Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

On Sun, Jul 9, 2017 at 4:29 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > ​ > > The Penon report?!? > ​***ALL of it. The Penon report, the supposed heat exchanger, all of it. If the Penon report is as fraudulent as you make it out to be, then Rossi would be up on charges for that. All

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com> wrote: > Kevin O'Malley <kevmol...@gmail.com> wrote: > > >> As soon as they verify a LENR experiment that many who have the means can >> do in our garages, the cat is out of the bag. >> > > That may never happen. It may be tha

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

; On Fri, Jul 7, 2017 at 6:51 PM, Kevin O'Malley <kevmol...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Yup, this is just the first battle in the patent wars. It will last >> decades until some billionaire steps in. >> > > Oligarchic 'Capitalism' (parasitism) does not HAVE decades. > > But maybe none of the rest of us do, either. > > > > >

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

… I am still trying to convince the group to take another crack at it, with a more sophisticated radiation measurement that requires some building and a small amount of funding. ***That means you have not been pursuing it. It's been 4 years and basically no mention on the MFMP blog. Even if

Re: [Vo]:Interest in cold fusion has waned

One of the cool things about cold fusion in a 500 year outlook is that it makes for a very ineffective weapon. Even fire is a more effective weapon. You know why potatoes became a crop of choice in Europe? Because when a king's army sieged your castle and burned your crops, there were still

Re: [Vo]:Picking up the pieces

There is one conclusion that can be drawn. Rossi submitted all kinds of information to the court docket, under oath. The claim against him was fraud. The legal burden of proof in a civil case is "preponderance of the evidence". IH obviously couldn't even meet that level of proof. The legal

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

Hagelstein was going to sell NANORs for a few thousand dollars but that appears to have gone nowhere. On Fri, Jul 7, 2017 at 2:02 PM, Che <comandantegri...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Thu, Jul 6, 2017 at 8:57 PM, Kevin O'Malley <kevmol...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >>

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

; data or he intentionally misrepresented his data. > > Harry > > On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 3:55 PM, Kevin O'Malley <kevmol...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> You're probably right. But there is evidence he had a COP > 1 for >> some length of time according

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

; wrote: > >> If that is true then Rossi either lacks the ability to interpret his own >> data or he intentionally misrepresented his data. >> >> Harry >> >> On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 3:55 PM, Kevin O'Malley <kevmol...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >&

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

On 7/10/17, Jed Rothwell wrote: > > I cannot judge legal standards. ***Then stop using a legal term. It's like saying that by scientific standards and by common sense standards your neighbor is guilty of armed robbery. If there were "scientific standards" to begin

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

On 7/9/17, Jed Rothwell wrote: OJ Simpson... > Obviously he was guilty. ***Then obviously Rossi is Not Guilty of Fraud. You just agreed with the legal standard. > All I did was read the Penon report. That's all it takes. ***Bullshit. Plenty of others have read the

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

e the device > in Florida worked as he claimed. If the trial proceeded I think it is very > likely that the preponderance of the evidence would not support his claim. > > Harry > > On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 10:07 AM, Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

The report was credible enough for IH not to move forward on their case. I'm glad to see you got a start on delineating all the scientific charlatanism in that report and in the case. On 7/10/17, Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com> wrote: > Kevin O'Malley <kevmol...@gmail.com> wr

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

On 7/10/17, Jed Rothwell wrote: > Unless you took part in the lawyers' negotiations, you do not know that is > the reason. ***You don't have to be involved at that level. If the report was a slam dunk either way it would have compelled the outcome of the case. It wasn't

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

The Gamma Ray thing happened in 2013, that was the link I posted. I am glad to see someone at MFMP taking this seriously. On Friday, July 7, 2017, Mark Jurich wrote: > I wrote: > > Yes, we (MFMP) did pursue the “Gamma Ray Thing” (we made an > unsuccessful replication

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

If Rossi's report proves he is a thief then he would be up on charges. On Friday, July 7, 2017, Jed Rothwell wrote: > Axil Axil > wrote: > > I don't remember writing a post that personally attacked

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

e >> >> >> >> -Original Message- >> From: Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com> >> To: Vortex <vortex-l@eskimo.com> >> Sent: Wed, Jul 5, 2017 6:20 pm >> Subject: Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled >> >> Kevin O'Malley <

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

Fusion events, and other nuclear exchanges. On 7/11/17, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote: > Gamma's were also seen at reaction shutdown. What produces those gammas? > > On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 9:35 PM, Kevin O'Malley <kevmol...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >&g

Re: [Vo]:MFMP activities

nything that looks unusual or otherwise worth > discussion, let us all know. > > *AlanG / MFMP* > > On 7/12/2017 4:44 AM, Kevin O'Malley wrote: >> The issue is:What have you been doing with that gamma ray thing. All >> the rest fits into what I called "what

Re: [Vo]:MFMP activities

On 7/14/17, Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com> wrote: > Kevin O'Malley <kevmol...@gmail.com> wrote: > > What leads you to doubt Hans Biberian's "replication" of finding the >> gamma rays within 48 hours? >> > > Not familiar with that. ***You di

Re: [Vo]:MFMP activities

What leads you to doubt Hans Biberian's "replication" of finding the gamma rays within 48 hours? On 7/14/17, Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com> wrote: > Kevin O'Malley <kevmol...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Well, are you happy with how they handled this gamma ra

Re: [Vo]:MFMP activities

http://www.quantumheat.org/index.php/en/home/mfmp-blog/347-gamma On 7/13/17, Kevin O'Malley <kevmol...@gmail.com> wrote: > I updated their blog entry for them. > > http://www.quantumheat.org/#comment-8874 >

Re: [Vo]:MFMP activities

e you want them to go. > Or find an investor. Right? > > > On 14 July 2017 at 03:43, Kevin O'Malley <kevmol...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> I updated their blog entry for them. >> >> http://www.quantumheat.org/#comment-8874 >> >> > > &

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

On 7/17/17, bobcook39...@hotmail.com wrote: Bremsstrahlung is associated with the slowing of a charged > particle which enters a substance at a velocity greater than the speed of > light in the medium. Velocity greater than C? I thought there was nothing that could

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

On 7/17/17, Brian Ahern wrote: > > The sad reality is that nobody has succeeded in producing 1.0 watts of > excess energy with a COP > 1.5 on a repeatable and demonstrated platform. > ***What about the NANOR? And also, what about those 153 peer reviewed replications of

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

Jed Rothwell 5:36 PM (5 hours ago) Nope. The legal system does not sue scientists for publishing fraudulent or idiotic reports. ***The legal system brings its resources to bear upon scientists who scam others with fraudulent reports. One reason is that no one can tell fools and frauds apart.

Re: Fw: [Vo]:Interest in cold fusion has waned

gunpowder. > > > ------ > *From:* Kevin O'Malley <kevmol...@gmail.com> > *Sent:* Friday, July 7, 2017 7:04 PM > *To:* vortex-l > *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:Interest in cold fusion has waned > > One of the cool things about cold fusion in a 500

Re: [Vo]:MFMP activities

. Even if there is no excess heat, it MUST be a nuclear phenomena. Even the skeptopath Kirk Shanahan acknowledges this, and he is one to throw out all 153 of those peer reviewed replication papers that you published. On 7/14/17, Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com> wrote: > Kevin

Re: [Vo]:Fwd: Martin Fleischmann Memorial Project just uploaded a video

Last I was looking into this, it seemed like there was a scam being run on MFMP. It took all this rigmarole to get the guy to work with you on a replication? On 7/19/17, Che wrote: > So... what do people think about the ECCO cold fusion project from an > Indian

Re: [Vo]:Fwd: Martin Fleischmann Memorial Project just uploaded a video

Because if it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, walks like a duck, etc., it's probably a duck. http://e-catworld.com/2017/07/14/mfmp-plan-and-proposal-regarding-ecco-device/ On 7/20/17, Che wrote: > > Why would anyone think this guy is having the World on, as

Re: [Vo]:Rossi vs. Darden Settlement Agreement Published

://animpossibleinvention.files.wordpress.com/2017/07/settlement-agreement.pdf On 7/18/17, Kevin O'Malley <kevmol...@gmail.com> wrote: > Wouldn't that be fascinating if High Temp Superconductors were > generating linear BECs? I can see they might be Luttinger Liquids, > but let's say it went o

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

, Che <comandantegri...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 12:43 AM, Kevin O'Malley <kevmol...@gmail.com> > wrote: >> >> On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 7:13 AM, Brian Ahern <ahern_br...@msn.com> wrote: >> >> There are no room temperature super

Re: [Vo]:Fwd: Martin Fleischmann Memorial Project just uploaded a video

7 at 5:03 AM, Kevin O'Malley <kevmol...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Because if it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, walks like a >> duck, etc., it's probably a duck. >> > > That's the kind of bullshit, status-quo prevarication we get in Politix all > the

Re: [Vo]:Fwd: Martin Fleischmann Memorial Project just uploaded a video

statement projects. And in the link provided, I'm not the only one saying such things. So pipe down, bub. Argue the facts, not personality "types" and pure bullshit. On 7/20/17, Che <comandantegri...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 5:16 PM, Kevin O'Malley &

Re: [Vo]:MFMP activities

So then a gamma ray detection followed by a replication within 48 hours would be very significant, wouldn't you say? That's why I'm disappointed MFMP didn't pursue this line of inquiry. On 7/15/17, Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com> wrote: > Kevin O'Malley <kevmol...@gmai

Re: [Vo]:MFMP activities

On 7/16/17, Alain Sepeda wrote: > > multiple independent instruments are also more convincing than just two. ***That is why I criticized MFMP's dropping this line of inquiry due to personal circumstances, not due to lack of promise of earlier results. It turns out that

Re: [Vo]:Fwd: Martin Fleischmann Memorial Project just uploaded a video

In any case: I hope this guy and his team make it to Europa -- and to a new > lab. And DON'T start 'pulling a Rossi' on the World. > > > > > >> >> On 7/20/17, Che <comandantegri...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 5:16 PM, Kevin O'Malley &

Re: [Vo]:Rossi-Gullstrom paper published on July 18 on Arxiv.org

Maybe whoever is trying to develop the device alongside Rossi next time shouldn't fund his competitors.Don't piss him off. That kind of thing. Let Fred Flinstone keep his job. On 7/20/17, Axil Axil wrote: > This trillion $$ invention only works if Rossi is there at

Re: [Vo]:Fwd: Martin Fleischmann Memorial Project just uploaded a video

t; On Fri, Jul 21, 2017 at 5:18 AM, Kevin O'Malley <kevmol...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> You're saying EXACTLY the same thing I and others were saying on the >> link provided, jerk. >> > > At this point I do not CARE what you have to say: because the bottom line >

Re: [Vo]:Why Rossi 'won'

Eric: Thank you for sending that PM to Kirk. Like I said over there, maybe I'm wrong about you after all. Try to "suffer" through that compliment, ok? On 7/27/17, Eric Walker <eric.wal...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Jul 27, 2017 at 4:55 PM, Kevin O'Malley <kevmol...@gmail

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 7:13 AM, Brian Ahern wrote: There are no room temperature superconductors. They are theoretically impossible. ***Someone should tell the guys who are working towards that goal. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Room-temperature_superconductor On

Re: [Vo]:Fwd: Martin Fleischmann Memorial Project just uploaded a video

Over at EcatWorld Bob Greenyer • 9 hours ago I am now within a whisker of stating that LENR as in "Low Energy Nuclear Reactions" (however they are caused) are real and testable based on specific data. With reference to ECCO, without knowing for certain that it is producing excess heat

Re: [Vo]:Fwd: Martin Fleischmann Memorial Project just uploaded a video

What? You're the one who started with the personal bullshit. Buying real estate to help out an experimenter's debt situation is pretty far afield from what MFMP's stated mission is declared. On 7/20/17, Che <comandantegri...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 1:41 PM, Kevin

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

days. > > > > From: Jed Rothwell [mailto:jedrothw...@gmail.com] > Sent: Monday, July 10, 2017 9:03 PM > To: Vortex > Subject: Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled > > > > Kevin O'Malley <kevmol...@gmail.com <mailto:kevmol...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

That would be just like him. On 7/11/17, Jones Beene wrote: > > Wait a minute. There is still Randell Mills to deal with, and he says he > can not only heat up a cup of coffee but evaporate it in a burst of > hydrinos in seconds. He has better credentials than any of us, and

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

You sound like someone who doesn't want to see LENR succeed. Seems about the right position, for a communist. On 7/11/17, Che <comandantegri...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Jul 5, 2017 at 7:12 PM, Kevin O'Malley <kevmol...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Mary Yugo said he

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

The gamma ray finding of MFMP was replicated within 48 hours by Hans Biberian. And then they just faded away onto whatever it is they've been doing for 4 years. On 7/10/17, Che <comandantegri...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sun, Jul 9, 2017 at 8:03 PM, Kevin O'Malley <kevmol...@gmai

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

e LENR reaction. > > On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 6:30 PM, Kevin O'Malley <kevmol...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> I have thought for a long time that there have been multiple LENR >> reactions. When you let loose a gamma inside a lattice and it hits >> those other nickel (or

Re: [Vo]:Rossi v. Darden

n banned from Vortex, like MaryYugo. On 6/27/17, Eric Walker <eric.wal...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 7:37 PM, Kevin O'Malley <kevmol...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > They are following it on LENR-Forum but the moderation there is so >> blatantly one-sided

Re: [Vo]:Rossi v. Darden

posedly an expert and a layman is poking holes in your bullshit right and left. Display Less Moved from the Rossi v. Darden thread. Eric This post has previous versions that are saved. <https://www.lenr-forum.com/edit-history/?objectType=com.woltlab.wbb.post=63843> On Mon, Jul 3, 2017 at

Re: [Vo]:Rossi v. Darden

moderator. On Fri, Jun 30, 2017 at 8:49 AM, Eric Walker <eric.wal...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Jun 28, 2017 at 6:50 PM, Kevin O'Malley <kevmol...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > Comments get moved to another thread without notification. >> > > When people such as

Re: [Vo]:Rossi v. Darden

pended for two weeks. It was just a matter of time. Next time will probably be permanent. ERIC WALKER CONTROLS LENR_FORM FOR ALL INDUSTRIAL HEAT COMMENTS. Moved from the Rossi v. Darden thread. Eric On Mon, Jul 3, 2017 at 3:29 PM, Kevin O'Malley <kevmol...@gmail.com> wrote:

Re: [Vo]:Rossi v. Darden

; In giving Mary the boot, we would be editorializing the content. > > >> You should just admit that you made a mistake and hope that vorts will >> want to head on over to your discussion. > > > I’m quite happy with my treatment of you, as it's kept the level of > conversation

Re: [Vo]:A forgotten chapter in LENR

Why does it matter that this was NOT electrolysis? Didn't Arrata load up his cells with pycnodeuterium and no power input? On Mon, Jul 3, 2017 at 12:54 AM, Che wrote: > > > On Mon, Jul 3, 2017 at 2:03 AM, Axil Axil wrote: > > IMHO, the person

Re: [Vo]:Rossi v. Darden

Good post from EcatWorld, pulling some items from behind a paywall: Engineer48 • 20 hours ago [hush]​[hide comment] Some details of the initial shots fired by IH &

Re: [Vo]:Rossi v. Darden

orum and he/she's trolling yours. If you had wisdom you'd remove her/it >> from your forum as well. > > > In giving Mary the boot, we would be editorializing the content. > > >> You should just admit that you made a mistake and hope that vorts will >> want to head on

Re: [Vo]:Rossi v. Darden

though one of the posted goals of the moderators is to not allow threads to get derailed. On Mon, Jul 3, 2017 at 8:16 AM, Eric Walker <eric.wal...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Kevin, > > On Mon, Jul 3, 2017 at 7:29 AM, Kevin O'Malley <kevmol...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > You

Re: [Vo]:Rossi v. Darden

ric Walker <eric.wal...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Jul 3, 2017 at 3:05 PM, Kevin O'Malley <kevmol...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > You say I have the last word but... then ... look below and now you have >> something else to say. You aren't even a man of your word. >>

Re: [Vo]:Rossi v. Darden

o give Vorts warning of a completely unfair setup where you are going to look through Vortex but not Shane's nor Mary's history of trolling.Eric: Pull your head out. On Mon, Jul 3, 2017 at 8:10 AM, Eric Walker <eric.wal...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Kevin, > > On Mon, Jul 3, 2017

Re: [Vo]:Rossi v. Darden

Jed: I'm responding here because I'm not allowed to respond at LENR forum for 2 weeks. Does your concept of reading the depositions apply to someone who claims to be a lawyer? WoodWorker claimed to be a lawyer and in his intro made a big deal about Penon not showing up to back up his report.

Re: [Vo]:Rossi v. Darden

this off. It is very un-professional. > > Frank Znidarsic > > > -Original Message- > From: Kevin O'Malley <kevmol...@gmail.com> > To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com> > Sent: Tue, Jul 4, 2017 6:56 pm > Subject: Re: [Vo]:Rossi v. Darden > > Hah hah,

Re: [Vo]:Rossi v. Darden

What are the possibilities that LENR is moved forward? Rossi wins because he supposedly fulfilled the contract, gaining interest from the press. Rossi loses and IH is free to pursue other LENR opportunities. Split-the-baby decision, both sides limping away with Status Quo Ante Bellum. All the

Re: [Vo]:Rossi v. Darden

They are following it on LENR-Forum but the moderation there is so blatantly one-sided and biased that the actual narrative posted isn't what went on. https://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/thread/5271-clearance-items/?pageNo=3 Online

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

. So this is a healthy thing. On Wed, Jul 5, 2017 at 3:13 PM, Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com> wrote: > Kevin O'Malley <kevmol...@gmail.com> wrote: > > If Rossi has managed to be the great magician that his detractors claim, >> his next set of investors might think a

Re: [Vo]:Interest in cold fusion has waned

There was a software package called "cold fusion" which can obscure the results as well as the interest. LENR needs to repackage their name. Maybe something like Anomalous Heating Event.

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

ent occurred in the MFMP's apparatus for at > least that short time. > > > On Thu, Jul 6, 2017 at 8:57 PM, Kevin O'Malley <kevmol...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Celani detected gamma rays when Rossi's reactor got started, and Rossi >> came down hard on him for bringing a

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

Status Quo Ante Bellum, as I predicted. It is a mystery why IH didn't accept this offer a long time ago. On Thu, Jul 6, 2017 at 6:46 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > The judge issued an "order of dismissal." It says "this matter is > dismissed with prejudice," "all parties

Re: [Vo]:Picking up the pieces

Abd was speculating just like the rest of us. The most probable outcome was Status Quo Ante Bellum, but Rossi was focused on getting his IP back. So he probably did so, since IH supposedly considered it worthless. That's kind of weird how one side considers something worthless while the other

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

Celani detected gamma rays when Rossi's reactor got started, and Rossi came down hard on him for bringing a Geiger counter. So yes, there was a Nuclear event occuring in Rossi's apparatus for at least that short time. On Wed, Jul 5, 2017 at 3:20 PM, Che wrote: >

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

If Rossi has managed to be the great magician that his detractors claim, his next set of investors might think about bringing a thermometer to the test. "For want of a nail the kingdom was lost" becomes "for want of a thermometer the truth was lost." On Wed, Jul 5, 2017 at 10:08 AM, Brian Ahern

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

Abd reports that Darden was the only one who wasn't smiling. He probably had bigger legal fees. On Wed, Jul 5, 2017 at 8:03 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > Abd reports the trial was settled. Or called off. Withdrawn. I do not know > what this means in legal terms. See: > >

[Vo]:CERN Declares War On The Standard Model

CERN Declares War On The Standard Model Article Updated: 20 Apr , 2017by Matt Williams https://www.universetoday.com/135091/cern-declares-war-standard-model/ Ever since the

Re: [Vo]:CERN Declares War On The Standard Model

of beauty was in the Large Hardon Collider beauty experiment <http://lhcb-public.web.cern.ch/lhcb-public/> (LHCb) . The hardon typo is in the original article, and it's kinda funny. ;-) On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 3:24 PM, Kevin O'Malley <kevmol...@gmail.com> wrote: > CERN Declares War

Re: [Vo]:Why Rossi 'won'

The ash-swapping accusation is one of those continental divide/watershed issues. Either he swapped the samples or there was evidence of transmutation. There is no middle ground. These kinds of no-middle-ground issues are good for determining the truth of the scenario, because it is easily

Re: [Vo]:Why Rossi 'won'

Both sides submitted bills to the Court of about $7.5 million each ***I find that surprising, Jones. I expected IH's legal bills to be at least double that of Rossi's. I wonder how they got their top notch firm so cheap? What does this mean: This similarity of bills looks like collusion on

Re: [Vo]:Why Rossi 'won'

You're one to talk, Eric. You are among the most unreasonable moderators over at LENR-Forum with your acknowledged "Yes some farm animals are more equal than others" and other bullshit you throw on top of Pro-LENR enthusiasts and all the outright insults you allow by the skeptopath crowd. You

Re: [Vo]:Missing Neutrons? In a neutron-rich tin nucleus, electromagnetism can win over the strong force

Maybe we should change the name of LENR to remove the 'Nuclear' connotation and just call it Structure Effect HyperChemical Reactions, SEHCR.Just because there's a high energy gamma ray DURING the process doesn't mean that we have to deal with gamma rays as a RESULT of it.So by it not

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

;janap...@gmail.com> wrote: > The problem with this fusion idea is that it does not explain the subset > of LENR experiments that show fission is occurring. Can this theory explain > fission in LENR? I don't think so. > > On Mon, Jun 5, 2017 at 3:13 AM, Kevin O'Malley <k

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

<janap...@gmail.com> wrote: > The problem with this fusion idea is that it does not explain the subset > of LENR experiments that show fission is occurring. Can this theory explain > fission in LENR? I don't think so. > > On Mon, Jun 5, 2017 at 3:13 AM, Kevin O'Malley <kevmol...@gma

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

Jones, isn't there an endothermic reaction with d-d that releases a gamma ray? On Tuesday, June 6, 2017, Jones Beene wrote: > Jed Rothwell wrote: > > I suppose the cathode might have been storing and releasing heat at the > same time, but how could you tell with a

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

Jones, isn't "stored nuclear energy " a new concept? If you fission/split an atom, are you releasing its stored energy? And hence, aren't all the modes of storing nuke energy known? On Tuesday, June 6, 2017, Jones Beene wrote: > No, your conclusion is both wrong and

Re: [Vo]: MFMP starting to test me356 reactor today

So it's all just another dud. MFMP is working up quite a record of finding duds. On Monday, May 29, 2017, Brian Ahern wrote: > Has the testing concluded? It is now 3 PM in Czech. > > > -- > *From:* Jed Rothwell

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

It could also mean that one way to get LENR reactions started is with the endothermic alpha capture process. On Monday, June 5, 2017, Axil Axil wrote: > MORE... > > In this Focardi >

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

Even Ed Storms admitted there was SOME radiation in LENR cells, just a thousand or million times too little. On Monday, June 5, 2017, wrote: > In reply to Kevin O'Malley's message of Mon, 5 Jun 2017 02:01:26 -0700: > Hi, > [snip] > >Yes it can. When 2 d's fuse and emit a

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

I think I found the reference to the endothermic process, Y E Kim was using it in some discussions. ... https://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg65963.html Endothermic Alpha Capture On Tuesday, June 6, 2017, Kevin O'Malley <kevmol...@gmail.com> wrote: > Jone

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

at 7:20 PM, Kevin O'Malley <kevmol...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 3:27 PM, Edmund Storms <stor...@ix.netcom.com> > wrote: > >> >> >> NO!!! That is not the issue Cold fusion produces He4 without radiation. >> > ***There h

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

nergy is predicted to be released without high-energy particles. " On Mon, Jun 5, 2017 at 12:01 AM, Kevin O'Malley <kevmol...@gmail.com> wrote: > In this old thread, we discussed BECs with Edmund Storms. He > unsubscribed from Vortex soon after this interaction, hopefully I wasn't >

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

That super absorption sounds familiar. There was a study done with lattices that thermalized gamma rays and broke them down into X-rays according to the number "N" of the items in the lattice. I'll try to find it. On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 10:54 AM, Axil Axil wrote: > A

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

I believe it was Y.E. Kim who induced LENR by way of BECs with laser cooling. I had pointed this out to Ed Storms on one of these threads. He was arguing that it was laser heating and that it would destroy the BEC, while I pointed out that Y E Kim, KP Sinha, and Steven Chu (Obama's Nobel Prize

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

Water can shove its head through a rock by dripping on it relentlessly. And softer materials can wear down harder materials if given time. On the nanoparticle scale, perhaps all that's needed is a few billion iterations to get tunneling, and that can happen in a matter of milliseconds or maybe

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

Frank, those vibrations could be inducing a 1 dimensional Luttinger Liquid which becomes a 1 dimensional vibrating BEC. That is my V1DLLBEC hypothesis. V1DLLBEC -- Vibrating 1 Dimensional Luttinger Liquid Bose Einstein Condensate. On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 7:02 AM, Frank Znidarsic

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

There is experimental evidence in the form of Luttinger Liquids. Those are "real" and established laboratory particle exchanges. Basically it means that liquids form at temperatures much higher than previously thought when they are 1 dimensional. On Sun, Jun 11, 2017 at 2:49 PM, Jones Beene

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

h would be present inside the BEC when mass-energy was released. I would expect this release would destroy the BEC, leaving the fused hydrons to dissipate energy by the normal hot fusion method. The concept appears to have many logical flaws. Ed Storms Kevin O'Malley <kevmol...@gmail.com> 5/

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

ptical NAE process may be the reason that Mills sees XUV in his reactions. On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 2:50 AM, Kevin O'Malley <kevmol...@gmail.com> wrote: > That super absorption sounds familiar. There was a study done with > lattices that thermalized gamma rays and broke them down into

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

d high reproducibility for further scientific investigations and for practical applications. The experimental results obtained with the HyperionR-5 reactor are described in some details. On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 1:14 PM, Kevin O'Malley <kevmol...@gmail.com> wrote: > Researchers have the

Re: [Vo]:The recent ICCF18 (Defkcalion Demo)

%2Flisasunshinegrl%2Fgilda-radner-from-snl%2F=algLkuaucCL2RM=JHTmomKhjv8viM%3A=10ahUKEwjF-dLy6bvUAhXj6oMKHdURD1kQMwhGKA0wDQ..i=500=500=en=616=1149=rosanna%20rosannadanna%20never%20mind=0ahUKEwjF-dLy6bvUAhXj6oMKHdURD1kQMwhGKA0wDQ=mrc=8 On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 2:57 PM, Kevin O'Malley <kevmol...@gmail.

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

I like where this is headed, especially when looking at it in a 1 dimensional viewpoint. The bosenova 'explosion' has been witnessed but no one really knows what caused it nor where the energy came from to drive all that matter away. Seems like 1 or 2 fusion events might be enough energy to do it.

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

non-linear Schrödinger equations for many-body systems (timedependent non-linear (TDNL) dynamics). On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 1:29 PM, Kevin O'Malley <kevmol...@gmail.com> wrote: > And now, bringing Bosenovas back to BECs, LENR, Y.E. Kim > > http://www.physics.purdue.edu/people/facult

Re: [Vo]:The recent ICCF18 (Defkcalion Demo)

I did a search for BCNSF and it came up with nothing. But yet, here it is. On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 9:45 AM, Axil Axil wrote: > *http://coldfusionnow.org/iccf-18-day-5-presentations-and-awards/ > * > > > >

Re: [Vo]:Bose Einstein Condensate formed at Room Temperature

hese effects." - References 1. Anderson, B. P., Haljan, P. C., Regal, C. A., Feder, D. L., Collins, L. A., Clark, C. W. & Cornell, E. A. Watching dark solitons decay into vortex rings in a Bose-Einstein condensate. *Physics Review Letters* (in press). On Tue,

<    4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >