[Vo]:Metastable Innershell Molecular State (MIMS) - This is not femto atoms

2015-02-24 Thread Daniel Rocha
It's binding atoms with their innershells.

It's free:

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2211379714000515

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0375960114009256

http://nextbigfuture.com/2015/02/confirmation-of-ultra-high-energy.html


Daniel Rocha - RJ
danieldi...@gmail.com


Re: [Vo]:Proposed YouTube introduction to cold fusion

2015-02-24 Thread Blaze Spinnaker
Just get MFMP to replicate Parkhomov.   That'll go viral instantly.   I
find it unlikely it will happen.  I'm sure if it could be replicated
someone would have already done so by now.

On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 3:15 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:

 I have been thinking about a YouTube video 3 to 6 minutes long to
 introduce cold fusion. The goal would be to increase interest in the field.
 Ideally, it would be great to provoke a viral reaction attracting thousands
 of viewers. Possibly even millions. I personally am not capable of making
 something like this. It should be done by a professional producer. Here is
 what I think it should be like.


 Three ideas are presented:

 Cold fusion has been widely replicated.

 It remains difficult to replicate because control parameters are difficult
 to achieve.

 If researchers learn to control cold fusion, it might become a valuable
 source of energy.


 In more detail, the script would be something like this:

 Cold fusion was announced by professors Fleischmann and Pons in 1989. It
 is a nuclear reaction that produces heat without burning chemical fuel. It
 produces helium in the same ratio to the heat as plasma fusion does. It
 sometimes produces tritium. Helium and tritium are unmistakable signs of a
 nuclear reaction.

 [Display for the above paragraph: A few words perhaps: “Cold fusion was
 announced in 1989. It is a nuclear reaction producing heat, helium and
 tritium.” No graph of heat and helium because that is too complicated.]


 Cold fusion has been replicated thousands of times in hundreds of major
 laboratories. This graph shows results from several tests performed at two
 different laboratories. When loading exceeds 0.92, the effect turns on.

 [Display: McKubre graph 1, Maximum loading,
 http://lenr-canr.org/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/McKubre-graph-1.jpg.
 Under graph it says “Combined results from SRI and ENEA (Italian National
 Agency for New Technologies, Energy)”]


 Cold fusion remains difficult to replicate because it occurs under rare
 conditions that are difficult to achieve, but when these conditions are
 achieved, the reaction always turns on. The strength of the reaction varies
 with current density, loading and other control parameters. [1] Again, high
 loading and high current density can be difficult to reach, but when
 researchers manage to reach them, the reaction always turns on. This graph
 also shows that high loading correlates with high heat; each dot represents
 one test. [2] Here are similar results from Toyota. [3]

 [Display: 1.
 http://lenr-canr.org/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/McKubre-graph-2.jpg,
 under graph it says SRI The graphs on this screen are animated. 2.
 McKubre graph of loading. 3. Kunimatsu graph overlays SRI, label on screen
 IMRA (Toyota research lab),
 http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/KunimatsuKdeuteriuml.pdf]


 Cold fusion has reached temperatures and power density roughly as high as
 the core of a nuclear fission reactor. If researchers can learn to control
 cold fusion and make it occur on demand, it might become a practical source
 of energy. It would provide inexhaustible energy for billions of years.
 Because it consumes hydrogen in a nuclear process, rather than a chemical
 process, the hydrogen generates millions of times more energy than any
 chemical fuel such as oil. It would also eliminate the threat of global
 warming because it does not produce carbon dioxide.

 Hydrogen fuel is virtually free, and cold fusion devices are small,
 relatively simple, and inexpensive. They resemble NiCad batteries. So the
 cost of the energy would be low.

 For more information, see LENR.org

 [Links to this paper by McKubre, or something similar:
 http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/McKubreMCHcoldfusionb.pdf]



 NOTES

 The main goal is to attract as many viewers as possible, perhaps even
 triggering a viral response. Another goal is to overturn the viewer's
 notions about cold fusion, but not by challenging those notions directly or
 by arguing. We present the facts and let them speak for themselves. This
 has to be technically accurate with no exaggerations or false promises.

 The choice of messages seems self-evident to me. What else do we have to
 say? The difficult part is to present this in a way that people find
 compelling. Will people find this compelling? Can it go viral? I do not
 know.

 This draft may present too much detail. It may need fewer topics with more
 repetition. This text takes me ~2.5 minutes to read. With animated graphs
 and some pauses it would be 3 or 4 minutes. A few more details, with more
 repetition would bring it to 6 minutes. I am tempted to add this detail
 from Roulette et al, but I think it is too much, and it strains credulity:
 A few cold fusion devices the size of a coin have produced heat at 100 W
 continuously for months. This much chemical fuel would last only a few
 minutes.

 The trick is to leave out details while giving viewers a link to a
 document so 

Re: [Vo]:Proposed YouTube introduction to cold fusion

2015-02-24 Thread Blaze Spinnaker
I think what people don't get is that there are probably dozens if not at
least a 100 or so labs trying to replicate lugano.   It's likely some % of
those labs are going to make make measurement errors.And some % of that
are going to report without proper review.

On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 4:29 AM, Blaze Spinnaker blazespinna...@gmail.com
wrote:

 Just get MFMP to replicate Parkhomov.   That'll go viral instantly.   I
 find it unlikely it will happen.  I'm sure if it could be replicated
 someone would have already done so by now.

 On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 3:15 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com
 wrote:

 I have been thinking about a YouTube video 3 to 6 minutes long to
 introduce cold fusion. The goal would be to increase interest in the field.
 Ideally, it would be great to provoke a viral reaction attracting thousands
 of viewers. Possibly even millions. I personally am not capable of making
 something like this. It should be done by a professional producer. Here is
 what I think it should be like.


 Three ideas are presented:

 Cold fusion has been widely replicated.

 It remains difficult to replicate because control parameters are
 difficult to achieve.

 If researchers learn to control cold fusion, it might become a valuable
 source of energy.


 In more detail, the script would be something like this:

 Cold fusion was announced by professors Fleischmann and Pons in 1989. It
 is a nuclear reaction that produces heat without burning chemical fuel. It
 produces helium in the same ratio to the heat as plasma fusion does. It
 sometimes produces tritium. Helium and tritium are unmistakable signs of a
 nuclear reaction.

 [Display for the above paragraph: A few words perhaps: “Cold fusion was
 announced in 1989. It is a nuclear reaction producing heat, helium and
 tritium.” No graph of heat and helium because that is too complicated.]


 Cold fusion has been replicated thousands of times in hundreds of major
 laboratories. This graph shows results from several tests performed at two
 different laboratories. When loading exceeds 0.92, the effect turns on.

 [Display: McKubre graph 1, Maximum loading,
 http://lenr-canr.org/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/McKubre-graph-1.jpg.
 Under graph it says “Combined results from SRI and ENEA (Italian National
 Agency for New Technologies, Energy)”]


 Cold fusion remains difficult to replicate because it occurs under rare
 conditions that are difficult to achieve, but when these conditions are
 achieved, the reaction always turns on. The strength of the reaction varies
 with current density, loading and other control parameters. [1] Again, high
 loading and high current density can be difficult to reach, but when
 researchers manage to reach them, the reaction always turns on. This graph
 also shows that high loading correlates with high heat; each dot represents
 one test. [2] Here are similar results from Toyota. [3]

 [Display: 1.
 http://lenr-canr.org/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/McKubre-graph-2.jpg,
 under graph it says SRI The graphs on this screen are animated. 2.
 McKubre graph of loading. 3. Kunimatsu graph overlays SRI, label on screen
 IMRA (Toyota research lab),
 http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/KunimatsuKdeuteriuml.pdf]


 Cold fusion has reached temperatures and power density roughly as high as
 the core of a nuclear fission reactor. If researchers can learn to control
 cold fusion and make it occur on demand, it might become a practical source
 of energy. It would provide inexhaustible energy for billions of years.
 Because it consumes hydrogen in a nuclear process, rather than a chemical
 process, the hydrogen generates millions of times more energy than any
 chemical fuel such as oil. It would also eliminate the threat of global
 warming because it does not produce carbon dioxide.

 Hydrogen fuel is virtually free, and cold fusion devices are small,
 relatively simple, and inexpensive. They resemble NiCad batteries. So the
 cost of the energy would be low.

 For more information, see LENR.org

 [Links to this paper by McKubre, or something similar:
 http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/McKubreMCHcoldfusionb.pdf]



 NOTES

 The main goal is to attract as many viewers as possible, perhaps even
 triggering a viral response. Another goal is to overturn the viewer's
 notions about cold fusion, but not by challenging those notions directly or
 by arguing. We present the facts and let them speak for themselves. This
 has to be technically accurate with no exaggerations or false promises.

 The choice of messages seems self-evident to me. What else do we have to
 say? The difficult part is to present this in a way that people find
 compelling. Will people find this compelling? Can it go viral? I do not
 know.

 This draft may present too much detail. It may need fewer topics with
 more repetition. This text takes me ~2.5 minutes to read. With animated
 graphs and some pauses it would be 3 or 4 minutes. A few more details, with
 more repetition would bring it to 6 

[Vo]:The hidden problem with Lithium

2015-02-24 Thread Jones Beene
Here is a paper worth reading as background for understanding the
possibility of a hidden lithium depletion problem. This problem could
relate to why cold fusion has historically been hard to replicate (if the
electrolyte contained LiOH with the depleted light isotope).

http://paperzz.com/doc/3108333/selective-resonant-tunnelling-%E2%80%93-turn-
the-hydrogen

The paper does not mention the problem of (hidden) depletion in lithium -
i.e. lithium-6 removal - which is a little-discussed but a potentially major
problem --- and which could actually serve to nullify gain in any dogbone
reactors fueled with depleted material. Of course, so no one knows the real
source of gain now, but if it relates to Li-6 content, then there is a
problem for many experimenters in not being able to get hold of the most
active isotope. However, pure isotopes can be bought, as mentioned here
before and that may be a key to success.

Natural lithium has two stable isotopes, Li-6 and Li-7, with the latter
being far more abundant: about 92.5% BUT --- the former being far more
valuable to the military. Li-6 could also be more valuable to LENR because
of some parameter which shows up differently in LENR - we simply do not
know. What we do know is that commercial sources may not contain the
expected 7% because of regulations which allow depleted lithium to be sold
as natural.  

In short, both natural Li isotopes have an unexpectedly low nuclear binding
but Li-6 may be more active but not as the source of tritium. Since Li-6 is
extremely valuable to the Pentagon as the source of tritium, large amounts
are (were) separated out (historically) and the remainder then resold as
lithium but without the purchaser realizing the level of depletion. Much
of the depleted material is still on the market, as lithium batteries are
recycled over and over. For instance, almost all of the lithium which was
produced 100 years ago is still in circulation, and lithium which was
depleted during the cold war is found in new batteries. (where the level
depletion is totally immaterial)

Note: Tritium has not been detected in the dogbone and it would be easily
detected if there - so if Li-6 is more active for thermal gain - it is for a
different reason. The paper above seems to suggest one way this could
happen, but there is another way as well (probably several).

Jones





[Vo]:Current Science, Special Section: Low Energy Nuclear Reactions

2015-02-24 Thread Jed Rothwell
The journal Current Science, Vol. 108, No. 4, published on February 25,
2015 includes 35 papers about cold fusion, Special Section: Low Energy
Nuclear Reactions. The online edition is here:

http://www.currentscience.ac.in/php/cissue.php


[Vo]:almost the expected flow of LENR information today

2015-02-24 Thread Peter Gluck
Dear Friends,

Just published:

http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2015/02/tactical-lenr-battles-week-day-2.html

Going back for continuing search and hunting. Wish me luck, please!

Peter

-- 
Dr. Peter Gluck
Cluj, Romania
http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com


[Vo]:the story behind free pdfs of 34 cold fusion papers in Current Science 104(4) 574-7, 2015.02.25: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax: Rich Murray 2015.02.24

2015-02-24 Thread Rich Murray
the story behind free pdfs of 34 cold fusion papers in Current Science
104(4) 574-7, 2015.02.25: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax: Rich Murray 2015.02.24


Replicable cold fusion experiment: heat/helium ratio, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax,
Current Science 104(4) 574-7, 2015.02.25 free pdfs of 34 papers: Rich
Murray 2015.02.24
http://rmforall.blogspot.com/2015/02/replicable-cold-fusion-experiment.html


Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com [newvortex] 
newvor...@yahoogroups.com
4:59 PM (5 hours ago) Tuesday. 2015.02.24

to newvortex

The entire journal:

http://www.currentscience.ac.in/php/toc.php?vol=108issue=04

The special section alone, 34 papers:

http://www.currentscience.ac.in/php/feat.php?feature=Special%20Section:%20Low%20Energy%20Nuclear%20Reactionsfeatid=10094

And, of course, my paper: Replicable cold fusion experiment:
heat/helium ratio
http://www.currentscience.ac.in/Volumes/108/04/0574.pdf

All the papers in that section may be discussed on Wikversity:

https://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Cold_fusion/Current_Science

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Current_Science

Some general information about this.
Current Science is a multidisciplinary journal established in 1932,
published by the Current Science Association in collaboration with the
Indian Academy of Sciences.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Academy_of_Sciences

Last year, the editors of the section solicited papers from
researchers in the field of LENR.
These papers went through two reviews, first by the special section editors
and then, if the editors decided to forward the paper, by a normal peer
reviewer
assigned by Current Science.

The anonymous reviewer of my paper was familiar with physics and not with
cold fusion, and was skeptical at first.
Yes, I modified my paper extensively in response to his critique and it is,
no doubt,
better for it.
Apparently, he was convinced, he gave a glowing recommendation for
publication.

There are some very good papers in this collection, and others that are
brief reports on activity in various nations or organizations.

I specially recommend McKubre's paper,
Cold fusion: comments on the state of scientific proof

http://www.currentscience.ac.in/Volumes/108/04/0495.pdf

But there are *many* excellent papers.

One might notice that we are not being shy about using the term cold
fusion.  Times change.

It's fusion, get over it.

(Fusion is a result, not a mechanism. The mechanism is a mystery.)

Posted by: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com


Re: [Vo]:Current Science, Special Section: Low Energy Nuclear Reactions

2015-02-24 Thread Jed Rothwell
I meant 34 papers. Here are the titles in the EndNote default format:

1. Azizi, O., et al., *Progress towards understanding anomalous heat effect
in metal deuterides.* Curr. Sci., 2015. *108*(4).

2. Biberian, J.P., *Biological transmutations.* Curr. Sci., 2015. *108*(4).

3. Cravens, D., M.R. Swartz, and B.S. Ahern, *Condensed matter nuclear
reactions with metal particles in gases.* Curr. Sci., 2015. *108*(4).

4. Dong, Z.M., C.L. Liang, and X.Z. Li, *Condensed matter nuclear science
research status in China.* Curr. Sci., 2015. *108*(4).

5. Hagelstein, P.L. and I. Chaudhary, *Phonon models for anomalies in
condensed matter nuclear science.* Curr. Sci., 2015. *108*(4).

6. Hagelstein, P.L., *Directional X-ray and gamma emission in experiments
in condensed matter nuclear science.* Curr. Sci., 2015. *108*(4).

7. Hubler, G.K., et al., *Sidney Kimmel Institute for Nuclear
Renaissance.* Curr.
Sci., 2015. *108*(4).

8. Iwamura, Y., T. Itoh, and S. Tsuruga, *Transmutation reactions induced
by deuterium permeation through nano-structured palladium multilayer thin
film.* Curr. Sci., 2015. *108*(4).

9. Kidwell, D., et al., *Observation of radio frequency emissions from
electrochemical loading experiments.* Curr. Sci., 2015. *108*(4).

10. Kitamura, A., et al., *Brief summary of latest experimental results
with a mass-flow calorimetry system for anomalous heat effect of
nano-composite metals under D(H)-gas charging.* Curr. Sci., 2015. *108*(4).

11. Kitamura, A., *Status of cold fusion research in Japan.* Curr. Sci.,
2015. *108*(4).

12. Letts, D., *Highly reproducible LENR experiments using dual laser
stimulation.* Curr. Sci., 2015. *108*(4).

13. Liang, C.L., Z.M. Dong, and X.Z. Li, *Selective resonant tunnelling --
turning hydrogen-storage material into energetic material.* Curr. Sci.,
2015. *108*(4).

14. Lomax, A., *Replicable cold fusion experiment: heat/helium ratio.* Curr.
Sci., 2015. *108*(4).

15. McKubre, M.C.H., *Cold fusion: comments on the state of scientific
proof.* Curr. Sci., 2015. *108*(4).

16. Meulenberg, A., *Extensions to physics: what cold fusion teaches.* Curr.
Sci., 2015. *108*(4).

17. Mosier-Boss, P.A., et al., *Use of CR-39 detectors to determine the
branching ratio in Pd/D co-deposition.* Curr. Sci., 2015. *108*(4).

18. Mosier-Boss, P.A., et al., *Condensed matter nuclear reaction products
observed in Pd/D co-deposition experiments.* Curr. Sci., 2015. *108*(4).

19. Nagel, D.J., *Energy gains from lattice-enabled nuclear reactions.* Curr.
Sci., 2015. *108*(4).

20. Nagel, D.J., *Lattice-enabled nuclear reactions in the nickel and
hydrogen gas system.* Curr. Sci., 2015. *108*(4).

21. Sinha, A., *Model of low energy nuclear reactions in a solid matrix
with defects.* Curr. Sci., 2015. *108*(4).

22. Srinivasan, M. and A. Meulenberg, *Preface.* Curr. Sci., 2015. *108*(4).

23. Srinivasan, M., *Observation of neutrons and tritium in the early BARC
cold fusion experiments.* Curr. Sci., 2015. *108*(4).

24. Srinivasan, M., *Introduction to isotopic shifts and transmutations
observed in LENR experiments.* Curr. Sci., 2015. *108*(4).

25. Storms, E., *How the explanation of LENR can be made consistent with
observed behaviour and natural laws.* Curr. Sci., 2015. *108*(4).

26. Storms, E., *Introduction to the main experimental findings of the LENR
field.* Curr. Sci., 2015. *108*(4).

27. Swartz, M.R., et al., *Dry, preloaded NANOR (R)-type CF/LANR
components.* Curr. Sci., 2015. *108*(4).

28. Takahashi, A., *Development status of condensed cluster fusion
theory.* Curr.
Sci., 2015. *108*(4).

29. Valat, M., R. Hunt, and R. Greenyer, *Martin Fleischmann Memorial
Project status review.* Curr. Sci., 2015. *108*(4).

30. Verner, G.M., M.R. Swartz, and P.L. Hagelstein, *Summary report:
‘Introduction to Cold Fusion’ -- IAP course at the Massachusetts Institute
of Technology, USA.* Curr. Sci., 2015.*108*(4).

31. Violante, V., et al., *Review of materials science for studying the
Fleischmann and Pons effect.* Curr. Sci., 2015. *108*(4).

32. Vysotskii, V. and M. Vysotskii, *Coherent correlated states of
interacting particles – the possible key to paradoxes and features of
LENR.* Curr.
Sci., 2015. *108*(4).

33. Vysotskii, V., A.A. Kornilova, and A.O. Vasilenko, *Observation and
investigation of anomalous X-ray and thermal effects of cavitation.* Curr.
Sci., 2015. *108*(4).

34. Vysotskii, V. and A.A. Kornilova, *Microbial transmutation of Cs-137
and LENR in growing biological systems.* Curr. Sci., 2015. *108*(4).