm afraid. In fact sure Real, I observed many times. But since there is no peer-reviewed theory for that decadence of science it should be non existent. ;-)
Re: [Vo]:Potential Rossi Patent Battle
yes On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 12:58 AM, pagnu...@htdconnect.com wrote: Axil, Is the Focus Fusion Society (URL: http://focusfusion.org/) what you're referring to? -- Lou Pagnucco See http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_Jx78YcF-F8U/TBNnrA0L3WI/CN4/_tuQ1t6BT5w/s1600/neutron_yield_in_dpfs.gif On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 11:32 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: Focus fusion among a few others has been at this for many years. They produce a plasmoid using a high current formed spark. They get a trillion neutrons from fusion per shot using deuterium. Focus fusion uses a light magnetic field and a low pressure gas. Cheers: Axil On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 11:01 PM, pagnu...@htdconnect.com wrote: Akira - Thanks for the link to Santilli's patent application. A more readable pdf-format version is at - http://images3.freshpatents.com/pdf/US20120033775A1.pdf Santilli is making very specific claims of observed transmutations, and at measurable levels - e.g., Deuterium + Carbon -- Nitrogen. He also predicts the byproducts for various reactions. To defend the patent, I assume he is confident he can replicate this. His method involves morphing atomic electron orbitals with very strong magnetic fields ( 10^10 Gauss) in intense current arcs in gases during dielectric breakdown which permit nuclei to be forced near enough for fusion. LENRs have been reported in other arcing and electron beam experiments. Has anyone looked at his approach and have any opinions? -- Lou Pagnucco Akira Shirakawa wrote on Thu, 18 Oct 2012 01:59:10 -0700 On 2012-10-18 10:42, Mint Candy wrote: [...] A more convenient link to the patent: http://www.google.com/patents/US20120033775
[Vo]:Defkalion GT announces test results
Hello group, Today, an official announcement about test results was posted on the Defkalion GT forum: http://www.defkalion-energy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=17t=4143 As previously promised, we are attaching two files that contain a signed protocol and a preliminary report by one independent international group on our technology. This marks the end of our first cycle of testing on our lab reactors, which lasted five months with 21 different experiments having been conducted by three different international organizations. The attached documents indicate the test results obtained by one such team. The other two international well known testing organizations obtained equally impressive results following similar protocols while using their own instrumentation. These results, data, and full analyses by each of the three testers will be published in peer reviewed Journals as applicable by each Journal. Names of the testers and the organizations they represent are still under strict NDAs and have therefore been removed from the attached documents. Defkalion will not disclose names. In the attached protocol the first page represents our RD path and our testing strategy. The test performed under this protocol can be identified under step 1.3.2, which represents the end of this section of our work in progress. Subsequent RD steps and tests on our pre-industrial prototypes have already been scheduled by third parties (as depicted in step 2 – Hyperion Multi-Reactor Kernel Testing). Additionally, all such tests have been video recorded. The following two links indicate a small sample of such recordings. · Explanation of the calorimetry set-up: (uploading in progress) · Triggering the reaction: (uploading in progress) Defkalion Green Technologies 19th October, 2012 Links: Exec Sum of Defkalion Test Review - Sept 2012.pdf [52.49 KiB] http://www.defkalion-energy.com/forum/download/file.php?id=31 2012-09-07_Test Report Validation_Signed_No Names.pdf [3.52 MiB] http://www.defkalion-energy.com/forum/download/file.php?id=30 Cheers, S.A.
Re: [Vo]:Defkalion GT announces test results
Test Results: Defkalion demonstrated 1 COP of accumulated total energy output divided by accumulated total energy input (exact total COP will be provided in final report) Defkalion demonstrated control of reaction (start, stop, increase, decrease) Defkalion demonstrated a reaction output greater than equivalent chemical energy from mass of internal components [But the signature of the third party is blacked out. Why??]
Re: [Vo]:Defkalion GT announces test results
On 2012-10-19 14:12, Akira Shirakawa wrote: Exec Sum of Defkalion Test Review - Sept 2012.pdf [52.49 KiB] http://www.defkalion-energy.com/forum/download/file.php?id=31 By the way, I wonder if the way DGT blacked out some information in the pdf above was *very* weak on purpose. Cheers, S.A.
Re: [Vo]:Defkalion GT announces test results
On 2012-10-19 14:12, Akira Shirakawa wrote: Hello group, Today, an official announcement about test results was posted on the Defkalion GT forum: http://www.defkalion-energy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=17t=4143 Two videos have been added: Explanation of the calorimetry set-up: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VvmWGeryKQc Triggering the reaction http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yax8oHzlXkI Cheers, S.A.
Re: [Vo]:Defkalion GT announces test results
Names of the testers and the organizations they represent are still under strict NDAs and have therefore been removed from the attached documents. Defkalion will not disclose names. http://www.lenrforum.eu/viewtopic.php?f=27t=749p=2692#p2692 My opinion is such, but I'm not expert, just trusting the professionals. You critics welcome: The protocol is simple flow calorimetry with aqueous fluid (glycol+water, or water). Tester is happy with DGT cooperation and sincerity. The results imply sure a COP3. Not chemical for sure. Test repeated. Calibration coherent. Reaction is controlled at will. The flow calorimetry with those fluid does not allow good performance. As said before test lead to sparkplug shorting, even breaking a test in process at the end. It work, yet performance shown are not fantastic, because of sparkplug for endurance, because of fluid used for calorimetry setup about performance. Normally non chemical COP3 is a revolution in physics, but I expect nobody except us will care, as for the rest. Maybe the name of the tester can change that, but there are already big name, and the only names that I imagine powerful enough are Science Magazine, Scientific American, MIT boss. Even Nasdaq, DowJones companies, or N/Dxxx state institutions cannot. 2012/10/19 Craig Haynie cchayniepub...@gmail.com Test Results: Defkalion demonstrated 1 COP of accumulated total energy output divided by accumulated total energy input (exact total COP will be provided in final report) Defkalion demonstrated control of reaction (start, stop, increase, decrease) Defkalion demonstrated a reaction output greater than equivalent chemical energy from mass of internal components [But the signature of the third party is blacked out. Why??]
[Vo]:FW: Defkalion GT announces test results
Speaking of prior art, and patents, in recent threads here ... and looking at page 10 of the DGT report, their device seems to clearly be employing the teachings of: http://www.google.com/patents/US20110233061? Compare the drawings of the reactors. The patent drawing is almost identical to the DGT image of their reactor on page 10. Of course - there is always the small chance that DGT does not use a nickel-based nanopowder or nano-structured material - alone or supported in a dielectric. Jones Today, an official announcement about test results was posted on the Defkalion GT forum: http://www.defkalion-energy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=17t=4143 As previously promised, we are attaching two files that contain a signed protocol and a preliminary report by one independent international group on our technology. This marks the end of our first cycle of testing on our lab reactors, which lasted five months with 21 different experiments having been conducted by three different international organizations. The attached documents indicate the test results obtained by one such team. The other two international well known testing organizations obtained equally impressive results following similar protocols while using their own instrumentation. These results, data, and full analyses by each of the three testers will be published in peer reviewed Journals as applicable by each Journal. Names of the testers and the organizations they represent are still under strict NDAs and have therefore been removed from the attached documents. Defkalion will not disclose names. In the attached protocol the first page represents our RD path and our testing strategy. The test performed under this protocol can be identified under step 1.3.2, which represents the end of this section of our work in progress. Subsequent RD steps and tests on our pre-industrial prototypes have already been scheduled by third parties (as depicted in step 2 – Hyperion Multi-Reactor Kernel Testing). Additionally, all such tests have been video recorded. The following two links indicate a small sample of such recordings. Defkalion Green Technologies 19th October, 2012 Links: Two videos have been added: Explanation of the calorimetry set-up: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VvmWGeryKQc Triggering the reaction http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yax8oHzlXkI Exec Sum of Defkalion Test Review - Sept 2012.pdf [52.49 KiB] http://www.defkalion-energy.com/forum/download/file.php?id=31 2012-09-07_Test Report Validation_Signed_No Names.pdf [3.52 MiB] http://www.defkalion-energy.com/forum/download/file.php?id=30
Re: [Vo]:FW: Defkalion GT announces test results
as an exercise of young patent reader, after david French course I will try to explain why I think it is not infringing. http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/FrenchDpatentsand.pdf If David French can check my homework it is not nanopowder of 3-20nm but micrometer nickel foam as david french explain, is claim 1 is good, no need to care of the others. claim 1 might be killed by piantelli work, but I don't know if piantelli tested arcing, and dielectric medium (is hydrogen or any athmosphere a dielectric medium? yes but not so clear according to that claim, I should call USPTO) the other claims seems retreat position, with some complementary innovations like: - macrosopic particle of dielectric+nano - some transition metals - adding alloys - zirconium or Titanium or thorium oxides mattrix - more than 2athosphere hydrogene - spillover catalyst (thorium,cerium,palladium,zirconium) - spillover catalyst produce via promoter in the particles - 150-15000vold arc - suspension in water - terahertz excitation - fluidized bed DGT can infrige Ahern if they ise nanoparticle, eventually embedded in a mattrix... If as they say, the modify the surface, they are innovative. 2012/10/19 Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net Speaking of prior art, and patents, in recent threads here ... and looking at page 10 of the DGT report, their device seems to clearly be employing the teachings of: http://www.google.com/patents/US20110233061? Compare the drawings of the reactors. The patent drawing is almost identical to the DGT image of their reactor on page 10. Of course - there is always the small chance that DGT does not use a nickel-based nanopowder or nano-structured material - alone or supported in a dielectric. Jones Today, an official announcement about test results was posted on the Defkalion GT forum: http://www.defkalion-energy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=17t=4143 As previously promised, we are attaching two files that contain a signed protocol and a preliminary report by one independent international group on our technology. This marks the end of our first cycle of testing on our lab reactors, which lasted five months with 21 different experiments having been conducted by three different international organizations. The attached documents indicate the test results obtained by one such team. The other two international well known testing organizations obtained equally impressive results following similar protocols while using their own instrumentation. These results, data, and full analyses by each of the three testers will be published in peer reviewed Journals as applicable by each Journal. Names of the testers and the organizations they represent are still under strict NDAs and have therefore been removed from the attached documents. Defkalion will not disclose names. In the attached protocol the first page represents our RD path and our testing strategy. The test performed under this protocol can be identified under step 1.3.2, which represents the end of this section of our work in progress. Subsequent RD steps and tests on our pre-industrial prototypes have already been scheduled by third parties (as depicted in step 2 – Hyperion Multi-Reactor Kernel Testing). Additionally, all such tests have been video recorded. The following two links indicate a small sample of such recordings. Defkalion Green Technologies 19th October, 2012 Links: Two videos have been added: Explanation of the calorimetry set-up: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VvmWGeryKQc Triggering the reaction http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yax8oHzlXkI Exec Sum of Defkalion Test Review - Sept 2012.pdf [52.49 KiB] http://www.defkalion-energy.com/forum/download/file.php?id=31 2012-09-07_Test Report Validation_Signed_No Names.pdf [3.52 MiB] http://www.defkalion-energy.com/forum/download/file.php?id=30
Re: [Vo]:Defkalion GT announces test results
On 2012-10-19 14:12, Akira Shirakawa wrote: 2012-09-07_Test Report Validation_Signed_No Names.pdf [3.52 MiB] http://www.defkalion-energy.com/forum/download/file.php?id=30 An earlier version with names of this test report has been posted on ecatnews.com, pulled from the browser cache of a user who happened to stumble upon it: http://ecatnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/2012-09-07_Test-protocol-signed.pdf The other 2-pages, 52 kBytes report was also reported to be originally longer and more detailed, but it looks like that version is no longer available to the public. Cheers, S.A.
Re: [Vo]:Defkalion GT announces test results
what a security tragedy... hopeful it is not Afghan war infiltrated agents list. only the big boss of NASA might feel uncomfortable (yet happy secretly, that they will be heroes soon, after bloody insults by the mainstream scientists). 2012/10/19 Akira Shirakawa shirakawa.ak...@gmail.com On 2012-10-19 14:12, Akira Shirakawa wrote: 2012-09-07_Test Report Validation_Signed_No Names.pdf [3.52 MiB] http://www.defkalion-energy.**com/forum/download/file.php?**id=30http://www.defkalion-energy.com/forum/download/file.php?id=30 An earlier version with names of this test report has been posted on ecatnews.com, pulled from the browser cache of a user who happened to stumble upon it: http://ecatnews.com/wp-**content/uploads/2012/10/2012-** 09-07_Test-protocol-signed.pdfhttp://ecatnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/2012-09-07_Test-protocol-signed.pdf The other 2-pages, 52 kBytes report was also reported to be originally longer and more detailed, but it looks like that version is no longer available to the public. Cheers, S.A.
Re: [Vo]:Defkalion GT announces test results
On 2012-10-19 17:17, Akira Shirakawa wrote: http://ecatnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/2012-09-07_Test-protocol-signed.pdf On page 18: Test observer, Michael Nelson, was asked to come in lieu of Micheal Melich due to Dr. Melich's current constraints [...] Michael Melich is on Rossi's Board of Advisers too: http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?page_id=2 This might sound like a stupid question, but since Rossi and his team were so adamant that Defkalion GT had absolutely nothing in their hands, now that Micheal Nelson positively reported for Melich on the excess heat from DGT's reactor, will they change their mind? Cheers, S.A.
Re: [Vo]:Defkalion GT announces test results
maybe are the current constraints the fact that he is in the e-cat board...??? about Rossi, clear that he is lying all the time... on COP theoretically limited to 6 on RFG needed on DGT having nothing probably on sales and delivery of MW e-cats... add to that his errors, that he does not admit... anyway from the satellites around I infer that he have something valuable... but what? When I want to guess what is true I look at Proia. 2012/10/19 Akira Shirakawa shirakawa.ak...@gmail.com On 2012-10-19 17:17, Akira Shirakawa wrote: http://ecatnews.com/wp-**content/uploads/2012/10/2012-** 09-07_Test-protocol-signed.pdfhttp://ecatnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/2012-09-07_Test-protocol-signed.pdf On page 18: Test observer, Michael Nelson, was asked to come in lieu of Micheal Melich due to Dr. Melich's current constraints [...] Michael Melich is on Rossi's Board of Advisers too: http://www.journal-of-nuclear-**physics.com/?page_id=2http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?page_id=2 This might sound like a stupid question, but since Rossi and his team were so adamant that Defkalion GT had absolutely nothing in their hands, now that Micheal Nelson positively reported for Melich on the excess heat from DGT's reactor, will they change their mind? Cheers, S.A.
RE: [Vo]:FW: Defkalion GT announces test results
Are you in touch with David? He seems to have a genuine interest in the field - so why no ask for his opinion directly? Of course, he is located in Canada, but that is where DGT hopes to be located in the future, so he may not want to comment - in the event that they would seek his services. From: alain.coetm...@gmail.com as an exercise of young patent reader, after David French course I will try to explain why I think it is not infringing. http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/FrenchDpatentsand.pdf If David French can check my homework
Re: [Vo]:FW: Defkalion GT announces test results
I have no specific relation whith him, even if I appreciate greatly his course on patent (yet I miss much of it probably). Opinion from him, as he already have studied Brillouin patent, would be great. 2012/10/19 Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net Are you in touch with David? He seems to have a genuine interest in the field – so why no ask for his opinion directly? ** ** Of course, he is located in Canada, but that is where DGT hopes to be located in the future, so he may not want to comment – in the event that they would seek his services. ** ** *From:* alain.coetm...@gmail.com ** ** as an exercise of young patent reader, after David French course I will try to explain why I think it is not infringing. http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/FrenchDpatentsand.pdf If David French can check my homework ** **
Re: [Vo]:Defkalion GT announces test results
On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 8:12 AM, Akira Shirakawa shirakawa.ak...@gmail.com wrote: · Explanation of the calorimetry set-up: (uploading in progress) · Triggering the reaction: (uploading in progress) · Explanation of the calorimetry set-up: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VvmWGeryKQcfeature=youtu.be · Triggering the reaction: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yax8oHzlXkIfeature=youtu.be
Re: [Vo]:Defkalion GT announces test results
On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 2:01 PM, Alan J Fletcher a...@well.com wrote: Just like Rossi --- last signature box on the main report : On behalf of [Redacted] The customer? Dr. Michael Melich
Re: [Vo]:Defkalion GT announces test results
At 11:01 AM 10/19/2012, Alan J Fletcher wrote: Unfortunately, the result is only that it SUGGESTS a COP of 1 Since Defkalion specs have COP in the 20-30 range this seems rather disappointing. The blog goes on to say : The objective of this test was to get only COP1.1 with a noise to signal ratio less than 10%. We got COP3 very easy with noise to signal less than 4%. Note that the tested reactor R5 was not designed for maximum COP but to get maximum lab safety and control /understanding over the phenomena.
Re: [Vo]:Defkalion GT announces test results
Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote: Gee, Jed, did you set up that flow calorimeter? :-) Not me! I don't do secret tests. I don't sign NDAs. If you don't want the world to know, I don't want to hear about it. I have no objection to people keeping secrets, but I do not want to hear those secrets. Generally speaking, the value of information is inversely proportional to the extent it is kept secret. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Defkalion GT announces test results
Latest News: For easy HTML format see botton of http://lenr.scienceontheweb.net/ where breaking news referenced. Ahern, Santilli, Rossi, Zeocat, Thkeory, Videos and more. M.
Re: [Vo]:Discover article about cold fusion
On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 2:15 AM, Alain Sepeda alain.sep...@gmail.comwrote: 2012/10/19 James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com Of course, we must always remember that theory precedes phenomenon. Irony I hope? Real I'm afraid. In fact sure Real, I observed many times. But since there is no peer-reviewed theory for that decadence of science it should be non existent. ;-) And it is observed yet again in this article. I could go through and disect the ways in which the article is damage-control for the scientific establishment, but it is sort of like picking through dog vomit.
Re: [Vo]:How long?
I wrote: The only thing standing between Rossi and global domination of the energy market is Rossi himself. Assuming he is right, and not a faker. I trust I do not need to add that caveat every time, for this audience. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:New Experiment Started
I decided to perform an experiment where less current was flowing into my cell. I noted that 1 ampere of current still demonstrated sparks once the electrolyte had mostly boiled away. The earlier experiments were using 2 or 3 amps so I was curious if a threshold effect was present. The large flashes seem to be non existent at this current level. Sparks tend to be less frequent but energetic when using either my old test nickel or a new one connected to the supply negative terminal. As before, the sparks originate on or very near to the negative connected nickel. I still believe that this effect is of a chemical nature and not LENR. I wonder if the concentration of heat within a small volume is causing the carbonate to decompose and escape. There exists the possibility that some hydrogen or possibly sodium related phenomena is present. Has anyone else witnessed this strange effect? Dave -Original Message- From: David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thu, Oct 18, 2012 1:43 am Subject: Re: [Vo]:New Experiment Started The flashes of light that emit a puff of smoke may be occurring somewhat like you describe. The fact that they are located only in the vicinity of the negative supply connected nickel suggests that hydrogen is also a factor or perhaps the emission of electrons from that electrode is important. I agree that the bubbles are envolved as they are causing the voltage to vary significantly during this event. I also wonder if sparks due to the large electric field across the bubbles are igniting hydrogen in the area? I suppose the puffs of smoke could have been condensed water vapor. It was evident that the cell content was boiling vigorously between the electrodes during that episode and a far smaller quantity of vapor was always being emitted due to the high liquid temperature. Perhaps small hydrogen explosions suppled enough energy to make the big puffs. The sparks that are of short duration and not directly associated with the flashes behave in a different manner. These tiny events appear to radiate away from the nickel or thick white deposit extremely rapidly and in a straight line. They have the appearance of being shot from a point on the surface outward. If I recall, they look as if they were traveling one to two inches before becoming invisible. When I saw a group of them synchronized it reminded me of the science fiction films of wild time machine emissions. In this strange case they originate in several different locations and travel is random directions. Each one moves independent of the others but synchronized very closely in time. On a few occasions I noticed that there appeared to be a single tiny region typically along one edge of the nickel from which a series of the short duration sparks would originate. These sparks would shoot out in a straight line away from the active region while each one headed in a semi random direction. Here I use the word semi random because they tended to head outward within a cone shaped pattern of perhaps 45 degrees span. During these bursts of sparks I became concerned as it looked like a flame would originate from there. A volcano erruption of hot cinders from its crater is somewhat similar in appearance. This behavior is quite difficult to put into words and I apologize for my poor description! You should perform a similar experiment if you want to add a small dose of excitement to your day. I am not sure of exactly what is occurring at this time but I suspect that it is of a chemical nature. If it is an LENR effect, then everyone should be able to experience it as it happens with regularity. (Poor Dave mumbles to himself as he experiences a short period of brain death due to his attempt to describe the indescribable.) Dave -Original Message- From: Jeff Berkowitz pdx...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thu, Oct 18, 2012 12:24 am Subject: Re: [Vo]:New Experiment Started It's possible that as the electrolyte evaporates, and there is not sufficient electrolyte to make a fully-immersed path from anode to cathode (you'll have to confirm that), there are moments when the liquid withdraws from point(s) on one of the electrodes - because of the tendency of water to form minimum-area surfaces due to surface tension, for example. At this moment, even a relatively low voltage might be enough to arc across the tiny, just-formed air gap between the exposed cathode and the withdrawing electrolyte. The arc would be visible as a tiny spark. The spark could vaporize a tiny bit of the withdrawing water, and the conductivity of the microscopic puff of steam could kill the arc a moment later. This effect could occur repeatedly and rapidly. Jeff On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 10:14 AM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: It would be nearly impossible to catch the spark in the act with single frame
Re: [Vo]:WLT Disproof
On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 10:35 PM, pagnu...@htdconnect.com wrote: ... One needs very many particles to describe collective effects. In the model wave functions of Ciuchi et al there are no metallic hydrides, there are no cathodes and there are no chemical batteries. Employing a wave function with only one electron and one proton is inadequate for describing collective metallic hydride surface quantum plasma physics in cathodes accurately. Someone should hire Carver Mead to do an analysis. He wrote the book Collective Electrodynamics: Quantum Foundations of Electromagnetism.
Re: [Vo]:WLT Disproof
Once again you need to read my papers. http://www.gsjournal.net/Science-Journals-Papers/Author/913/Frank,%20Znidarsic%20(new) Frank Znidarsic Carver Mead -Original Message- From: James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Fri, Oct 19, 2012 9:19 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:WLT Disproof On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 10:35 PM, pagnu...@htdconnect.com wrote: ... One needs very many particles to describe collective effects. In the model wave functions of Ciuchi et al there are no metallic hydrides, there are no cathodes and there are no chemical batteries. Employing a wave function with only one electron and one proton is inadequate for describing collective metallic hydride surface quantum plasma physics in cathodes accurately. Someone should hire Carver Mead to do an analysis. He wrote the book Collective Electrodynamics: Quantum Foundations of Electromagnetism.
Re: [Vo]:New Experiment Started
Le Oct 19, 2012 à 4:34 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com a écrit : I still believe that this effect is of a chemical nature and not LENR. I wonder if the concentration of heat within a small volume is causing the carbonate to decompose and escape. There exists the possibility that some hydrogen or possibly sodium related phenomena is present. Has anyone else witnessed this strange effect? I recommend that anyone attempting electrolysis familiarize him or herself with Melvin Miles's work, e.g., [1,2]. Even if the chemistry goes well beyond one's training, his papers are helpful in getting a sense of how complex the (non-LENR) reactions are in these systems. The main way that they are helpful is in instilling fear in the heart of anyone seeking to draw any kind of conclusion about what is observed. Eric [1] and [2], http://www.iscmns.org/CMNS/JCMNS-Vol8.pdf, p. 12 ff. and 115 ff.
Re: [Vo]:Defkalion GT announces test results
Le Oct 19, 2012 à 5:27 AM, Akira Shirakawa shirakawa.ak...@gmail.com a écrit : By the way, I wonder if the way DGT blacked out some information in the pdf above was *very* weak on purpose. I was wondering why the presenter in one video (Hadjichristos?) was wearing a crisp, new NASA t-shirt. Also note two references made in passing: * National Instruments was to look into a glitch that was found in their software. * At least two of the testers were internationally recognized testing organizations Eric
