Re: [Vo]:Brillouin Energy Corp demonstration at ICCF-24

2022-07-22 Thread Bob Higgins
I think they are now claiming an electrical -thermal COP of 2.7.

On Fri, Jul 22, 2022, 6:54 AM Jones Beene  wrote:

> Can anyone comment on the reality of the Brillouin "breakthrough" claim ?
>
> For many years they have claimed modest COP but nothing commercializable
>
> Can they now demonstrate net real gain?
>
>
>
> Jed Rothwell wrote:
>
> QUOTE:
>
> Brillouin Energy Corp Demonstrates CleanTech Licensable Solid State Fusion
> Boiler System at the 24th Annual International Conference on Cold Fusion (
> www.iccf24.org) July 25th – 28th at the Computer History Museum in
> Mountain View, California
>
> Breakthrough boiler system uses hydrogen to produce low-cost heat with no
> combustion or pollution, paving the way to a clean energy future
>
>
> https://brillouinenergy.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/Brillouin-Press-Release-ICCF24-7-20-22-Final.pdf
>
>


Re: [Vo]:The "hero" LENR experiment ?

2021-11-21 Thread Bob Higgins
Hi Bob,

I found a report about Thermacore's measurements that included this picture
of their test vessel:

On Sun, Nov 21, 2021 at 4:52 PM bobcook39...@hotmail.com <
bobcook39...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> Jones—
>
>
>
> Higgins raised some good questions.
>
>
>
> I assumed from your description of the
>
> Thermacore test that the reactor was  a flanged hemisphere bolted to a
> bottom SS plate, not a complete spherical reactor.\
>
>
>
> Do you know of a report or other reference for the test>:
>
>
>
> Bob Cook
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Sent from Mail <https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> for
> Windows
>
>
>
> *From: *Jones Beene 
> *Sent: *Friday, November 19, 2021 1:17 PM
> *To: *vortex-l@eskimo.com
> *Subject: *Re: [Vo]:The "hero" LENR experiment ?
>
>
>
> Hi Bob,
>
>
>
> Yes, there are way too many loose ends in this story - not the least of
> which is: where is that damaged reactor now? It is almost unconscionable to
> have ignored it all these years.
>
>
>
> If a nuclear reaction had happened, there should be residual radiation.
> Not to mention - most top engineers would want to write this episode up, at
> some point. And also - Gene Mallove was apparently going to get involved
> before his tragic fate.
>
>
>
> Like so many stories in LERN since '89 this is one more mystery which is
> full of contrasting doubt and hope.
>
>
>
>
>
> Bob Higgins wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> Thank you, Jones, for that historical highlight of the Thermacore
> experiment.
>
>
>
> 2.5 pounds of the Ni would have only amounted to 12% volumetric fill of
> the 3L container volume.
>
>
>
> When you say the stainless steel pressure vessel had a "hemispherical
> volume", what do you mean?  Do you mean the pressure vessel was spherical?
> Or was it cylindrical with hemispherical top and bottom?
>
>
>
> If the vessel was spherical, it would have an inside diameter of about 7"
> for an internal volume of 3L.  If we then presume that it was 300 pounds of
> stainless steel, that is 1034 in^3 that would be in the shell of the
> container.  This would mean that the wall thickness of the container would
> have been 4.9" - extremely thick.  This is an unlikely sounding container.
> Was it really that thick?  For what purpose would such a container have
> ever been created?
>
>
>
> Jones Beene  wrote:
>
> After all of these decades, the perception of LENR in the general physics
> community is still rather 'unflattering,' shall we say. It is not even clear 
> what
> the most convincing experiment (aka - the hero effort) is/was in the field -
> since none has yet led to a commercial product.
>
> Many new observers of the LENR scene are unaware of the details of the
> Thermacore, Inc. runaway reaction in 1996. I ran across an old post on that
> work recently and decided to re-post it since there is some similarity to 
> current
> work - to wit the Clean Planet effort in Japan.
>
> Unfortunately, the end result was not (publicly) replicated, but in fact 
> became
> the final effort (and exit). (BTW - Thermacore was a recognized leader in all
> aspects of industrial thermochemistry, having inventedthe heat pipe. Had they
> kept at it (1996)... who knows?
>
> Sadly, the reason that they dropped LENR 25 years ago was far from 'no gain' -
> instead, it was the risk of deadly explosion. The incident echoes other 
> thermal
> runaways, including P, Mizuno, Mark Snoswell in Australia and Brian Ahern.
> However, Thermacore's was more  energetic than prior incidents and could have
> led to high profile fatalities.
>
>
>
> This was to have been a powered experiment, but they never had time to apply
>
> input power. It was was a follow-on to a Phase one grant from USAF
>
> (document in LENR-CANR library) and was simply intended to be an analysis
>
> the absorption reaction of a large amount of nickel powder with hydrogen at
>
> modest pressure. Instead, it was likely to have been the most energetic single
> event in the history of LENR.
>
>
>
> Years later, Brian Ahern was in contact with Nelson Gernert, the chief
>
> researcher in the new Thermacore, Inc (having gone through two changes of
>
> ownership) ... and who was also in charge of the runaway. Brian is absolutely
> convinced that this happened as described.
>
>
>
> Details: Gernert added 2.5 pounds of nickel powder (200 mesh of Ni-200) into a
> 3 liter stainless steel Dewar. The Dewar weighed 300 pounds. It was a strong
>
> pressure vessel with a hemispherical volume. I

Re: [Vo]:The "hero" LENR experiment ?

2021-11-19 Thread Bob Higgins
Thank you, Jones, for that historical highlight of the Thermacore
experiment.

2.5 pounds of the Ni would have only amounted to 12% volumetric fill of the
3L container volume.

When you say the stainless steel pressure vessel had a "hemispherical
volume", what do you mean?  Do you mean the pressure vessel was spherical?
Or was it cylindrical with hemispherical top and bottom?

If the vessel was spherical, it would have an inside diameter of about 7"
for an internal volume of 3L.  If we then presume that it was 300 pounds of
stainless steel, that is 1034 in^3 that would be in the shell of the
container.  This would mean that the wall thickness of the container would
have been 4.9" - extremely thick.  This is an unlikely sounding container.
Was it really that thick?  For what purpose would such a container have
ever been created?

On Wed, Nov 17, 2021 at 1:41 PM Jones Beene  wrote:

> After all of these decades, the perception of LENR in the general physics
> community is still rather 'unflattering,' shall we say. It is not even clear 
> what
> the most convincing experiment (aka - the hero effort) is/was in the field -
> since none has yet led to a commercial product.
>
> Many new observers of the LENR scene are unaware of the details of the
> Thermacore, Inc. runaway reaction in 1996. I ran across an old post on that
> work recently and decided to re-post it since there is some similarity to 
> current
> work - to wit the Clean Planet effort in Japan.
>
> Unfortunately, the end result was not (publicly) replicated, but in fact 
> became
> the final effort (and exit). (BTW - Thermacore was a recognized leader in all
> aspects of industrial thermochemistry, having inventedthe heat pipe. Had they
> kept at it (1996)... who knows?
>
> Sadly, the reason that they dropped LENR 25 years ago was far from 'no gain' -
> instead, it was the risk of deadly explosion. The incident echoes other 
> thermal
> runaways, including P, Mizuno, Mark Snoswell in Australia and Brian Ahern.
> However, Thermacore's was more  energetic than prior incidents and could have
> led to high profile fatalities.
>
> This was to have been a powered experiment, but they never had time to apply
> input power. It was was a follow-on to a Phase one grant from USAF
> (document in LENR-CANR library) and was simply intended to be an analysis
> the absorption reaction of a large amount of nickel powder with hydrogen at
> modest pressure. Instead, it was likely to have been the most energetic single
> event in the history of LENR.
>
> Years later, Brian Ahern was in contact with Nelson Gernert, the chief
> researcher in the new Thermacore, Inc (having gone through two changes of
> ownership) ... and who was also in charge of the runaway. Brian is absolutely
> convinced that this happened as described.
>
> Details: Gernert added 2.5 pounds of nickel powder (200 mesh of Ni-200) into a
> 3 liter stainless steel Dewar. The Dewar weighed 300 pounds. It was a strong
> pressure vessel with a hemispherical volume. It would have been an
> approximation of a small industrial boiler had things not gone berserk that 
> day.
>
> Thermacore evacuated the nickel under vacuum for several days before adding
> H2 gas at 2 atmospheres. The most amazing thing happened next. The powder
> immediately and spontaneously heated up before external power could even
> be added. The Dewar glowed orange (800C) and the engineers ran for cover.
> No external heat had been used and radiation monitors were not running. The
> nickel had sintered into a glob alloyed into the vessel and could not be 
> removed.
>
> The (then) owner of Thermacore, Yale Eastman was frightened that an
> explosion was imminent and that someone could be killed. He forbade any
> further work on LENR. The incident was not published.
>
> Superficial thermal analysis - 3 liters of H2 gas at 2 atmosphere will have a 
> heat
> of combustion of 74 kilojoules if combined with oxygen (but there was no 
> oxygen
> in the Dewar). Heating a 300 lb Stainless vessel to 800C would require 21
> megajoules. That is ostensibly ~289 times the possible chemical energy but can
> it be controlled?
>
> Maybe *Clean Planet *has learned how to control this phenomenon and can
> produce a small boiler. Mitsubishi is a major investor, it is said.
>
> Tesla beware.
>
> https://www.cleanplanet.co.jp/en/company/
>
>
>
>
>
>


Re: [Vo]:photons

2021-10-11 Thread Bob Higgins
Hi Robin,
See my answers inline below ...
Bob

On Sun, Oct 10, 2021 at 3:56 PM Robin 
wrote:

> In reply to  Bob Higgins's message of Sun, 10 Oct 2021 13:58:12 -0600:
> Hi Bob,
> [snip]
> >I believe photons to be corpuscles having more than one cycle (sort of
> like
> >a gaussian envelope) but finite in size.  The envelope is a soliton
> >solution supported by the nonlinearity of the aether; which is different
> >from a linear EM excitation of the aether.  Each photon contains a fixed
> >energy as a corpuscle.  You cannot ascribe an energy/cycle because the
> >waveform is not sine.
>
> Then what are frequency/wavelength related to in such an entity?

The frequency/wavelength ratio within the photon is not known because the
nonlinear equations have not been solved.  The photon carries a finite
amount of oscillatory energy.  When the photon interacts with an atom, it
is a complicated oscillatory dance.  This dance may even require a
non-sinusoidal E-field within the photon for interaction with the atom's
electron.  That's OK because the photon was generated by a transmitting
atom that had to go through that same dance to release the photon.

>

>Also, within the nonlinearity of the photon
> >excitation of the aether, the velocity is different due to the
> >nonlinearity.  Photons must have a fixed size, commensurate with the
> >electron orbital that can absorb it.
>
> Try assuming that absorption depends on frequency not size.
> Take the swing example. A push at the right moment leads to large
> oscillations, even though the length of the "push" is
> much smaller than the amplitude of the oscillation. IOW frequency
> (timing), not size, determines energy transfer.
>
Atoms are not magic antennas that can reach out and grab energy from the
aether with a reach much bigger than the orbital size.  Consider the atomic
electron to be an antenna nearly the same size as the orbital.  When an
atom absorbs a photon - it consumes ALL of it.  This means that the photon
must be of commensurate size to the electron orbital.  It helps to think
like Goedecke ("Classically Radiationless Motions) - this was the
foundation of Mills' derivation.

I have been giving a lot of thought lately to the transient behavior of the
electron in natural collisions with other atoms.  The physics of this are
mostly ignored.  The electron orbital will wobble as it gains or loses
energy in the collision.  According to Goedecke, only when the orbital is
in perfect balance between angular momentum of the electron and orbital
period does the electron not radiate RF energy.   When an electron gains
energy from collision, it is perturbed out of its radiation-less
condition.  It radiates energy until it reaches the condition of
non-radiation.  But what happens if the electron is perturbed to an energy
below that of the infinitely narrow radiation-less condition?  If
reciprocity is applied, it means that whenever the electron is not in the
radiation-less condition, it has a non-zero radiation resistance.  It can
not only radiate energy, but it can receive energy.  I propose that when
the electron is perturbed out of the radiation-less case to a lower energy
that it actually takes (receives) energy from the aether to go back to the
ideal radiation-less case.  This has other implications that I am trying to
thread through now.

>
> >Photons propagate completely
> >differently than normal linearly excited EM waves.
>
> So where is the frequency dividing line? IOW If radio waves are EM waves,
> and light is photons, then at what frequency
> does that change over from EM waves to photons occur?
>
It is an energy density issue in the aether.  The lower the frequency, the
more spread out the energy is across many units of the aether lattice.  At
higher frequency, the energy density can be higher over the course of a 1/2
wavelength creating greater likelihood of  stimulating a nonlinearity.  The
soft threshold is in the THz range.  I say soft, because it has to do with
field strength and that depends on amplitude and frequency.  The field must
rise very quickly before the energy radiates away via the normal linear
means.

BTW, this is the same mechanism for phonon formation in a condensed matter
lattice.  Phonons are the same kind of corpuscular solution in a nonlinear
excitation of the lattice.  When you look at the derivation for the
acoustic properties of a lattice, the first thing they do is linearize the
Young's modulus and solve for the linear solutions.  Phonons will not be a
solution within a linear formulation!  They linearize the Young's modulus
so that they can solve the math.

>
> >
> >Photons don't arise from Maxwell's equations because Maxwell's equations
> >are a linear description of space.  Maxwell believed there IS an aether
> and
> >his equations reflect this.  Even though the aether was not measured, they
> >continued to use Maxwell's equations for normal EM excitation because they
> >worked (proving there is an aether).  Those that believe 

Re: [Vo]:photons

2021-10-10 Thread Bob Higgins
I believe photons to be corpuscles having more than one cycle (sort of like
a gaussian envelope) but finite in size.  The envelope is a soliton
solution supported by the nonlinearity of the aether; which is different
from a linear EM excitation of the aether.  Each photon contains a fixed
energy as a corpuscle.  You cannot ascribe an energy/cycle because the
waveform is not sine.  Also, within the nonlinearity of the photon
excitation of the aether, the velocity is different due to the
nonlinearity.  Photons must have a fixed size, commensurate with the
electron orbital that can absorb it.  Photons propagate completely
differently than normal linearly excited EM waves.

Photons don't arise from Maxwell's equations because Maxwell's equations
are a linear description of space.  Maxwell believed there IS an aether and
his equations reflect this.  Even though the aether was not measured, they
continued to use Maxwell's equations for normal EM excitation because they
worked (proving there is an aether).  Those that believe there is no aether
cannot understand the possibility of a soliton solution for a photon.
Soliton solutions require a nonlinear medium.  From their perspective, if
space is empty, how can "nothing" be nonlinear?  From my perspective, the
existence of photons provides another proof that there is an aether and it
is nonlinear.

Bob Higgins

On Sun, Oct 10, 2021 at 1:00 PM Robin 
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Photons have a cycle time(T) = 1/frequency.
> Planks constant has the dimension of energy x time.
> So the energy of single cycle photon would be h/T = h x frequency, which
> is the formula for photon energy.
> What does this mean?
> It means that either the photon energy formula only describes the minimal
> energy of a photon, or that all photons only
> comprise a single cycle.
> If multi-cycle photons also exist, then their energy would be a multiple
> of the base photon energy.
>
> Comments?
> Regards,
>
> Robin van Spaandonk 
>
>


Re: [Vo]:What is meant by vortex here?

2021-08-06 Thread Bob Higgins
Actually, as far as I know, Hal Puthoff was not involved in the
measurement.  The Griggs test was done by well-grounded engineers.  This
was the same team responsible for development of the MOAC calorimeter.
When I heard how they measured the actual mechanical power going into the
pump, I was impressed by the sound basis of their measurement.  Many other
Griggs tests were based on motor electrical input power measurement with
estimates for the motor electrical-to-mechanical conversion efficiency.  I
think it was a reasonable presumption that it was the hydrosonic pump
itself that was potentially overunity, not the big electric motor.  So,
Earthtech measured the pump.

MOAC itself is well grounded in basics.  One of the core difficulties in a
flow calorimeter is accurately measuring the flow.  Most researchers try to
use volumetric flow measurement - which is a mistake.  The heat capacity of
a milliliter of water varies with temperature, dissolved air, and entrained
bubbles.  MOAC measures the mass of the water flowing because the heat
capacity per gram is nearly constant.  Mass flow measurement is hard to
implement, but they went the extra mile to make that kind of measurement.
That is also the way the calorimetry was done at SRI as I understand it.

<http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=webmail>
Virus-free.
www.avg.com
<http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=webmail>
<#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>

On Fri, Aug 6, 2021 at 9:50 AM Frank Grimer <88.fr...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I wouldn't worry too much about Puthoff
>
> Puthoff took an interest in the Church of Scientology
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_of_Scientology> in the late 1960s
> and reached what was then the top OT VII
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operating_Thetan> level by 1971.[3]
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harold_E._Puthoff#cite_note-Urban-3> Puthoff
> wrote up his "wins" for a Scientology publication, claiming to have
> achieved "remote viewing <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Remote_viewing>"
> abilities.[4]
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harold_E._Puthoff#cite_note-4> In 1974,
> Puthoff also wrote a piece for Scientology's *Celebrity* magazine,
> stating that Scientology had given him "a feeling of absolute fearlessness".
> [5] <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harold_E._Puthoff#cite_note-5> Puthoff
> severed all connection with Scientology in the late 1970s.[6]
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harold_E._Puthoff#cite_note-6>
>
> On Fri, 6 Aug 2021 at 16:30, Bob Higgins  wrote:
>
>> Hi Jones,
>>
>> I now have Earthtech's MOAC (calorimeter) in my lab and I am refurbishing
>> and re-commissioning it.  Earthtech is now closed and they are emptying
>> their building.
>>
>> The Griggs device was not tested in the MOAC calorimeter.  I spoke with
>> the engineers who built MOAC and who also tested the Griggs device.  They
>> measured the actual torque and RPM going into the cavitator (hence they
>> measured the mechanical input power).  I didn't ask how they measured the
>> heat output.  Their conclusion was no excess heat.  That's about all I know
>> about the experiment.
>>
>>
>> <http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=webmail>
>>  Virus-free.
>> www.avg.com
>> <http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=webmail>
>> <#m_4416185370211067280_m_5220694793293478513_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
>>
>> On Fri, Aug 6, 2021 at 7:41 AM Jones Beene  wrote:
>>
>>> Bob Higgins wrote:
>>>
>>> BTW, I was told that Earthtech testing of the Griggs device did NOT show
>>> excess heat.  The testing process was described to me.
>>>
>>>
>>> Hey Bob - that null result does not surprise me but is it really
>>> meaningful?
>>>
>>> Earthtech has a precision calorimeter which can accommodate small
>>> cavitation devices but as Rothwell has stated in the past, the Griggs
>>> machine is about 1000 times too large to be tested by them. He says that Ga
>>> Tech did test the device and found net thermal gain but, sadly, those
>>> results are not to be found on the WWW for unknown reasons ... so... it
>>> looks like an open issue.
>>>
>>> I wish someone would do the definitive testing of the large machine and
>>> have the courage to defend positive results if found.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>


Re: [Vo]:What is meant by vortex here?

2021-08-06 Thread Bob Higgins
Sorry, Jones;  I only got the MOAC.  Earthtech's facilities were in the
final stages of being cleared out when I got it (and it was a whole trailer
full of stuff).  I was sad to learn that Earthtech had closed.  I can ask
what happened to the Mills gas phase experiment.

The MOAC was configured to examine electrolysis based LENR claims.  I will
be somewhat reconfiguring MOAC to examine gas phase claims similar to those
of Ed Storms - a simple apparatus/experiment.  While I am working on MOAC,
I can still start my gas phase experiments.  Storms-like gas phase
experiments are not complicated - make the pellets, put them in a closed
cell (in this case the cell is just a valve and a 3/8" closed-one-end
tube), add 1 atmosphere of D2 gas, and heat.  Storms showed 0.5W of XH on
1g of a Ni(plus) pellet at 300C.  I will put 3x1g pellets in each cell to
test.  My little insulated oven for this tube cell has a sensitivity of
40C/watt.  If I get 0.5W of heat from each 1g pellet, the temperature rise
of the cell would be 60C - a pretty easy isoperibolic measurement.  The
trick is finding the (plus) in Storms' Ni(plus) material.  Anything I find
that is interesting will also be tested in MOAC.

<http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=webmail>
Virus-free.
www.avg.com
<http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=webmail>
<#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>

On Fri, Aug 6, 2021 at 10:56 AM Jones Beene  wrote:

> Hi Bob
>
> This is great news. Did you by any chance also get hold of the reactor
> apparatus that they built to replicate the Randell Mills gas phase
> experiment? That was a long time ago and it may have disappeared.
>
> As I recall this kind of experiment could have changed the entire
> landscape of LENR had they done it correctly. However, I have forgotten
> most of the details of how they blew it. They did see a few glimpses of
> gain but failed to pursue obvious ways to improve the results - that much
> was clear. And now with the added input of Holmlid, it could be possible to
> see proven gain from the simple gas phase plus catalyst setup.
>
> It is/was a very simple experimental design but the 'devil is in the
> details' as they say.
>
>
> Bob Higgins wrote:
>
> Hi Jones,
>
> I now have Earthtech's MOAC (calorimeter) in my lab and I am refurbishing
> and re-commissioning it.  Earthtech is now closed and they are emptying
> their building.
>
>
>


Re: [Vo]:What is meant by vortex here?

2021-08-06 Thread Bob Higgins
Hi Jones,

I now have Earthtech's MOAC (calorimeter) in my lab and I am refurbishing
and re-commissioning it.  Earthtech is now closed and they are emptying
their building.

The Griggs device was not tested in the MOAC calorimeter.  I spoke with the
engineers who built MOAC and who also tested the Griggs device.  They
measured the actual torque and RPM going into the cavitator (hence they
measured the mechanical input power).  I didn't ask how they measured the
heat output.  Their conclusion was no excess heat.  That's about all I know
about the experiment.

<http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=webmail>
Virus-free.
www.avg.com
<http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=webmail>
<#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>

On Fri, Aug 6, 2021 at 7:41 AM Jones Beene  wrote:

> Bob Higgins wrote:
>
> BTW, I was told that Earthtech testing of the Griggs device did NOT show
> excess heat.  The testing process was described to me.
>
>
> Hey Bob - that null result does not surprise me but is it really
> meaningful?
>
> Earthtech has a precision calorimeter which can accommodate small
> cavitation devices but as Rothwell has stated in the past, the Griggs
> machine is about 1000 times too large to be tested by them. He says that Ga
> Tech did test the device and found net thermal gain but, sadly, those
> results are not to be found on the WWW for unknown reasons ... so... it
> looks like an open issue.
>
> I wish someone would do the definitive testing of the large machine and
> have the courage to defend positive results if found.
>
>
>
>


Re: [Vo]:What is meant by vortex here?

2021-08-06 Thread Bob Higgins
BTW, I was told that Earthtech testing of the Griggs device did NOT show
excess heat.  The testing process was described to me.


Virus-free.
www.avg.com

<#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>

On Fri, Aug 6, 2021 at 6:54 AM Jones Beene  wrote:

> Hi Frank,
>
> I had not seen your Russian reference about the Potapov device. (which
> needs a bit of editing, probably due to poor translation)
>
> This brings ti mind one curious detail in the Griggs/Potapov results - as
> well as some Casimir force, magnetic motor, Maxwell's demon, and even a few
> LENR experiments - is that the upper range of thermal gain (output over
> input) seems to be limited to something like 1.25 or so.
>
> Which is to say that there is some real gain (overunity) - but not much.
>
> Does you beta atmosphere theory address this point?
>
> Jones
>
>
> Frank Grimer wrote:
>
>
> https://remontideas.ru/en/warm-floor/vechnyi-dvigatel-potapova-generator-svobodnoi-energii-s-samozapitkoi.html
>
> A bit of history.
>


Re: [Vo]:A Super New Theory to Explain Superconductivity

2021-07-12 Thread Bob Higgins
You are right, of course, Jones.  The point is that application of RTSCs
will likely not be something that is a direct extrapolation of how today's
superconductors are used.  The "killer app" for RTSCs will be something
only found when RTSCs materialize, taking advantage of the yet-to-be
discovered RTSC unique properties. Part of the problem in finding RTSCs is
that they may poorly resemble what are regarded as superconductors today.

On Mon, Jul 12, 2021 at 7:31 AM Jones Beene  wrote:

> Hey Bob,
>
> Yes, the "killer app" for RTSC, if there is one, is not apparent...
>
> ... however, it is probably not wise to belittle an emerging technology
> which is so fundamentally advanced that the best applications are not even
> evident to the proponents... or ... to quote a leading expert on the
> emergence of a prior breakthrough tech of some years ago...
>
> *"I think there is a world market for maybe five computers."*
>
> *Thomas Watson, president of IBM, 1943*
>
> Bob Higgins wrote:
>
> When I worked in research for a large company, the discovery of the first
> HTSCs stimulated research into the RF properties of superconductors - type
> I and type II.  Since there was a huge jump in Tc, we considered that room
> temperature superconductors were just around the corner.  What we
> discovered was that the higher the Tc, the worse the usable qualities of
> the superconductor.  Our estimate was that a RTSC would actually be no
> better than copper.  Superconductors are only zero resistance at DC.  There
> is a finite penetration of current in all superconductors for AC and RF.
>  The closer you are to the Tc and the higher the Tc is, the more AC/RF
> resistance you have and the lower the critical magnetic field.  Our
> conclusion was that the only superconductors that were useful over Cu for
> RF applications were deeply cooled Type I.  I think that RTSCs will only
> have niche applications.  But ... I would love to be surprised.
>
> On Sun, Jul 11, 2021 at 3:02 PM Jones Beene  wrote:
>
> Well as this paper implies, the field of superconductivity is "heating up"
> these days ..literally
>
> The prior story which may be very important on this point - and in the
> relentless progress towards usable RTSC - room temperature
> superconductivity - itself came out just a few weeks back
>
>
> https://phys.org/news/2021-07-ternary-hydrides-lanthanum-yttrium-high-temperature.html
> '
>
> ...  which is a high pressure but ambient temp (non cryogenic)
> phenomenon... involving superhydrides ... which curiously could be related
> to LENR and the Mills/Holmlid effect, if as I suspect the superhydrides are
> found to be in highly redundant ground states (as an alternative to
> pressurization)
>
> The holy grail of course would be a metal superhydride going into RTSC phase
> at ambient pressure.
>
> This advance would revolutionized the economy in so may ways - it would be
> the "next big thing" as they say.
>
> Does the "Berry phase" of this new theory help us to understand
> superhydride RTSC ?
>
> It doesn't look that way so far. The whole thing could be little more than
> hype if it does not illuminate RTSC.
>
> You have to worry when a PR firm releases a technical paper.
>
>
>  Kevin O'Malley wrote:
>
>
> *A Super New Theory to Explain Superconductivity*
> <https://freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3975166/posts>
> *Journal of Superconductivity and Novel Magnetism ^
> <https://scitechdaily.com/a-super-new-theory-to-explain-superconductivity/> *|
> 5 July 2021 | Hiroyasu Koizumi
>
>


Re: [Vo]:A Super New Theory to Explain Superconductivity

2021-07-11 Thread Bob Higgins
When I worked in research for a large company, the discovery of the first
HTSCs stimulated research into the RF properties of superconductors - type
I and type II.  Since there was a huge jump in Tc, we considered that room
temperature superconductors were just around the corner.  What we
discovered was that the higher the Tc, the worse the usable qualities of
the superconductor.  Our estimate was that a RTSC would actually be no
better than copper.  Superconductors are only zero resistance at DC.  There
is a finite penetration of current in all superconductors for AC and RF.
 The closer you are to the Tc and the higher the Tc is, the more AC/RF
resistance you have and the lower the critical magnetic field.  Our
conclusion was that the only superconductors that were useful over Cu for
RF applications were deeply cooled Type I.  I think that RTSCs will only
have niche applications.  But ... I would love to be surprised.

On Sun, Jul 11, 2021 at 3:02 PM Jones Beene  wrote:

> Well as this paper implies, the field of superconductivity is "heating up"
> these days ..literally
>
> The prior story which may be very important on this point - and in the
> relentless progress towards usable RTSC - room temperature
> superconductivity - itself came out just a few weeks back
>
>
> https://phys.org/news/2021-07-ternary-hydrides-lanthanum-yttrium-high-temperature.html
> '
>
> ...  which is a high pressure but ambient temp (non cryogenic)
> phenomenon... involving superhydrides ... which curiously could be related
> to LENR and the Mills/Holmlid effect, if as I suspect the superhydrides are
> found to be in highly redundant ground states (as an alternative to
> pressurization)
>
> The holy grail of course would be a metal superhydride going into RTSC phase
> at ambient pressure.
>
> This advance would revolutionized the economy in so may ways - it would be
> the "next big thing" as they say.
>
> Does the "Berry phase" of this new theory help us to understand
> superhydride RTSC ?
>
> It doesn't look that way so far. The whole thing could be little more than
> hype if it does not illuminate RTSC.
>
> You have to worry when a PR firm releases a technical paper.
>
>
>  Kevin O'Malley wrote:
>
>
> *A Super New Theory to Explain Superconductivity*
> 
> *Journal of Superconductivity and Novel Magnetism ^
>  *|
> 5 July 2021 | Hiroyasu Koizumi
>
>


Re: [Vo]:OT: Nissan e-POWER technology explained

2021-04-05 Thread Bob Higgins
Recently I have seen ridiculous advertisements for an all electric GMC
Hummer as the ultimate SUV.  I can just imagine people going overlanding in
such a vehicle - running out of charge in the middle of nowhere.  It
reminds me of a sight at a Tampa beach.  There was a guy on a small
electric bicycle pulling a bicycle trailer.  In the bicycle trailer was a
gasoline generator supplying the power for his bicycle.  Will the Hummer be
pulling a trailer with a generator and supply of gasoline?

On Mon, Apr 5, 2021 at 11:33 AM AlanG  wrote:

> I think a better question is how the Nissan is better than the Chevy Volt,
> which was discontinued after 5 years for disappointing sales, possibly from
> failing to meet efficiency expectations.
>
> AlanG
>
> On 4/5/2021 10:20 AM, H LV wrote:
>
> In a plug-in hybrid either an electric motor or an ICE drive the wheels,
> or not?
>
> The e-Power system uses just an electric motor to drive the wheels which
> makes it more quiet and fuel efficient than a plug-in hybrid.
> The gasoline is used only for  an ICE generator to charge the battery.
>
> harry
>
> On Mon, Apr 5, 2021 at 1:05 PM Bob Higgins 
> wrote:
>
>> How is this any different than a plug-in hybrid?
>>
>>
>> <http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=webmail>
>>  Virus-free.
>> www.avg.com
>> <http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=webmail>
>>
>> On Mon, Apr 5, 2021 at 10:08 AM Jones Beene  wrote:
>>
>>> I agree that this approach makes a lot more sense than a massive battery
>>> pack - Tesla notwithstanding.
>>>
>>> The approach is not new but has never been carried out sensibly ...
>>> before now.
>>>
>>>
>>> H LV wrote:
>>>
>>> Some people think the e-Power concept is silly.
>>> But I think it is just right for the times we live in. It is currently
>>> available in Japan,
>>> but not in NA.
>>>
>>> https://youtu.be/T5wCppCiQE8
>>>
>>> Harry
>>>
>>


Re: [Vo]:OT: Nissan e-POWER technology explained

2021-04-05 Thread Bob Higgins
How is this any different than a plug-in hybrid?


Virus-free.
www.avg.com

<#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>

On Mon, Apr 5, 2021 at 10:08 AM Jones Beene  wrote:

> I agree that this approach makes a lot more sense than a massive battery
> pack - Tesla notwithstanding.
>
> The approach is not new but has never been carried out sensibly ... before
> now.
>
>
> H LV wrote:
>
> Some people think the e-Power concept is silly.
> But I think it is just right for the times we live in. It is currently
> available in Japan,
> but not in NA.
>
> https://youtu.be/T5wCppCiQE8
>
> Harry
>


Re: [Vo]:A photo of an EVO on the fly

2021-03-29 Thread Bob Higgins
@ Jones Beene... There is nothing that exactly ties this to Ken Shoulders'
work.  It doesn't have to be an EVO.  However, I have never seen or heard
of a self-luminous, finite helical entity in a plasma system.  Sure, there
are helical tracks for current flow, but they begin and end on conductors.
Of course, and I pointed this out to Bob, there is some burden on him to
prove that this is not an imaging artifact.

I have seen work in CR39 that shows inexplicable tracks of odd, but
strangely repeating shapes, that on a fine scale look like they are the
imprint of some kind of helical monster interacting with the plastic.  We
have found no explanation for the tracks.  They bear a strong resemblance
to the strange radiation tracks in other media, which Bob Greenyer has been
reporting for years, primarily coming from Russian scientists.  It is a
curious phenomenon that may or may not have anything to do with LENR - but
it is curious.

On Sun, Mar 28, 2021 at 10:54 PM Axil Axil  wrote:

> The Vega project is an open source research project utilizing the methods
> developed during the SAFIRE project.  Bob Greenyer is working with the
> VEGA  researchers to interpret and document their findings.
>
> To See more Vega videos search YouTube using "Vega MFMP"
>
> On Sun, Mar 28, 2021 at 9:20 PM Jones Beene  wrote:
>
>> Bob,
>>
>> Yes. Lets hear where this comes from.
>>
>> IMO this is completely fake insofar as it relates to Shoulders' work..
>>
>> Jones
>>
>>
>> Bob Higgins wrote:
>>
>>
>> Axil, what is the provenance of this photo/gif anim?
>>
>> On Sun, Mar 28, 2021 at 5:41 PM Axil Axil  wrote:
>>
>> An apparently spiral looking track emerges from the highly excited gap
>> between two brass plates. The EVO is the root cause of strange radiation
>> tracks.
>>
>> https://drive.google.com/file/d/1VfOeYYPFVGTrIXP2ovvFMqpXpaJo3fDg/view
>>
>>


Re: [Vo]:A photo of an EVO on the fly

2021-03-28 Thread Bob Higgins
Apparently, this comes from Bob Greenyer's "Vega" project.  See
https://remoteview.substack.com/p/vega-more-extraordinary-traces?fbclid=IwAR2_XTXaoSpjkacCR7G_Es4c_SH2-GgcCYEF7bKD2e8MVZxtSPkur963_OY

Bob

On Sun, Mar 28, 2021 at 7:20 PM Jones Beene  wrote:

> Bob,
>
> Yes. Lets hear where this comes from.
>
> IMO this is completely fake insofar as it relates to Shoulders' work..
>
> Jones
>
>
> Bob Higgins wrote:
>
>
> Axil, what is the provenance of this photo/gif anim?
>
> On Sun, Mar 28, 2021 at 5:41 PM Axil Axil  wrote:
>
> An apparently spiral looking track emerges from the highly excited gap
> between two brass plates. The EVO is the root cause of strange radiation
> tracks.
>
> https://drive.google.com/file/d/1VfOeYYPFVGTrIXP2ovvFMqpXpaJo3fDg/view
>
>


Re: [Vo]:A photo of an EVO on the fly

2021-03-28 Thread Bob Higgins
Axil, what is the provenance of this photo/gif anim?

On Sun, Mar 28, 2021 at 5:41 PM Axil Axil  wrote:

> An apparently spiral looking track emerges from the highly excited gap
> between two brass plates. The EVO is the root cause of strange radiation
> tracks.
>
> https://drive.google.com/file/d/1VfOeYYPFVGTrIXP2ovvFMqpXpaJo3fDg/view
>


Re: [Vo]:Acoustic demonstration of beats

2020-10-21 Thread Bob Higgins
Peter Hagelstein hypothesized that SPPs could form on the surface and that
they may be complicit in the conversion of the 2 laser signals into the
beat frequency.  The SPPs could potentially provide the nonlinearity
required for a beat to form.  In past experiments, the amount of gold
needed for the effect to occur has not been carefully quantified nor has
its surface morphology.  Etched Pd cathodes are not like a sheet of glass
or polished silicon, so the thin gold deposit is bound to be very
complicated.

The possible use of gold nanoparticles has been discussed, but has not been
tried that I know of.  Any metal that is put in an electrolysis cell is
going to deposit to some extent on the cathode by ordinary electroplating.
Electroplating professionals go to a lot of trouble to put a filter bag
around the anode to prevent small "fines" from plating from the anode to
the cathode.  Regarding adding particles, why not begin with adding the
size you want?  Note that even for the red laser SPP resonance, the
particles needed may be quite big compared to the nanoscale.

I doubt that the "Woods anomalies" are an electromagnetic effect in the way
usually thought.  Even interferometry is completely misunderstood.  I
recommend reading the spot-on paper, "Interference and wave-particle
duality of single photons", by Shan-Liang Liu, arXiv [2017].  In it you
will find that what we were taught in university physics about interference
was complete malarkey.

Is there a way to get excess heat from plasmons alone?  I cannot weigh in
on that.

On Wed, Oct 21, 2020 at 9:27 AM Jones Beene  wrote:

> Bob Higgins wrote:
>
> > Yes, the beats in the Hagelstein, Letts, and Cravens experiment are
> presumably formed by this process.  A thin gold film was deposited on the
> cathode surface and the effect was not observed without the thin gold film.
>
> Has it been ruled out that the energy anomaly is not partly or solely due
> to plasmon formation alone ?
>
> > It is believed that the thin gold went down as tiny islands that were
> responsible for the nonlinearity needed to form the beats.
>
> If the "islands" were in the size range of 2-12 nm,  then the Casimir
> effect could come into play. The so-called "Wood's Anomalies" have been
> known for a century in various forms - and this plasmon anomaly of
> Hagelstein et al could be related to that.
>
>
> https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Chapter-2-Theory-of-Wood-%E2%80%99-s-Anomalies-Maystre/406d2c8f212c3286d85774815de62a2c75b748b8
>
> IOW there is a possibility of actual energy gain from plasmon radiation
> alone which may or may not also have a nuclear effect as a secondary
> reaction when deuterium is present.
>
>
>


Re: [Vo]:Acoustic demonstration of beats

2020-10-19 Thread Bob Higgins
Yes, the beats in the Hagelstein, Letts, and Cravens experiment are
presumably formed by this process.  A thin gold film was deposited on the
cathode surface and the effect was not observed without the thin gold
film.  It is believed that the thin gold went down as tiny islands that
were responsible for the nonlinearity needed to form the beats.

This gold film was right on the surface, and thus the THz beat would have
been delivered right at the surface of the Pd cathode.  Note that this THz
beat frequency will not propagate through even 1 micron of electrolyte, so
the THz signal must be generated right at the surface of the Pd.

On Mon, Oct 19, 2020 at 9:39 AM H LV  wrote:

>
>
> Were the laser beats in the Hagelstein, Letts & Cravens experiment of
> this type?
>
> The way the beats are generated could play role in the generation of
> anomalous heat.
> Harry
>
> On Sun, Oct 18, 2020 at 2:51 PM Bob Higgins 
> wrote:
>
>> No, not exactly.  Addition is a linear process and produces no
>> frequencies in the output of the summation which are not present in the
>> input.  A nonlinear process is commonly applied to the summation to create
>> beats.  For example putting a summation of sine wave voltages onto a diode
>> would produce a nonlinear current that would contain the beats.
>>
>> Sampling, like multiplication, is also a nonlinear process that can
>> produce beats.
>>
>> On Sun, Oct 18, 2020 at 12:19 PM H LV  wrote:
>>
>>> So the addition of frequencies requires that the input signal already
>>> contains a non-linear component.
>>> and for entirely linear input the frequencies would not be additive.
>>> Harry
>>>
>>> On Sun, Oct 18, 2020 at 12:08 PM Bob Higgins 
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> To get frequencies in the output that were not in the input requires a
>>>> nonlinearity.  If you model the nonlinearity using a series such as Y = a +
>>>> bX + cX^2 + dX^3...
>>>> then all of the terms with X^2 and greater are the nonlinear terms.
>>>> Usually the coefficient of the squared term, c, is the largest of the
>>>> nonlinear terms.  When you have an input that is the sum of two
>>>> frequencies, you get a component in Y that is c[sin(w1t) + sin(w2t)]^2  .
>>>> It is the square of the sum of sines that produces the sum and difference
>>>> frequencies.
>>>>
>>>> In the case of the Moire masks, you end up with a multiplication taking
>>>> place, not a sum.  The product of sines will also produce a sum and
>>>> difference.  Multiplication of inputs is a nonlinear operation.
>>>>
>>>> On Sun, Oct 18, 2020 at 9:44 AM H LV  wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>> When two waves of different frequencies combine the result is a third
>>>>> wave with a beat frequency corresponding to the difference between the two
>>>>> original frequencies. A wave model  can show how this happens, but I don't
>>>>> see how it can bring about the addition of frequencies. Can someone model
>>>>> this additive process for me?
>>>>>
>>>>> Harry
>>>>>
>>>>>>


Re: [Vo]:Acoustic demonstration of beats

2020-10-18 Thread Bob Higgins
No, not exactly.  Addition is a linear process and produces no frequencies
in the output of the summation which are not present in the input.  A
nonlinear process is commonly applied to the summation to create beats.
For example putting a summation of sine wave voltages onto a diode would
produce a nonlinear current that would contain the beats.

Sampling, like multiplication, is also a nonlinear process that can produce
beats.

On Sun, Oct 18, 2020 at 12:19 PM H LV  wrote:

> So the addition of frequencies requires that the input signal already
> contains a non-linear component.
> and for entirely linear input the frequencies would not be additive.
> Harry
>
> On Sun, Oct 18, 2020 at 12:08 PM Bob Higgins 
> wrote:
>
>> To get frequencies in the output that were not in the input requires a
>> nonlinearity.  If you model the nonlinearity using a series such as Y = a +
>> bX + cX^2 + dX^3...
>> then all of the terms with X^2 and greater are the nonlinear terms.
>> Usually the coefficient of the squared term, c, is the largest of the
>> nonlinear terms.  When you have an input that is the sum of two
>> frequencies, you get a component in Y that is c[sin(w1t) + sin(w2t)]^2  .
>> It is the square of the sum of sines that produces the sum and difference
>> frequencies.
>>
>> In the case of the Moire masks, you end up with a multiplication taking
>> place, not a sum.  The product of sines will also produce a sum and
>> difference.  Multiplication of inputs is a nonlinear operation.
>>
>> On Sun, Oct 18, 2020 at 9:44 AM H LV  wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>> When two waves of different frequencies combine the result is a third
>>> wave with a beat frequency corresponding to the difference between the two
>>> original frequencies. A wave model  can show how this happens, but I don't
>>> see how it can bring about the addition of frequencies. Can someone model
>>> this additive process for me?
>>>
>>> Harry
>>>
>>>>


Re: [Vo]:Acoustic demonstration of beats

2020-10-18 Thread Bob Higgins
To get frequencies in the output that were not in the input requires a
nonlinearity.  If you model the nonlinearity using a series such as Y = a +
bX + cX^2 + dX^3...
then all of the terms with X^2 and greater are the nonlinear terms.
Usually the coefficient of the squared term, c, is the largest of the
nonlinear terms.  When you have an input that is the sum of two
frequencies, you get a component in Y that is c[sin(w1t) + sin(w2t)]^2  .
It is the square of the sum of sines that produces the sum and difference
frequencies.

In the case of the Moire masks, you end up with a multiplication taking
place, not a sum.  The product of sines will also produce a sum and
difference.  Multiplication of inputs is a nonlinear operation.

On Sun, Oct 18, 2020 at 9:44 AM H LV  wrote:

> Hi,
> When two waves of different frequencies combine the result is a third wave
> with a beat frequency corresponding to the difference between the two
> original frequencies. A wave model  can show how this happens, but I don't
> see how it can bring about the addition of frequencies. Can someone model
> this additive process for me?
>
> Harry
>
>>


Re: [Vo]:Acoustic demonstration of beats

2020-10-16 Thread Bob Higgins
We are talking about THz stimulation of a cathode in a Pd-D electrolysis
LENR cell.  Certain frequencies of THz excitation stimulate LENR to occur,
the frequencies being around 8, 15, 21 THz.  These are believed to be
phonon frequencies in the loaded Pd-D lattice.  Thus, the
Letts-Cravens-Hagelstein experiment of the tuned dual laser illumination
seems to implicate phonons in, at least, the stimulation of LENR.  It is a
very interesting probe into the underlying mechanism of LENR.

Here is the curve:
[image: XPvsLaserBeatFrequency_Letts-Cravens-Hagelstein.png]
It is from:

Hagelstein, P. L., D. Letts, and D. Cravens. "Terahertz difference
frequency response of Pd-D in two-lader experiments." J. Condensed Matter
Nucl. Sci. 3 (2010) 59-76



On Thu, Oct 15, 2020 at 8:32 PM Robert Lee  wrote:

> I must've missed a few classes; are you talking about creating or removing
> heat in a general sense, starting an atomic nuclear reaction, or simply
> producing energy? I joined the group last night and, obviously, missed a
> few emails, too. Just curious.
> Bob Lee
>


Virus-free.
www.avg.com

<#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>


Re: [Vo]:Acoustic demonstration of beats

2020-10-15 Thread Bob Higgins
The nonlinearity must be attached to the cathode itself because a THz
signal will not go through even 1 micron of electrolyte.  In the
Letts-Cravens-Hagelstein experiment, a tiny amount of gold was added to the
cathode to produce the nonlinearity.  Did it work because it formed a diode
junction?  Was the nonlinearity plasmon related?  That is presently unknown
- but it was produced directly on the cathode, which is the target.

On Thu, Oct 15, 2020 at 1:50 PM Sean Logan  wrote:

> Sounds fascinating.  May I ask:  what are you using as your non-linear
> element, to cause the two laser beams to heterodyne?  Is it the target they
> shine on, itself?
>
> On Wed, Oct 14, 2020, 15:19 Bob Higgins  wrote:
>
>> Sean,
>>
>> What you are describing is entirely possible.  Also, diode lasers can be
>> driven into modes that produce sidebands just at the threshold of ordinary
>> output - but it is hard to control the sidebands without an expensive
>> "loop" receiver and some kind of lock-in control.
>>
>> Using 2 lasers is pretty easy.  I am presently working on a dual laser
>> experiment with 2 tunable diode lasers combined optically onto a single
>> fiber. The wavelength separation (determines the beat frequency) is
>> continuously monitored in a high resolution fiber spectrometer.  We are
>> nearly ready to run experiments with this hardware.
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 14, 2020 at 2:10 PM Sean Logan  wrote:
>>
>>> Could you use an Optical Parametric Amplifier to create your desired
>>> sidebands?  Using one laser as the "signal input" and the other as the
>>> "pump" should give you an output containing sum and difference frequencies
>>> (sidebands, or heterodynes).
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Oct 14, 2020, 12:29 H LV  wrote:
>>>
>>>> In my estimation Rumford's theory is the seed of an alternate theory of
>>>> radiation.  It could still grow and blossom into a well
>>>> developed mathematical theory of heat.
>>>>
>>>> I am interested in beat theory because it resonants (pun intended) with
>>>> Rumford`s theory of hot and cold radiation, since
>>>> both involve  _differences_. A beat frequency is given by the
>>>> difference of two frequencies and in Rumford`s theory two types of
>>>> differences are important.The first is that the relative difference in
>>>> temperature between two bodies determines which body is producing more hot
>>>> or more cold radiation. The second is that the sign and magnitude of the
>>>> difference between the received frequency and the oscillator's frequency
>>>> determines whether the radiation increases or decreases the energy of the
>>>> oscillator.
>>>>
>>>> Harry
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Oct 13, 2020 at 3:21 PM JonesBeene  wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The beat frequency they were after  was in the THz range and this was
>>>>>  in order to fit Hagelstein’s theory of optical phonons –
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> … and yes - small gain was seen.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> However, in the  earlier similar work without beat frequencies –
>>>>> single laser only - much higher gain (order of magnitude more) has been
>>>>> reported by Letts/Cravens.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The reproducibility was apparently better in the later experiments -
>>>>>  but I  do not think the lower  result with the beat frequency is leading
>>>>> anywhere.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> *From: *H LV 
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Beat frequencies of two lasers irradiating a surface appear in
>>>>>
>>>>> _Stimulation of Optical Phonons in Deuterated Palladium_ by Dennis
>>>>> Letts and Peter Hagelstein
>>>>>
>>>>> https://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/LettsDstimulatio.pdf
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Harry
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>


Re: [Vo]:moire patterns -- beats without waves

2020-10-15 Thread Bob Higgins
The Moire effect is the result of spatial undersampling an image, and the
Moire pattern is the aliasing.  This is the reason that Canon and many
other camera manufacturers put an optical blurring filter in front of the
image sensor.  The blurring filter is a spatial lowpass filter to prevent
the aliasing of spatial frequencies above the sampling frequency / 2.

Sampling is fundamentally a nonlinear process and thus the beat can occur.
That it can show up visually in the eye testifies to the sampling within
the eye.

On Thu, Oct 15, 2020 at 6:28 AM H LV  wrote:

>
> Moire patterns are like beats without waves.
>
> Moiré Kit
> 1.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4nn1MqCMa1M
>
> 2. Moire pattern effect
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QZYpEMp87Xo
>
> 3. What Are Moire Patterns? (Mr. Wizard)
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W8Jf9SVsT38
>
> 4. Freaky Dot Patterns - Numberphile
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QAja2jp1VjE
>
> Harry
>
>
>
>


Re: [Vo]:Acoustic demonstration of beats

2020-10-14 Thread Bob Higgins
Could the "cold radiation" be considered something like hole carriers in a
semiconductor?

On Wed, Oct 14, 2020 at 1:29 PM H LV  wrote:

> In my estimation Rumford's theory is the seed of an alternate theory of
> radiation.  It could still grow and blossom into a well
> developed mathematical theory of heat.
>
> I am interested in beat theory because it resonants (pun intended) with
> Rumford`s theory of hot and cold radiation, since
> both involve  _differences_. A beat frequency is given by the difference
> of two frequencies and in Rumford`s theory two types of differences are
> important.The first is that the relative difference in temperature between
> two bodies determines which body is producing more hot or more cold
> radiation. The second is that the sign and magnitude of the difference
> between the received frequency and the oscillator's frequency determines
> whether the radiation increases or decreases the energy of the oscillator.
>
> Harry
>


Re: [Vo]:Acoustic demonstration of beats

2020-10-14 Thread Bob Higgins
Sean,

What you are describing is entirely possible.  Also, diode lasers can be
driven into modes that produce sidebands just at the threshold of ordinary
output - but it is hard to control the sidebands without an expensive
"loop" receiver and some kind of lock-in control.

Using 2 lasers is pretty easy.  I am presently working on a dual laser
experiment with 2 tunable diode lasers combined optically onto a single
fiber. The wavelength separation (determines the beat frequency) is
continuously monitored in a high resolution fiber spectrometer.  We are
nearly ready to run experiments with this hardware.

On Wed, Oct 14, 2020 at 2:10 PM Sean Logan  wrote:

> Could you use an Optical Parametric Amplifier to create your desired
> sidebands?  Using one laser as the "signal input" and the other as the
> "pump" should give you an output containing sum and difference frequencies
> (sidebands, or heterodynes).
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 14, 2020, 12:29 H LV  wrote:
>
>> In my estimation Rumford's theory is the seed of an alternate theory of
>> radiation.  It could still grow and blossom into a well
>> developed mathematical theory of heat.
>>
>> I am interested in beat theory because it resonants (pun intended) with
>> Rumford`s theory of hot and cold radiation, since
>> both involve  _differences_. A beat frequency is given by the difference
>> of two frequencies and in Rumford`s theory two types of differences are
>> important.The first is that the relative difference in temperature between
>> two bodies determines which body is producing more hot or more cold
>> radiation. The second is that the sign and magnitude of the difference
>> between the received frequency and the oscillator's frequency determines
>> whether the radiation increases or decreases the energy of the oscillator.
>>
>> Harry
>>
>> On Tue, Oct 13, 2020 at 3:21 PM JonesBeene  wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> The beat frequency they were after  was in the THz range and this was
>>>  in order to fit Hagelstein’s theory of optical phonons –
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> … and yes - small gain was seen.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> However, in the  earlier similar work without beat frequencies – single
>>> laser only - much higher gain (order of magnitude more) has been reported
>>> by Letts/Cravens.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> The reproducibility was apparently better in the later experiments -
>>>  but I  do not think the lower  result with the beat frequency is leading
>>> anywhere.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *From: *H LV 
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Beat frequencies of two lasers irradiating a surface appear in
>>>
>>> _Stimulation of Optical Phonons in Deuterated Palladium_ by Dennis Letts
>>> and Peter Hagelstein
>>>
>>> https://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/LettsDstimulatio.pdf
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Harry
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>


Re: [Vo]:Acoustic demonstration of beats

2020-10-14 Thread Bob Higgins
Unfortunately, at least for electrochemical LENR, the THz radiation will
not penetrate the electrolyte (not even a micron).  The dual laser approach
worked because the two red lasers would pass through the electrolyte and
the beat frequency was produced directly on the cathode surface without the
THz beat having to propagate through the electrolyte.  However, for that
THz beat to form, a nonlinearity must be present at the surface of the
cathode.  If it were linear, then the only frequencies in the output are
those at the input.  It is believed that the addition of the thin film of
gold provided the prescribed nonlinearity.  When gold goes down at a low
rate, it is possible for it to form micro- or nano-scale islands rather
than a uniform epitaxy of thin gold.  These islands could form plasmon or
other resonant effects that could enhance the local nonlinearity - they
could even form metal-oxide semiconductor junctions for the nonlinear
mixing.

OTOH, if you had a gas phase system (perhaps Mizuno-like), a tunable THz
laser would be an excellent stimulation.  I am not sure how well direct THz
stimulation would work through a plasma - it may just reflect or be
absorbed in the plasma.

I would love to have a tunable THz laser to try it.

Bob

On Wed, Oct 14, 2020 at 8:39 AM JonesBeene  wrote:

>
>
> Good post, Bob
>
>
>
> Because of this effect (Letts/Cravens) and the optical phonon addition of
> Hagelstein and the  Holmlid work also – it seems clear that laser
> irradiation of a metal matrix  is perhaps the most promising open avenue
> for optimizing LENR gain.
>
>
>
> It would be great if THz lasers were available now at reasonable cost, and
> maybe they will be soon but it seems like this is the stumbling point in
> progress.
>
>
>
> I would like to see what happens if sequential THz pulsing is followed
> closely in time by a UV laser pulse on the exact same area of loaded matrix.
>
>
>
> IOW the Terahertz pulse primes the target for the much more intense
> radiation which follows.
>
>
>
> This could be a shortcut to Holmlid’s claimed proton annihilation instead
> of “mere fusion. “
>
>
>
> proton annihilation… Ha ! what a concept, almost a LOL…
>
>
>
> … and to think it could be generally ignored by the institutionalized
> Fizzix establishment …
>
>
>
> That would be the Science Story of the century. I was hoping to hear from
> Norront this year.
>
>
>
>
>
> *From: *Bob Higgins 
>
>
>
> Laser stimulation of LENR cells is an interesting subject.  These
> experiments can probe the underlying mechanisms of LENR itself.  One of the
> things that has not been characterized in the laser stimulation studies is
> the sideband noise of the lasers.  All oscillators exhibit sideband noise.
> Oscillators are nonlinear electronic/electro-optical circuits.  Because of
> the internal high Q cavity, the intensity of the oscillation is Q times
> higher than the output of the oscillator/laser.  This oscillator
> nonlinearity causes the noise at baseband to beat up to form sidebands
> around the oscillator primary output.  Also, any noise or modulation of the
> cavity beats to baseband.  This means that for a 400 THz red laser, there
> could easily be 8-15 THz sideband energy that will mix with the laser's
> main component producing 8-15 THz baseband excitation.
>
>
>
> So, a single laser excitation is not necessarily a pure 400 THz excitation
> - it could directly excite 8-15 THz phonons with its sidebands.
>
>
>
> The dual laser experiment is important because it provides a controlled
> frequency of THz beat excitation.  The LENR output was found to be
> triggered only by specific frequencies of the beat signal that happened to
> correspond to phonon excitation.
>
>
>
> I don't think the phonon correspondence is air-tight because no one
> apparently calculates true phonon solutions for the material.  If you look
> at the acoustic propagation formulation, they begin by expanding the
> nonlinear Young's modulus in a series.  Then they throw away the nonlinear
> terms of the series and use a linear representation of the Young's
> modulus.  Because of this, true phonon solutions will not emerge from the
> equations because phonons are soliton solutions.  Soliton solutions
> *require* a nonlinear medium which the present formulations of the
> acoustics do not represent (by choice because they cannot solve the
> nonlinear formulated equation).  Yes, you can find singularities in the
> solutions of the linear formulations and say that's where the phonons must
> lie - but it is only an approximate guess ("thar be dragons").
>
>
>
> JonesBeene wrote:
>
> The beat frequency they were after  was in the THz range and this was  in

Re: [Vo]:Acoustic demonstration of beats

2020-10-14 Thread Bob Higgins
Laser stimulation of LENR cells is an interesting subject.  These
experiments can probe the underlying mechanisms of LENR itself.  One of the
things that has not been characterized in the laser stimulation studies is
the sideband noise of the lasers.  All oscillators exhibit sideband noise.
Oscillators are nonlinear electronic/electro-optical circuits.  Because of
the internal high Q cavity, the intensity of the oscillation is Q times
higher than the output of the oscillator/laser.  This oscillator
nonlinearity causes the noise at baseband to beat up to form sidebands
around the oscillator primary output.  Also, any noise or modulation of the
cavity beats to baseband.  This means that for a 400 THz red laser, there
could easily be 8-15 THz sideband energy that will mix with the laser's
main component producing 8-15 THz baseband excitation.

So, a single laser excitation is not necessarily a pure 400 THz excitation
- it could directly excite 8-15 THz phonons with its sidebands.

The dual laser experiment is important because it provides a controlled
frequency of THz beat excitation.  The LENR output was found to be
triggered only by specific frequencies of the beat signal that happened to
correspond to phonon excitation.

I don't think the phonon correspondence is air-tight because no one
apparently calculates true phonon solutions for the material.  If you look
at the acoustic propagation formulation, they begin by expanding the
nonlinear Young's modulus in a series.  Then they throw away the nonlinear
terms of the series and use a linear representation of the Young's
modulus.  Because of this, true phonon solutions will not emerge from the
equations because phonons are soliton solutions.  Soliton solutions
*require* a nonlinear medium which the present formulations of the
acoustics do not represent (by choice because they cannot solve the
nonlinear formulated equation).  Yes, you can find singularities in the
solutions of the linear formulations and say that's where the phonons must
lie - but it is only an approximate guess ("thar be dragons").

On Tue, Oct 13, 2020 at 1:21 PM JonesBeene  wrote:

>
>
> The beat frequency they were after  was in the THz range and this was  in
> order to fit Hagelstein’s theory of optical phonons –
>
>
>
> … and yes - small gain was seen.
>
>
>
> However, in the  earlier similar work without beat frequencies – single
> laser only - much higher gain (order of magnitude more) has been reported
> by Letts/Cravens.
>
>
>
> The reproducibility was apparently better in the later experiments -  but
> I  do not think the lower  result with the beat frequency is leading
> anywhere.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From: *H LV 
>
>
>
> Beat frequencies of two lasers irradiating a surface appear in
>
> _Stimulation of Optical Phonons in Deuterated Palladium_ by Dennis Letts
> and Peter Hagelstein
>
> https://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/LettsDstimulatio.pdf
>
>
>
> Harry
>
>
>
>
>


Re: [Vo]:Orchestrated Objective Reduction

2020-06-03 Thread Bob Higgins
This would be a good question to pose to Jed Rothwell.  Jed has studied and
written much about the energy landscape - history & present - and probably
has a lot to say about the future.  He monitors this list.

On Wed, Jun 3, 2020 at 11:05 AM Ken Deboer  wrote:

> I have an open-ended question for this group, which I have great
> admiration for. I'm a biologist and am writing a book on, especially, the
> population problem. One of the chapters is on energy, mainly from the
> viewpoint of future energy sources. The only one I am at all even partly
> able to judge fairly is biomass, and to some extent solar, wind and similar
> 'standard' ones. I am helpless about nuclear, and like Daniel Yergin in
> "Quest" dont say much about it. What do y'all see as real possibilities in
> 50 years? regards, ken deboer
>
>>


Re: [Vo]:More on the WuFlu conspiracy theory

2020-03-06 Thread Bob Higgins
I have read that the pneumonia vaccine only protects against strep
pneumonia and will not protect against pneumonia caused by the corona virus.

On Fri, Mar 6, 2020 at 11:38 AM Frank Znidarsic  wrote:

> I went an got a phenomena shot Singrix
>  (Zoster
> ).  It should help a lot.
> Thanks all.
>
> Frank
>
>
>
>


Re: [Vo]:Nick Danger's Top 10 answers for symptom 7

2019-10-27 Thread Bob Higgins
Hi Bob,

The polycapillary lenses are not very efficient; I.E. they lose source
energy in the process of focusing.  If you are starting with a high
intensity x-ray source, you can get a substantial amount focused into a
10-100 micron spot of high intensity.  This is used in micro-XRF where a
spot is illuminated by a high intensity, high energy source causing local
ionization and when neutralization occurs, characteristic x-rays are
emitted and measured typically with a silicon SDD detector.  This type of
lens is not used with the detectors due to its high loss.

The best detectors for low energy x-ray are probably the silicon detectors
having a FWHM of about 120eV at 3.5 keV.  However, NIST has a
superconducting threshold spectroscopy technology that is the best in the
world.  Superconducting pixels are regulated to a temperature that is on
the threshold of going out of the superconducting state.  When a single
photon hits, it heats the pixel enough that the change in its
superconductive resistivity can be measured to provide how much energy was
in the photon.  They are probably able to measure to better than 0.1 eV the
energy of the incident photon - I don't remember the actual spectral
resolution.  I remember when hearing of it that it was an absolutely
phenomenal capability.  It made HPGe look shabby.

On Sun, Oct 27, 2019 at 9:56 AM bobcook39...@hotmail.com <
bobcook39...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> Bob—
>
>
>
> One such spectrometer is summarized here:
>
>
> “Abstract
>
> Polycapillary X-ray optics (capillary X-ray lens) are now popular in X-ray
> fluorescence (XRF) analysis. Such an X-ray lens can collect X-rays emitted
> from an X-ray source in a large solid angle and form a very intense X-ray
> microbeam which is very convenient for microbeam X-ray fluorescence (MXRF)
> analysis giving low minimum detection limits (MDLs) in energy dispersive
> X-ray fluorescence (EDXRF). A new method called position sensitive X-ray
> spectrometry (PSXS) which combines an X-ray lens used to form an intense
> XRF source and a position sensitive detector (PSD) used for wavelength
> dispersive spectrometry (WDS) measurement was developed recently in the
> X-ray Optics Laboratory of Institute of *Low Energy Nuclear Physics
> (ILENP) at Beijing Normal University*. Such a method can give high energy
> and spacial resolution and high detection efficiency simultaneously. A
> short view of development of both the EDXRF using a capillary X-ray lens
> and the new PSXS is given in this paper.”
>
> However the frequency sensitivity is not so good IMHO.  It will take 4 or
> 5 significant figures to help define/validate a good nuclear model and be
> taken seriously as a nuclear source of a reasonable transition.  The WDS
> technology may achieve the sensitivity needed.
>
>
>
> Do you know the state -of-art  probe frequency sensitivity?  The paper
> abstracted above is nearly 20 years old!!!
>
>
>
> Bob Cook
>
>
>
>
> --
> *From:* Bob Higgins 
> *Sent:* Saturday, October 26, 2019 4:51:29 PM
> *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com ; Jones Beene <
> jone...@pacbell.net>
> *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:Nick Danger's Top 10 answers for symptom 7
>
> @Jones Beene  The putative 3.5 keV is, of course,
> detectable in pancake GM detectors and most x-ray sensors and
> spectrometers.  No esoteric detectors required for this.
>
> On Sat, Oct 26, 2019 at 8:48 AM Jones Beene  wrote:
>
> Of interest in the identification of LENR "mystery radiation" (if it is
> found in the range of 3.5 keV)  ...
>
>
>
> <http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=webmail>
>  Virus-free.
> www.avg.com
> <http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=webmail>
> <#m_4945925743225898710_x_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
>


Re: [Vo]:Nick Danger's Top 10 answers for symptom 7

2019-10-26 Thread Bob Higgins
@Jones Beene  The putative 3.5 keV is, of course,
detectable in pancake GM detectors and most x-ray sensors and
spectrometers.  No esoteric detectors required for this.

On Sat, Oct 26, 2019 at 8:48 AM Jones Beene  wrote:

> Of interest in the identification of LENR "mystery radiation" (if it is
> found in the range of 3.5 keV)  ...
>


Virus-free.
www.avg.com

<#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>


[Vo]: Seals

2019-06-28 Thread Bob Higgins
Hi Dave,

This looks like standard conflat UHV gear to me.  The typical gasket used
for conflats is a fairly thick copper ring that is sealed by compression
between knife edges turned into the conflat faces.  In absence of a
description of a special gasket material, I would presume it is the
standard copper gasket.

Bob

On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 12:32 PM Dave Roberson  wrote:

>
>
>
>
> Sent from Mail  for
> Windows 10
>
>
>
> *From: *Dave Roberson 
> *Sent: *Friday, June 28, 2019 1:40 PM
> *To: *vortex-l@eskimo.com
> *Subject: *RE: [Vo]:It is unlikely Mizuno’s results are a mistake
>
>
>
> Interesting results.  One question I have is what material is used as a
> gasket between the end flanges and the SS reaction chamber?  It is hard to
> believe that nothing is required to prevent leaks.
>
>
>
> Dave
>
>
>
> Sent from Mail  for
> Windows 10
>
>
>
> With further reading I see that some thin gasket was used.  I answered my
> own question.  Of course the type of material is very critical for anyone
> wanting to replicate the experiment.
>
>
>
> Dave
>


Virus-free.
www.avg.com

<#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>


Re: [Vo]:Mizuno presentation at ICCF-21

2019-06-24 Thread Bob Higgins
Of course, the presumption is that the excess heat in Mizuno's reactor is
being generated in his Ni screen and thermally transferred to the outer SS
shell of his reactor vessel.  That is not necessarily the case.  If the
output of the reaction was kinetic charged particle emission, and in
particular if it was alpha emission, the energy could be transferred almost
50% directly to the shell of the vessel without having the Ni mesh be
hotter than the outside of the vessel.  The same would be even more true if
the output were low energy photons.  At this point, we don't have enough
data to know.

Fortunately, the reactor and protocol seem very simple, and replication
should provide ample opportunities for evaluation of the possibilities.

Bob Higgins

On Mon, Jun 24, 2019 at 9:21 AM bobcook39...@hotmail.com <
bobcook39...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> Jed wrote about the Mizuno reactor wall temperature:
>
>
>
> “”Here's the problem. The Ni mesh reactant is right up against the inside
> wall. If the experiment works, the mesh gets hot, and the portion of the
> wall just outside the mesh gets hot. Significantly hotter than the rest of
> the outside wall, or the ends of reactor. That would be difficult to model,
> I think. It complicates matters.”
>
>
>
> Modeling temperatures in a metal object is old hat.  The reactor vessel
> would be easy to model IMHO.
>
>
>
> Such modeling would add to the understanding of the air cooling and
> identify if any heat is being generated in the metal of the  reactor vessel
> as a result of unexpected reactions adding or subtracting energy to the
> metal of the reactor vessel.
>
>
>
> Validation of any thermal model would be substantial with information from
> both the dummy reactor and the LENR reactor.   You cannot have too many
> thermocouples for a validation from my experience--complications be damned.
>
>
>
> If the Ni mesh is the source of heat from an LENR reaction, then the
> contact between the mesh and the reactor wall at any spot will be a factor
> in the temperature of the mesh.  An ultrasonic examination of such contacts
> over the entire reactor/mesh interface would be desirable to facilitate
> modeling to determine mesh temperatures,   Temperature gradients in the
> mesh would likely cause changes in the mesh/reactor wall contact,
> substantially influencing the resulting temperature.   The same issues
> would apply to the dimensional stability of the heating wire.
>
>
>
> Mizuno should specify the details associated with the mesh/reactor wall
> contact as well as the details associated with the heating wire contact.
>
>
>
> Bob Cook
>

<http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=webmail>
Virus-free.
www.avg.com
<http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email_source=link_campaign=sig-email_content=webmail>
<#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>


Re: [Vo]:LENR was discovered in 1982/1983 (if not before)

2018-07-12 Thread Bob Higgins
But Jones,

That's not what I said (I don't think).  What I was trying to get at was:

Hot fusion = Almost *all* of the fusion energy is delivered in the form of
neutron kinetic energy + energetic gamma energy

Cold fusion = Almost *none* (lets say < 1E-6) of the fusion energy recorded
is delivered in the form of neutron kinetic energy + energetic gammas


Otherwise, if cold fusion produced the energetic neutrons and gammas of hot
fusion, the future for it may not be as interesting.  Whatever the "cold
fusion" reaction is, it delivers fusion commensurate heat without the nasty
energetic neutrons and gammas that makes it particularly interesting.
These energetic neutrons and gammas are a real quagmire for the hot fusion
programs.  The 50% energetic neutrons will activate the machinery turning
it all into radioactive waste.  The machinery will have to be periodically
replaced just due to neutron damage to the materials.  Hot fusion reactors
may not have runaway reaction danger, but it will still be proliferating
radioactive waste (admittedly shorter half life).  Also what is being
turned into waste and having to be replaced will be expensive machinery.
The energetic neutrons will make hot fusion energy expensive.

On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 11:03 AM, JonesBeene  wrote:

>
>
> Bob,
>
>
>
> Well, given that there are claims of small amounts of neutrons and gammas
> in cold fusion by a number of reputable experiments, one cannot arbitrarily
> define the reaction as being neutron-free or gamma free.
>
>
>
> *From: *Bob Higgins 
>
>
>
> Jones -
>
>
>
> No, not humor.  Lack of neutrons and gamma has been -a- defining
> difference between hot fusion and cold fusion.  In hot fusion the energy is
> taken away by neutrons and gamma almost exclusively.  In cold fusion, there
> are no neutrons and gamma commensurate with heat production (or dead
> graduate students).  Instead, there are low rate side productions of
> neutrons and gammas in cold fusion systems, but that may be due to a small
> branching ratio or a small amount of 2-body hot fusion occurring.
>
>
>
> The input energy going into many cold fusion experiments is certainly
> commensurate with that going into a Farnsworth fusor, but the Farnsworth
> reaction is widely regarded as being 2-ion hot fusion.
>
>
>
> I have that report, but have only scanned it so far.  It could be that the
> neutron and gamma rates reported were small compared to the energy released
> by the reaction - do you know?
>
>
>
> JonesBeene  wrote:
>
> Bob,
>
> Did you mean that as humor?
>
> It would be almost “pathological” to define cold fusion in such a way as
> to exclude the known outputs of nuclear fusion in general.
>
> In fact, in terms of the applied heat, palladium fusion at 2 volts has the
> equivalent input temperature of 20,000°K per atom of reactant, whereas the
> combustion temperature of burning deuterium in O2 would be less.
>
>
>
>
>


Re: [Vo]:LENR was discovered in 1982/1983 (if not before)

2018-07-12 Thread Bob Higgins
Jones -

No, not humor.  Lack of neutrons and gamma has been -a- defining difference
between hot fusion and cold fusion.  In hot fusion the energy is taken away
by neutrons and gamma almost exclusively.  In cold fusion, there are no
neutrons and gamma commensurate with heat production (or dead graduate
students).  Instead, there are low rate side productions of neutrons and
gammas in cold fusion systems, but that may be due to a small branching
ratio or a small amount of 2-body hot fusion occurring.

The input energy going into many cold fusion experiments is certainly
commensurate with that going into a Farnsworth fusor, but the Farnsworth
reaction is widely regarded as being 2-ion hot fusion.

I have that report, but have only scanned it so far.  It could be that the
neutron and gamma rates reported were small compared to the energy released
by the reaction - do you know?

On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 9:18 AM, JonesBeene  wrote:

> Bob,
>
>
>
> Did you mean that as humor?
>
>
>
> It would be almost “pathological” to define cold fusion in such a way as
> to exclude the known outputs of nuclear fusion in general.
>
>
>
> In fact, in terms of the applied heat, palladium fusion at 2 volts has the
> equivalent input temperature of 20,000°K per atom of reactant, whereas the
> combustion temperature of burning deuterium in O2 would be less.
>
>
>
>
>
> *From: *Bob Higgins 
>
>
>
> But, Jones,
>
>
>
> Is it LENR if it produces neutrons and gamma?
>
>
>
>
>


Re: [Vo]:LENR was discovered in 1982/1983 (if not before)

2018-07-12 Thread Bob Higgins
But, Jones,

Is it LENR if it produces neutrons and gamma?


On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 8:28 AM, JonesBeene  wrote:

>
>
> And this wasn’t “fracto-fusion” which has been disputed, nor was it the
> Farnsworth Fusor (1964) which was labeled as “warm fusion”  (ICE).
>
>
>
> As we now know, LENR driven by a chemical reaction (combustion shock wave)
> was invented around 1980, probably in several places including the USA, for
> military uses. (tritium-free bomb trigger).
>
>
>
> In fairness to our friends from the North – it is time to acknowledge that
> LENR was invented, produced and well-document in Canada 35 years ago, well
> before it turned up in Utah. In fact, the Canucks  might not have been the
> first to do it, but so far as the online record is concerned, they have the
> belated honor of presenting the first report.
>
>
>
> Problem was, the experimental work back then (during the depth of the Cold
> War with Russia) was for done for weapons research - and our Pentagon
> effectively silenced the similar work in the USA. Of course, filing a
> patent was out of the question. This work (due to its application as a bomb
> trigger) was and still is – a huge proliferation risk.
>
>
>
> A typewritten report available online is entitled “EXPLOSIVE-DRIVEN
> HEMISPHERICAL IMPLOSIONS FOR GENERATING FUSION PLASMAS” By D. Sagie and I.
> 1. Glass at the University of Toronto, Institute for Aerospace. There is no
> doubt about the importance of this work, or the high quality of the
> experiment - but it is seldom mentioned and does not appear on the
> LENR-CANR library.
>
>
>
> Google Scholar did publish the paper online some 30+ years later, but not
> many took notice of its significance. For one thing, this information
> upsets the common misperception that Pons and Fleischmann invented cold
> fusion. They did not, unless one wishes to redefine it in such a way that
> eliminates simple chemical reactions.
>
>
>
> That credit, which is nothing less than the discovery of LENR (using any
> reasonable definition of “low energy”) - should  in a perfect world – be
> attributed to Glass and Sagie. However, other researchers whose work was
> squelched by the Pentagon are probably out there. You can track down the
> large file (42 megs)  through this link.
>
>
>
> http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1982PhFl...25..269G
>
>
>
> The University of Toronto (Aerospace) had at that time  a dedicated
>  “explosive-driven-implosion facility” and it  was used by Glass et al  to
> produce stabIe, centered and focused hemispherical implosions to generate
> neutrons from D-D reactions using only the energy of combustion.  This was
> a CHEMICAL REACTION only. The reaction was actually simply the result of a
>  self-generated shock wave from self-detonation of the pure deuterium gas
> in oxygen.
>
>
>
> A high resolution scintillator-detection system measured the neutrons and
> y-rays resulting from the fusion of deuterium. “Several approaches were
> used to initiate fusion in deuterium.
>
> The simplest and most direct proved to be in a stoichiometric mixture of
> deuterium-oxygen…”
>
>
>
> QUTOE: “this is the only known work where fusion neutrons were produced by
> chemical energy in a direct manner.”
>
>
>


[Vo]:I think this was the best ICCF conference in a while

2018-06-12 Thread Bob Higgins
But, I think you missed the point (maybe).  Achieving an XH stimulation
with such weak lasers, and in particularly at a required resonance in
difference frequency in the THz range, is a key probe of the effect.  Yes,
you might be able to generate some enhancement by brute force, but it would
cloud the probe of the nature of the effect.  The efficiency will be low
for conversion of the small power laser signal pair to a THz difference
signal, so it means that the THz signal at the surface was extremely weak.
Yet at the THz resonance, it had a very significant effect on the XH.  The
THz signal was extremely weak compared to the XH that was stimulated and
was clearly non-ionizing.  That THz-to-XH gain at such a low level is a key
evidence of phonon involvement IMHO.

On Mon, Jun 11, 2018 at 9:17 PM, Jones Beene  wrote:

> Bob,
>
>
>
> One interpretation of the input parameters and the use of very weak lasers
> by L/C (comparatively) is that for them to see any anomalous thermal
> effect, they had to hit a special resonance frequency in order to get
> results.
>
>
>
> OTOH if a far more powerful laser is available and is employed – then a
> brute force approach negates the need to achieve an exact resonance.
>
>
>
> Thus a “special THz range”  could be red herring...
>
>
>
>
>
> *From: *Bob Higgins 
>
>
>
> Jones,
>
>
>
> I don't think the Letts-Cravens experiment is similar to Holmlid at all.
> They used two calibrated wavelength lasers superimposed on the cathode.
> They found that when the lasers were separated by a specific frequency
> difference in the 10-20 THz range, there was a peaking in the XP.  For
> there to be a frequency difference effect, there must be a nonlinearity -
> likely a surface plasmon at the cathode surface - that allows the
> difference frequency to form.  The difference frequency of 10-20 THz where
> there was a peak in XP is VERY suggestive of phonon stimulation, something
> compeletely different than Holmlid's experiment.
>
>
>
> *From: *Jed Rothwell 
>
> I do not think there is any evidence for muons in cold fusion.
>
> JB: There is actually plenty of evidence along with plenty of data some of
> which was presented. You may not think the evidence is credible, but you
> are not a nuclear engineer
>
>
>
>- People who are nuclear engineers and nuclear physicists don't think
>so either.
>
>
>
> Some do, some don’t. George Miley for instance, who has far stronger
> credentials than most critics of Holmlid, was actually a co-author with him.
>
>
>
>
>
>- The main reason I know of is that if there were lots of muons, they
>would cause harm, and there is no sign of harm.
>
>
>
> There is not much sign of harm for airline crews who spend many hours at
> altitude where muons are present in high flux. Furthermore, Holmlid has
> suffered a health issue recently which could have been aggravated by
> exposure to muons. The jury is out on this issue.
>
>
>
> In fact, muons are weakly interacting with light elements like carbon so
> health issues are not expected but no one knows. The Curie’s health
> problems, for instance, is a situation where they were exposed to muons, in
> addition to gamma radiation, but no one has revisited the old cases to
> estimate relative risks.
>
>
>
> Actually, there are stronger arguments against muons than health issues
> but what is needed is a stronger independent replication.
>
>
>
> Since the so-called “Letts-Cravens effect” is similar to Holmlid’s
> technique and has been replicated by others, it is conceivable that some
> kind of hybrid experiment will emerge… sooner rather than later, it is
> hoped.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>


Re: [Vo]:I think this was the best ICCF conference in a while

2018-06-11 Thread Bob Higgins
Jones,

I don't think the Letts-Cravens experiment is similar to Holmlid at all.
They used two calibrated wavelength lasers superimposed on the cathode.
They found that when the lasers were separated by a specific frequency
difference in the 10-20 THz range, there was a peaking in the XP.  For
there to be a frequency difference effect, there must be a nonlinearity -
likely a surface plasmon at the cathode surface - that allows the
difference frequency to form.  The difference frequency of 10-20 THz where
there was a peak in XP is VERY suggestive of phonon stimulation, something
compeletely different than Holmlid's experiment.

On Mon, Jun 11, 2018 at 5:30 PM, Jones Beene  wrote:

>
>
> *From: *Jed Rothwell 
>
> I do not think there is any evidence for muons in cold fusion.
>
> JB: There is actually plenty of evidence along with plenty of data some of
> which was presented. You may not think the evidence is credible, but you
> are not a nuclear engineer
>
>
>
>- People who are nuclear engineers and nuclear physicists don't think
>so either.
>
>
>
> Some do, some don’t. George Miley for instance, who has far stronger
> credentials than most critics of Holmlid, was actually a co-author with him.
>
>
>
>
>
>- The main reason I know of is that if there were lots of muons, they
>would cause harm, and there is no sign of harm.
>
>
>
> There is not much sign of harm for airline crews who spend many hours at
> altitude where muons are present in high flux. Furthermore, Holmlid has
> suffered a health issue recently which could have been aggravated by
> exposure to muons. The jury is out on this issue.
>
>
>
> In fact, muons are weakly interacting with light elements like carbon so
> health issues are not expected but no one knows. The Curie’s health
> problems, for instance, is a situation where they were exposed to muons, in
> addition to gamma radiation, but no one has revisited the old cases to
> estimate relative risks.
>
>
>
> Actually, there are stronger arguments against muons than health issues
> but what is needed is a stronger independent replication.
>
>
>
> Since the so-called “Letts-Cravens effect” is similar to Holmlid’s
> technique and has been replicated by others, it is conceivable that some
> kind of hybrid experiment will emerge… sooner rather than later, it is
> hoped.
>
>
>
>
>


Re: [Vo]:Beiting paper at ICCF-21

2018-06-06 Thread Bob Higgins
I asked Beiting about the addition of SmCo magnets. SmCo was chosen for its
higher curie temp.  The magnets began as charged SmCo disks and were
crushed into apparently 1-2 mm fragments for inclusion with the fuel.
Enhancement of the LENR by magnetic field when using light hydrogen (as he
used) is a surprise. It could have been the Sm or Co instead of the
magnetic field - he did not have an experiment with un-charged SmCo
material for comparison.

A wonderful replication report.

On Tue, Jun 5, 2018, 10:13 PM Jed Rothwell  wrote:

> Richard Garwin of the Jasons was brought in to evaluate the experiment. He
> said there is a problem because it uses K-type thermocouples which are
> susceptible to errors from exposure to hydrogen. Beiting pointed out three
> problems with this hypothesis:
>
>1. The thermocouples were shielded.
>2. The damage only happens at ~600°C and these cells were run at 300°C.
>3. The damage causes the thermocouples to show a lower temperature. If
>would reduce the estimate of excess heat, not increase it.
>
> Garwin is grasping at straws, trying to find an excuse to dismiss the
> results. He said the first thing that popped into his head, which could not
> have happened and would have had the opposite effect if it could. Soon
> after cold fusion began, Garwin was called in to evaluate SRI. The gist of
> his report was: "I could not find an error but I am sure something must be
> wrong."
>


[Vo]:Fast company in Fresno

2018-05-21 Thread Bob Higgins
In the case of Ni, there is not a significant population of P+ or D+ ions
in the lattice.  When the thermal wave sweeps through the Ni rod, the it
sweeps the electrons along like an ocean wave.  But, there are barriers -
the Ni grains.  The barriers form a boundary condition for how well, how
quickly, and how fast the electron wave is able to propagate.  The grain
boundaries cause an electron back-sloshing inside the metal grains,
stimulating a BEC-like behavior for the atoms of the metal grain - I called
this a transient BEC - and it is stimulated by the collective action of the
electrons being sloshed like a liquid.  To maximize the transient-BEC
effects, Piantelli insists that the metal grains must be "right-sized".
Piantelli believes the collective action of electron sloshing in the grain
was responsible for the ability to draw-in an H- ion from the surface into
the surface metal crystal grain.  After a sequence of steps that Piantelli
hasn't entirely worked out, the H- merges with a nearby Ni atom, ultimately
resulting in a muon-like catalyzed nuclear reaction.  I extend that by
saying that the energy from the reaction can be semi-coherently returned to
the thermal wave - enhancing its amplitude and causing it to stimulate more
reactions.  The rod is a half-wave thermal wave resonator and the addition
of the energy to the thermal wave makes it a thermal wave oscillator.

I don't believe proton or deuteron flow within the Ni lattice is part of
the thermal wave phenomenon.  These ions are simply not able to freely flow
in the Ni lattice due to their size.

This discussion is not part of my ICCF talk - just the thermal modeling.

On Sun, May 20, 2018 at 11:29 PM, Russ <russ.geo...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Conduction band moving particles that are not electrons were very clearly
> described in the work of Talbot and Scott Chubb. They focused their
> considerable genius on proton conduction which includes deuteron
> conduction. RIP Scott and Talbot, they were good companions in the study of
> cold fusion for so many years.
>
>
>
> *From:* JonesBeene <jone...@pacbell.net>
> *Sent:* Monday, May 21, 2018 2:17 AM
> *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com
> *Subject:* RE: [Vo]:Fast company in Fresno
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> According to the ORNL paper, which may not be related to this - the
> propagation wave does not consist of conduction band electrons but
> “phasons” which is a much heavier particulate, like a phonon but also much
> faster. Wouldn’t it be interesting if potassium ferrite was such ceramic?
>
>
>
> That exotica may not apply to LENR however, but if it does, there is the
> possibility of finding better results with  lattice alloy combinations (or
> more likely ceramics) which work more like the phasons in fresnoite.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From: *Bob Higgins <rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com>
>
>
>
>
>
> The interesting part of the phenomenon is not the speed of propagation per
> se, but what happens at the metal surface during this propagation.  I
> believe there is a conduction band electron sweep as this type of thermal
> "wave" passes through the metal grains with perhaps unusual behavior when
> these electrons are swept up to a metal grain boundary.  Also, it appears
> to be more of a wave - and in that sense it can setup up reflections and
> standing wave behavior.  Look at Krivit's photo of Piantelli's runaway
> reaction on his Ni rod.  It appears to have a standing wave effect for the
> maximum LENR action in the center of the rod.  This seems characteristic of
> a standing wave pattern.  It is possible that the LENR activity, being
> stimulated by the passage of a thermal wave, can turn the rod into an
> active medium so that a passing thermal waves can have gain and oscillation
> - almost like a laser cavity.
>
>
>
> [image: cid:ii_jhfhaaou0_1637ff96e0443058]
> ​
>
>
>
>
>


[Vo]:Fast company in Fresno

2018-05-20 Thread Bob Higgins
The "non-Fourier" propagation mode I am describing as implicated in
Piantelli's Ni rod LENR only occurs in metals.  It is about 50x faster than
normal thermal propagation, but still <10x (slower than) the speed of
sound.  A useful reference to this thermal wave in metals is:

N. I. Kobasko, SH. E. Guseynov, An Explanation of the Nature of Thermal
Waves “a Poker Effect” on the Basis of Hyperbolic Heat Conductivity
Equation Analysis and Existence of Free Electrons in Metals,* Recent
Researches in Circuits and Systems* (2014), ISBN 978-1-61804-108-1, WSEAS
Press, 167-172


I don't believe it is related to the ORNL paper, but that paper has some
interesting concepts.  Having a dielectric with super high heat transfer is
a holy grail technology.  For thermoelectrics, what is needed to go along
with that is a semiconductor with almost no thermal conductivity (very high
thermal resistance) and near 0 electrical resistance.

On Sun, May 20, 2018 at 7:17 PM, JonesBeene <jone...@pacbell.net> wrote:

>
>
>
>
> According to the ORNL paper, which may not be related to this - the
> propagation wave does not consist of conduction band electrons but
> “phasons” which is a much heavier particulate, like a phonon but also much
> faster. Wouldn’t it be interesting if potassium ferrite was such ceramic?
>
>
>
> That exotica may not apply to LENR however, but if it does, there is the
> possibility of finding better results with  lattice alloy combinations (or
> more likely ceramics) which work more like the phasons in fresnoite.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From: *Bob Higgins <rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com>
>
>
>
>
>
> The interesting part of the phenomenon is not the speed of propagation per
> se, but what happens at the metal surface during this propagation.  I
> believe there is a conduction band electron sweep as this type of thermal
> "wave" passes through the metal grains with perhaps unusual behavior when
> these electrons are swept up to a metal grain boundary.  Also, it appears
> to be more of a wave - and in that sense it can setup up reflections and
> standing wave behavior.  Look at Krivit's photo of Piantelli's runaway
> reaction on his Ni rod.  It appears to have a standing wave effect for the
> maximum LENR action in the center of the rod.  This seems characteristic of
> a standing wave pattern.  It is possible that the LENR activity, being
> stimulated by the passage of a thermal wave, can turn the rod into an
> active medium so that a passing thermal waves can have gain and oscillation
> - almost like a laser cavity.
>
>
>
> [image: cid:ii_jhfhaaou0_1637ff96e0443058]
> ​
>
>
>
>
>


[Vo]:Fast company in Fresno

2018-05-20 Thread Bob Higgins
The interesting part of the phenomenon is not the speed of propagation per
se, but what happens at the metal surface during this propagation.  I
believe there is a conduction band electron sweep as this type of thermal
"wave" passes through the metal grains with perhaps unusual behavior when
these electrons are swept up to a metal grain boundary.  Also, it appears
to be more of a wave - and in that sense it can setup up reflections and
standing wave behavior.  Look at Krivit's photo of Piantelli's runaway
reaction on his Ni rod.  It appears to have a standing wave effect for the
maximum LENR action in the center of the rod.  This seems characteristic of
a standing wave pattern.  It is possible that the LENR activity, being
stimulated by the passage of a thermal wave, can turn the rod into an
active medium so that a passing thermal waves can have gain and oscillation
- almost like a laser cavity.


​



On Sun, May 20, 2018 at 5:34 PM, JonesBeene <jone...@pacbell.net> wrote:

>
>
> *From: *Bob Higgins <rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com>
>
>
>
>
>
> One of the things I will mention in my presentation at ICCF-21 next month
> is detection of a non-Fourier heat transfer mode in thermal modeling work I
> did for a calorimeter.  Interestingly, Piantelli implicates such a mode as
> stimulus of LENR in his Ni rod experiments.
>
>
>
>
>
> Bob,
>
>
>
> Not sure that “non-Fourier heat transfer mode” is a useful descriptor of
> this property, but anyway… if an extremely rapid heat transfer capability
> were to be a part of a metal-hydride LENR system, (which seems unlikely,
> but who knows?)  then there are design steps which one could take to
>  optimize the system. The basic design which would benefit from very high
> speed-of-sound mechanics, and phasons, would be “spherical convergence”.
> Assuming the same or similar deuteron Fusion dynamics exist which are seen
> in the Farnsworth Fusor – there is perhaps a 20:1 benefit of spherical
> convergence over solenoid (tubular) containment for low energy initiation.
> That is for a plasma convergence system but solid state could be even
> better.
>


[Vo]:Fast company in Fresno

2018-05-20 Thread Bob Higgins
One of the things I will mention in my presentation at ICCF-21 next month
is detection of a non-Fourier heat transfer mode in thermal modeling work I
did for a calorimeter.  Interestingly, Piantelli implicates such a mode as
stimulus of LENR in his Ni rod experiments.

On Sun, May 20, 2018 at 12:55 PM, JonesBeene  wrote:

>
>
> Another prior device comes to mind – the Qu-tube. Still a mystery.  The
> test below showed a sample to conduct heat up to 30,000 times better than
> copper
>
> http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20080009660_2008009120.pdf
>
> … thus the Qu-tube is said to be a superconductor of heat. But NASA did not 
> confirm the claim of its independent contractor in the paper above.
>
> If Dr. Qu’s claim were to be true then a superconductor of heat can actually 
> be made - and may well have contained a functional equivalent of fresnoite.
>
>
>
> Hard to imagine that this could have been kept a virtual secret all these 
> years…
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> The following table gives the speed of sound in selected solids.
>
>
>
> Most types of glass and ceramic have a speed of sound of about 5000 meters
> per second. In air it is about 340 m/sec which is 767 mph.
>
>
>
> Diamond
>
> 12000
>
> Pyrex glass
>
> 5640
>
> Iron
>
> 5130
>
> Aluminum
>
> 5100
>
> Brass
>
> 4700
>
> Copper
>
> 3560
>
> Gold
>
> 3240
>
> Lucite
>
> 2680
>
> Lead
>
> 1322
>
>
>
> In Fresno, however they found a local crystal in which sound can
> apparently zip around much faster. A factor of over 4 times faster thanks
> to “phasons”.
>
>
>
> https://www.ornl.gov/content/supersonic-propagation-
> lattice-energy-phasons-fresnoite
>
>
>
> The crystal is named “fresnoite” which is probably the best thing to come
> out of Fresno since Slim Pickens. “A good place to be from” as they say,
> with the emphasis on from.
>
>
>
> There are implications to phasons which are not mentioned… possibly even
> implications for LENR…
>
>
>
>
>
>
>


Re: [Vo]:Meshugganons

2018-05-04 Thread Bob Higgins
Geiger tubes can record betas at close range, but success will depend on
the nature of the window used.  I don't think it makes it through the
thicker plastic windows used on a lot of the pancake tubes.

Keep in mind that the "strange radiation" made it out of Ed's stainless
steel reactor and then activated the mica window.  Once activated, ordinary
radiation was emitted with a measured half-life.

On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 6:06 PM, bobcook39...@hotmail.com <
bobcook39...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> Russ George suggested that Geiger tubes do not record betas.
>
>
>
> I would guess that high energy betas (depending upon the window
> composition) should be recorded by Geiger tubes.  Russ’s beta sources that
> he used to check his tubes may have produced only soft betas.
>
>
>
> Maybe Russ could identify the energy of his beta sources.
>
>
>
> Bob Cook
>
>
>
>
> --
> *From:* Bob Higgins <rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com>
> *Sent:* Friday, May 4, 2018 4:28:40 PM
> *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com
> *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:Meshugganons
>
> When Ed Storms reported on this, he had more than one pancake tube.  One
> had a mica window and the other two were plastic.  I believe he said that
> the "strange radiation" he encountered activated something in the mica
> window.  The tube with the mica window became activated and had a
> particular decay rate that he measured.  He could bring the other, plastic
> window'ed tubes close to the mica window and they would detect emissions
> from it.
>
> On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 1:33 AM, Russ <russ.geo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> We have three identical Geiger’s that I switch positions to constantly
>> challenge (and eliminate) any anomalous behaviour and to reveal glitches as
>> well as to provide coincident background counts that are used to refine the
>> precision of the background vs. hot counts. The high count rates can be
>> intentionally produced and reduced with prescribed changes in the
>> experiment. So far so good. Of course this must be repeated with ever more
>> precision and care, an effort in process at this moment.
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* John Berry <aethe...@gmail.com>
>> *Sent:* Monday, April 16, 2018 11:38 PM
>> *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com
>> *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:Meshugganons
>>
>>
>>
>> Is there any difference when the tube, shielding and Geiger counter are
>> vertically disposed as in the image, or horizontally?
>>
>>
>>
>> How can you be sure it isn't some capacitive coupling effect?
>>
>> Could you ground the shields?
>>
>> Could you apply voltage spikes to the plates without them being exposed
>> to the spark gap directly, see if that triggers the Geiger?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Apr 16, 2018 at 7:20 PM, Russ <russ.geo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Nonsense there is no such lead shielding on the experiment as suggested.
>>
>>
>>
>> As well I have been interchanging 3 independent Geiger counters to
>> eliminate any one being seen as being influenced by stray electrical
>> fields. Only the Geiger that is nearest to the experimental source shows
>> the anomalous count at multiples of the background.
>>
>>
>>
>> Much more work needs to be done to eliminate any and all possible errors
>> in this but at least the anomalous emissions are predictably able to be
>> induced in a repeatable fashion. In my opinion these emissions might well
>> be either gammas or something unusual. The Geigers have been challenged
>> with known beta sources and are quite unable to count betas.
>>
>>
>>
>> They are  not behaving like my previous discovery of Mischugenons, I have
>> recently renamed these ‘Tellerons’ in honour of my colleague Edward Teller
>> who helped me with that discovery and indeed had speculated on their
>> existence decades before my discovery experiments.
>>
>>
>>
>> There are clear paths to improve and enhance this Androcles protocol that
>> will bring it in line with the work and teachings of Mills, Rossi, and
>> Piantelli.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com>
>> *Sent:* Sunday, April 15, 2018 8:00 PM
>> *To:* vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
>> *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:Meshugganons
>>
>>
>>
>> In Alan's experiment, the  Geiger counter's activity is the function of
>> the thickness of the lead shielding. No shielding creates no  Geiger
>> counter activity.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Apr 15,

Re: [Vo]:Meshugganons

2018-05-04 Thread Bob Higgins
When Ed Storms reported on this, he had more than one pancake tube.  One
had a mica window and the other two were plastic.  I believe he said that
the "strange radiation" he encountered activated something in the mica
window.  The tube with the mica window became activated and had a
particular decay rate that he measured.  He could bring the other, plastic
window'ed tubes close to the mica window and they would detect emissions
from it.

On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 1:33 AM, Russ  wrote:

> We have three identical Geiger’s that I switch positions to constantly
> challenge (and eliminate) any anomalous behaviour and to reveal glitches as
> well as to provide coincident background counts that are used to refine the
> precision of the background vs. hot counts. The high count rates can be
> intentionally produced and reduced with prescribed changes in the
> experiment. So far so good. Of course this must be repeated with ever more
> precision and care, an effort in process at this moment.
>
>
>
> *From:* John Berry 
> *Sent:* Monday, April 16, 2018 11:38 PM
> *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com
> *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:Meshugganons
>
>
>
> Is there any difference when the tube, shielding and Geiger counter are
> vertically disposed as in the image, or horizontally?
>
>
>
> How can you be sure it isn't some capacitive coupling effect?
>
> Could you ground the shields?
>
> Could you apply voltage spikes to the plates without them being exposed to
> the spark gap directly, see if that triggers the Geiger?
>
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Apr 16, 2018 at 7:20 PM, Russ  wrote:
>
> Nonsense there is no such lead shielding on the experiment as suggested.
>
>
>
> As well I have been interchanging 3 independent Geiger counters to
> eliminate any one being seen as being influenced by stray electrical
> fields. Only the Geiger that is nearest to the experimental source shows
> the anomalous count at multiples of the background.
>
>
>
> Much more work needs to be done to eliminate any and all possible errors
> in this but at least the anomalous emissions are predictably able to be
> induced in a repeatable fashion. In my opinion these emissions might well
> be either gammas or something unusual. The Geigers have been challenged
> with known beta sources and are quite unable to count betas.
>
>
>
> They are  not behaving like my previous discovery of Mischugenons, I have
> recently renamed these ‘Tellerons’ in honour of my colleague Edward Teller
> who helped me with that discovery and indeed had speculated on their
> existence decades before my discovery experiments.
>
>
>
> There are clear paths to improve and enhance this Androcles protocol that
> will bring it in line with the work and teachings of Mills, Rossi, and
> Piantelli.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Axil Axil 
> *Sent:* Sunday, April 15, 2018 8:00 PM
> *To:* vortex-l 
> *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:Meshugganons
>
>
>
> In Alan's experiment, the  Geiger counter's activity is the function of
> the thickness of the lead shielding. No shielding creates no  Geiger
> counter activity.
>
>
>
> On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 2:54 PM, Brian Ahern  wrote:
>
> Geiger counters are notoriously prone to high voltage noise interference.
>
>
> --
>
> *From:* Axil Axil 
> *Sent:* Sunday, April 15, 2018 2:15 PM
> *To:* vortex-l
> *Subject:* [Vo]:Meshugganons
>
>
>
> ·
> New
>
> ·
>
> · #54
> [image:
> 4766-the-test-png]
>
>
>
> Regarding Alan glow tube test...
>
>
> THUNDER ENERGIES,   a company that uses
> DR. RUGGERO SANTILLI'S TECH to detect nuclear weapons in sealed containers
> uses a variant of Alan Smith's experiment.
>
>
>
> http://www.thunder-energies.co…11-articles/19-article-10
> 
>
>
>
> Quote
>
> *The hadronic reactors for the industrial synthesis of thermal neutrons
> from a hydrogen gas essentially include (TEC international patent pending):*
>
> *1. A metal vessel filled up with a hydrogen gas at a pressure depending
> on the desired neutron CPS;*
>
> *2. Electronic means for the remote control of the gap between a pair of
> tungsten electrodes located inside said metal vessel; and*
>
>
>
> *3. A specially designed power unit delivering high voltage and high
> current rapid DC discharges in between said electrodes.*
>
> *As shown in Figure 5, the DC arc ionizes the hydrogen atoms, thus
> creating a plasma of protons and electrons; the DC arc then aligns the
> proton and the electron along a magnetic field line with the appropriate
> spin and other couplings; an engineering means called triggers compress the
> electron inside the proton, by supplying the missing energy (which is about
> one 

[Vo]:The Purcell Effect

2018-04-01 Thread Bob Higgins
It sounds like that the pitchblende begins as a pretty good metal oxide
dielectric, and as the Purcell processing commences, some oxide is lost and
the sample becomes conductive.  Once the sample becomes conductive, the
electric field is shorted out across the sample.  This is also why it won't
work directly on metals - they conduct and short out the high electric
field.

On Sat, Mar 31, 2018 at 9:46 AM, Eric Walker  wrote:

> Thank you, Jones.  That's an interesting account.  It's always frustrating
> when replications are attempted only half-heartedly and without attention
> to detail or followup.  Have you considered writing up a protocol for the
> pitchblend experiment?
>
> Eric
>
>
> On Fri, Mar 30, 2018 at 8:59 PM, JonesBeene  wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> *From: *Eric Walker 
>>
>>
>>
>> I'm curious whether any of those replications have been outside of the
>> LENR field.
>>
>>
>>
>> Eric
>>
>>
>>
>> Several years ago, not long after the P announcement - this was a hot
>> topic on various forums. I participated in one replication attempt, since
>> at the time I had a working Tesla coil (Ouidin coil)  setup which was an
>> ideal vehicle to demonstrate the effect as it is more of a bipolar
>> resonator giving a large swing in alternating HV potential across a sample.
>>
>>
>>
>> We were able to show two orders of magnitude increase in the rate at
>> which pitchblende decayed … but that rate gain attenuated after several
>> days. This generated some interest at Cal (Berkeley).
>>
>>
>>
>> The PhDs who ostensibly tried a replication experiment of the Barker
>> patent (for unknown reasons)  proceeded with a setup which was completely
>> inadequate and (as expected) showed a null result. This null result
>> squelched any further interest in our funders.
>>
>>
>>
>> Sadly the geniuses at Cal missed two  important details – which are that
>> the effect works best (or only) on minerals (especially oxides of U and Th)
>> and almost never works on a pure metal isotope like Californium IIRC  and
>> second that the electric field must be arranged to have an extreme
>> variation - such that the sample sees alternating voltage polarity over its
>> surface and not a purely static field. As I recall, the details are
>> explained in the patent. Researchers often hate to work with minerals since
>> there is so much variability in composition... but still…
>>
>>
>>
>> An effect which is stated not to work with metals is doomed from the
>> start - if you use a metal. Anyway – everyone seemed to move to LENR after
>> this and it was mostly forgotten.
>>
>>
>>
>> The main reason that even a large increase in the decay rate of a mineral
>> like pitchblende cannot be easily commercialized is that even at a factor
>> of 100 improvement, the half-life may drop from several billion years to
>> several tens of million years, but still far from breakeven, considering
>> the power put into the HV input. Even so, it is probably something that
>> should have been continued.
>>
>>
>>
>> I see the assignee is Altran Corporation which may still have an interest
>> but it may not be the well-known Altran.
>>
>>
>>
>> Jones
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>


Re: [Vo]:1/f squared gamma distribution from Rossi-like

2018-03-10 Thread Bob Higgins
Neutral particle flux probably won't create substantial electromagnetic
noise and certainly no gamma.  Best case is that it would occasionally
knock off some electrons that would excite the characteristic x-ray
emission of their host atom.  They will excite acoustic noise that would
quickly be converted to heat.

On Sat, Mar 10, 2018 at 4:45 PM, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote:

> According to Holmlid, there is a high flux of neutral atomic fragments
> that receive a ton of kinetic energy from the primary reaction(nucleon
> particle decay). These fragments would dissipate their kinetic energy
> through particle collision cascades. That particle collision cascade
> would produce the pink noise.
>
> On Sat, Mar 10, 2018 at 6:33 PM, Bob Higgins <rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Keep in mind that as large massive charged particles (200x that of an
>> electron), muons would not penetrate materials very well.  For a given
>> energy, they are moving much slower than electrons.  Also, because they are
>> so heavy, they will stop slowly, and hence, not create much bremsstrahlung
>> radiation.
>>
>> On Sat, Mar 10, 2018 at 1:11 PM, JonesBeene <jone...@pacbell.net> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> BTW - Wouldn’t it be a hoot if muons showed up on a particular detector
>>> as 1/f^2 noise  ??
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Nigel,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Since you noticed the fit initially, were you looking for it based on
>>> phenomena from another field ?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I see from Alan’s posting that the context is no mystery – except to
>>> someone who was not paying attention to every detail of an excellent
>>> presentation 
>>>
>>> However, I think Nigel is looking for deeper significance. Universal
>>> theories of pink noise are incomplete. According to Wiki,  the Tweedie
>>> hypothesis has been proposed to explain the genesis of pink noise on the
>>> basis of a mathematical convergence theorem related to statistical analysis
>>> in many systems, yet … this signal  is not pink noise per se. In general
>>> the spectrum of pink noise is 1/f  for what are said to be
>>> one-dimensional signals.
>>>
>>> Perhaps two-dimensional signals have a weaker power spectrum which is
>>> the reciprocal of f^2 ? At any rate, pink noise would be an obvious place
>>> to start a search for statistical significance.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>


Re: [Vo]:1/f squared gamma distribution from Rossi-like

2018-03-10 Thread Bob Higgins
Keep in mind that as large massive charged particles (200x that of an
electron), muons would not penetrate materials very well.  For a given
energy, they are moving much slower than electrons.  Also, because they are
so heavy, they will stop slowly, and hence, not create much bremsstrahlung
radiation.

On Sat, Mar 10, 2018 at 1:11 PM, JonesBeene  wrote:

>
>
> BTW - Wouldn’t it be a hoot if muons showed up on a particular detector as
> 1/f^2 noise  ??
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Nigel,
>
>
>
> Since you noticed the fit initially, were you looking for it based on
> phenomena from another field ?
>
>
>
> I see from Alan’s posting that the context is no mystery – except to
> someone who was not paying attention to every detail of an excellent
> presentation 
>
> However, I think Nigel is looking for deeper significance. Universal
> theories of pink noise are incomplete. According to Wiki,  the Tweedie
> hypothesis has been proposed to explain the genesis of pink noise on the
> basis of a mathematical convergence theorem related to statistical analysis
> in many systems, yet … this signal  is not pink noise per se. In general
> the spectrum of pink noise is 1/f  for what are said to be
> one-dimensional signals.
>
> Perhaps two-dimensional signals have a weaker power spectrum which is the
> reciprocal of f^2 ? At any rate, pink noise would be an obvious place to
> start a search for statistical significance.
>
>
>
>
>


Re: [Vo]:1/f squared gamma distribution from Rossi-like

2018-03-10 Thread Bob Higgins
In the calibrated trace, which you may not be seeing, it is not 1/f^2
exactly.  Also, there will be absorption and scattering in going through
the reactor that will affect the shape of the curve.

On Sat, Mar 10, 2018 at 9:28 AM, JonesBeene  wrote:

> OK – but the context of what is being graphed  is not clear ---
>
>
>
> Is Trace 7 real or calculated? Maybe Trace 7 has been manipulated to show
> a desired fit.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From: *Nigel Dyer 
>
> It is like both like a Maxwellian distribution and Bremstrahlung, but
> neither of these give a 1/f^2 distribtion. If you overlay a 1/f^2 line over
> the red dots the fit is perfect, indeed it is so good that it almost looks
> as if that is how it was generated.
>
> JonesBeene wrote:
>
>
>
> Looks quasi-Maxwellian to me.
>
>
>
> Where is the inverse peak?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From: *Nigel Dyer 
>
>
>
> I have been looking at the graph titled
>
> "After the MASSIVE broad band 'turn on' pulse, the excess heat mode is
>
> between 0 and 100KeV"
>
>  at
>
> http://www.quantumheat.org/index.php/en/home/mfmp-blog/
> 519-the-cookbook-is-in-the-signal
>
> which shows the steady state gamma radiation from the Parkhomov-like
>
> experiment, together with a plot of the gamma radiation that is seen
>
> right at the start.
>
> It appears that the initial gamma radiation obeys a perfect inverse
>
> frequency squared law.  I feel that this must be telling us something
>
> about the underlying physics, but it is not clear what.  I cannot find
>
> any other examples of inverse frequency squared emission of radiation.
>
> Any ideas?
>
> Nigel
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>


Re: [Vo]:1/f squared gamma distribution from Rossi-like

2018-03-10 Thread Bob Higgins
It has the characteristics of bremsstrahlung radiation, likely from
stopping of beta emission within the reactor.

On Sat, Mar 10, 2018 at 8:24 AM, Nigel Dyer  wrote:

> I have been looking at the graph titled
> "After the MASSIVE broad band 'turn on' pulse, the excess heat mode is
> between 0 and 100KeV"
>  at
> http://www.quantumheat.org/index.php/en/home/mfmp-blog/519-
> the-cookbook-is-in-the-signal
> which shows the steady state gamma radiation from the Parkhomov-like
> experiment, together with a plot of the gamma radiation that is seen right
> at the start.
> It appears that the initial gamma radiation obeys a perfect inverse
> frequency squared law.  I feel that this must be telling us something about
> the underlying physics, but it is not clear what.  I cannot find any other
> examples of inverse frequency squared emission of radiation.
> Any ideas?
> Nigel
>
>
>


Re: [Vo]:Amazing and overlooked: the big picture of Grid Energy in the USA

2018-03-02 Thread Bob Higgins
It seems to me that another factor in the decline has been the decline in
manufacturing in the USA.  I know that when the Fukushima disaster struck,
the net reduction in available power in Japan caused significant problems
in manufacturing - hinting that manufacturing was a large consumer of the
grid power.  It was easier to see that effect when Fukishima was suddenly
shut down, but in the USA the manufacturing has been slowly and
consistently trickling to the far east for many years, gradually reducing
the electrical demand.

On Fri, Mar 2, 2018 at 6:01 PM, Andrew Meulenberg 
wrote:

> Has anyone looked at the impact of fracking on the data? Heating is a
> major energy sink and the difference in gas vs electric heating costs (even
> with heat pumps) could be a major driver in new builds.
>
> Andrew
> _ _ _ _ _
>
> On Fri, Mar 2, 2018 at 6:31 PM, Jed Rothwell 
> wrote:
>
>> JonesBeene  wrote:
>>
>> Not to mention the electric car. Tesla alone “should have” increased the
>>> demand for electrical power. This has not happened.
>>>
>>
>> I have not looked at the numbers, but I kind of doubt that Tesla alone
>> could have a measurable effect. Perhaps Tesla + Leaf + plug-in hybrids
>> could. Tesla has sold 250,000 cars I think. That sounds like a lot but
>> electric cars do not consume much electricity. About as much as a large air
>> conditioner, I think. 250,000 air conditioners more or less would not have
>> a measurable impact on U.S. consumption.
>>
>> From what I have seen, the major factors in reduced consumption are, from
>> big to small:
>>
>> Increased efficiency, especially in things like lighting (illumination),
>> HVAC equipment, refrigerators, and Energy Star compliant equipment. (The
>> Energy Star program is completely voluntary -- it just gives manufacturers
>> bragging rights with a sticker they put on equipment. But it is highly
>> popular with the public and it has had a large impact, which I suppose is
>> why the Trump administration want to kill it.)
>>
>> Large scale private cogeneration with natural gas, especially in large
>> buildings, campuses factories and so no. This is more common in Japan, I
>> think, but it is catching on in the U.S.
>>
>> "Distributed" solar, a.k.a. small scale solar photovoltaic. That is,
>> small scale PV solar, on roofs, for example. Large scale solar is done by
>> power companies so it does not reduce grid power consumption. It resembles
>> wind turbine power generated by power companies. Small scale solar is
>> having a big impact in Hawaii. The power companies are in bad shape because
>> of it. But it is not having an impact elsewhere as far as I know. The Trump
>> administration and the power companies are determined to keep it from
>> having an impact, for example, by charging customers who have their own
>> solar exorbitant amounts for getting any grid power at all to supplement it.
>>
>> I may have that wrong. That was the situation a few years ago. The EIA is
>> the place to go to get information on things like this. See:
>>
>> https://www.eia.gov/
>>
>> Distributed solar began to show up in the stats, just above the noise
>> level, in 2015:
>>
>> https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=23972
>>
>> Here is net generation of electricity from all sources, distributed and
>> grid:
>>
>> https://www.eia.gov/electricity/data/browser/
>>
>> You can play around with this graph in many ways to see what is
>> happening. Change it to years to smooth out seasonal fluctuations. You can
>> see solar (bottom teal line) *just beginning* to leave the noise level
>> in 2014. In 2017 4Q small scale solar photovoltaic it is 1,476 thousand
>> megawatt hours. Total generation was 345,939, so that's 0.4%.
>>
>> In the right-hand box, select "Net generation by energy source: electric
>> utilities." You do not see a dramatic reduction. Seasonal variation makes
>> it hard to spot. Try the Annual version, "Index to start as value." That
>> does show a distinct decline:
>>
>> https://www.eia.gov/electricity/data/browser/#/topic/0?agg=
>> 2,0,1=vvg=g=8=ELEC.GEN.ALL-US-1.A~
>> ELEC.GEN.COW-US-1.A~ELEC.GEN.NG-US-1.A~ELEC.GEN.NUC-US-1.A~
>> ELEC.GEN.HYC-US-1.A=ELEC.GEN.ALL-US-1.
>> A~ELEC.GEN.COW-US-1.A~ELEC.GEN.NG-US-1.A~ELEC.GEN.NUC-US-
>> 1.A~ELEC.GEN.HYC-US-1.A=ELEC.GEN.ALL-US-1.A=A&
>> chartindexed=2=linechart=pin=s=0=0=
>>
>> ("United States: all fuels (utility-scale)" blue line goes below -250,000)
>>
>> - Jed
>>
>>
>


Re: [Vo]:Quantized inertia Ted talk removes need for dark matter and explains the EM drive

2018-02-05 Thread Bob Higgins
I have read McCulloch's book.  His proposition fails in causality.  Filters
do not form with a filled state, they have a finite impulse response that
he hadn't addressed when I asked him about it.

On Mon, Feb 5, 2018 at 2:25 AM, Russ  wrote:

> Here’s Mike McCulloch’s TedX talk last Thursday. It is remarkable work.
> https://youtu.be/ZsGZsgd-944
>
>
>
> Mike is what one might call as ‘armchair physics anti-matter’ as he
> annihilates the fiction of dark matter with straight forward math and real
> data, eliminating the dark matter fudge that has made a sticky mess of
> science for a long time.
>


[Vo]:Rossi dog & pony show with full audio

2017-12-02 Thread Bob Higgins
Hi Robin,  Can you supply a link?  The only thing I can find with ion
thrusters is that the magnetic field is used to prevent the ions from
striking the side walls.  I didn't find anything that suggests that a
magnetic field can turn high energy ion trajectories from an
omnidirectional source into unidirectional thrust.  Magnetic fields only
make the ion path curl.

BH

On Fri, Dec 1, 2017 at 6:32 PM,  wrote:

> In reply to  Bob Higgins's message of Fri, 1 Dec 2017 16:48:01 -0700:
> Hi,
> [snip]
> >I cannot comprehend a magnetic field configuration that would
> unidirectionally focus an omnidirectional emission of alpha particles.  If
> you had such a thing it would be useful for making radioisotope alpha
> emitter batteries.
>
> It's a funnel shaped magnetic field. Look up the latest advances in ion
> propulsion.
> Regards,
>
>
> Robin van Spaandonk
>
> local asymmetry = temporary success
>
>


[Vo]:Rossi dog & pony show with full audio

2017-12-01 Thread Bob Higgins
Unfortunately Bob, some formatting error occurred in your email and I could
not read the whole of the first paragraph.

What you say about the plasma consisting of "Li ions, microscopic Li
droplets, microscopic Al droplets and Al ions" is possible, though the Li
and Al "droplets" are unlikely.  Any Li droplets would certainly evaporate
in the plasma, and any Al droplets would likely fall out of the plasma but
is possible some remain.  Rossi never claimed a "neutral" plasma that I
remember (I could be wrong).  He claimed approximately equal positive ion
and electron currents.  If the tube were a high vacuum electron tube, there
would only be electron carriers of the current.  In such a case, the mean
free path would be long and characteristic x-rays would be emitted from the
Ni electrode.  Since there are approximately equal positive ion carriers as
electrons (if we believe Rossi's claim), the mean free path will be short
(due to electron impact causing the positive ions), and the electron energy
at the anode will be small and produce no x-rays.

I cannot comprehend a magnetic field configuration that would
unidirectionally focus an omnidirectional emission of alpha particles.  If
you had such a thing it would be useful for making radioisotope alpha
emitter batteries.

I saw no evidence of sufficient apparatus to generate a quadrapole magnetic
field in Rossi's reactor.  I also doubt that he has that competence.

BH

On Fri, Dec 1, 2017 at 3:40 PM, bobcook39...@hotmail.com <
bobcook39...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> Higgins—Regarding your comments:
>
>
>
> The spectrometer Rossi  is said to have  used, if connected via fiber
> optics, would be limited in its effective range of wavelength monitoring
> from 200 nm to about 2200 nm.  The peak of black body radiation
>
> at 2300 C is in this range,  However, the peak as a function of radiance
> is fairly flat in this range.  The peak wavelengths that Rossi’s demo
> displayed were not associated with the black body radiation  temperature of
>
>
>
> I would guess that Rossi does not want spectrum data publicized, since it
> would tell too much about the mechanisms at work.
>
>
>
> The conducting medium within the plasma may be made up of Li ions,
> microscopic Li droplets, microscopic Al droplets and Al ions.  The H is
> either absorbed by the Ni or remains as a H2 molecule.  This assumption of
> the composition of gas is what I have called a “dusty” plasma expecting
> that the material is not  strictly an ionic substance.  I have never heard
> of neutral plasmas,  which neutrality Rossi has indicated is characteristic
> of his QX reactor.
>
>
>
> If the LENR produces alphas and results from a magnetic field with its
> directionality, the alpha emission may
>
> also display a related directionality.
>
>
>
> Finally the signal driving the reactor may be a quadrupole magnetic field
> to produce nuclear spin states that resonate with lattice electron  spin
> states. Such a driver may require significant energy to achieve the proper
> resonances with enough energy to change the nuclear energy states and allow
> nuclear transmutation.  To be useful as a heat source the change of
> potential energy and increase of the lattice energy or kinetic energy of
> emitted alphas would  have to be substantially greater than the energy
> needed to create the signal driving the reactor.
>
>
>
>  Bob Cook
>
>
>
>
>
> Sent from Mail <https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> for
> Windows 10
>
>
> --
> *From:* Bob Higgins <rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com>
> *Sent:* Friday, December 1, 2017 7:08:35 AM
> *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com
> *Subject:* [Vo]:Rossi dog & pony show with full audio
>
> As I understand it, Rossi is said to have recorded the spectrum using
> something like an Ocean Optics fiber spectrometer (
> https://oceanoptics.com/product/ocean-fx/).  A typical gas discharge
> spectrum will be a mix of blackbody for the plasma and lines from the key
> atomic and ionic species.  This spectrometer is capable of recording the
> full spectrum as a function of time so as to show the different stages of
> plasma formation, discharge, and turn-OFF.  It is highly likely that the
> spectrum will change significantly in each of these phases.  The stronger
> the lines are, the more likely that the gas is low pressure.  Stronger
> blackbody plasma discharge is characteristic of higher gas pressure.  The
> plasma will shut off quickly when electrical discharge is stopped.  There
> can be fluorescence during the discharge and afterglow (phosphorescence) in
> the system after discharge, depending upon the impurities in the glass tube
> (which could be implanted during discharge).  After

[Vo]:Rossi dog & pony show with full audio

2017-12-01 Thread Bob Higgins
As I understand it, Rossi is said to have recorded the spectrum using
something like an Ocean Optics fiber spectrometer (
https://oceanoptics.com/product/ocean-fx/).  A typical gas discharge
spectrum will be a mix of blackbody for the plasma and lines from the key
atomic and ionic species.  This spectrometer is capable of recording the
full spectrum as a function of time so as to show the different stages of
plasma formation, discharge, and turn-OFF.  It is highly likely that the
spectrum will change significantly in each of these phases.  The stronger
the lines are, the more likely that the gas is low pressure.  Stronger
blackbody plasma discharge is characteristic of higher gas pressure.  The
plasma will shut off quickly when electrical discharge is stopped.  There
can be fluorescence during the discharge and afterglow (phosphorescence) in
the system after discharge, depending upon the impurities in the glass tube
(which could be implanted during discharge).  Afterglow does not per se
indicate any LENR reaction.

Since alphas would have been emitted omnidirectionally, it would not
produce a DC current through the tube of any significance.  The axial
geometry of such a tube would mean that the side walls would get most of
any alphas that might be generated.

There is no evidence that this is a dusty plasma reactor.  Whenever the
tube cools off, the Li vapor would condense on the side walls taking any
"dust" with it.  In a dusty plasma reactor it takes a great deal of effort
to keep the dust in the plasma.  Suhas used ultrasound.  Egely uses an
acoustically resonant reactor body.  In the descriptions I have heard, I
see no evidence that Rossi's QX is based on dusty plasma technology.
Instead, it appears to be only a Li + H2 plasma.  It is possible that some
Ni could be evaporated from the electrodes, but I believe it would condense
quickly on the side walls of the tube near the electrodes - I don't believe
it would stay in plasma.  These areas of condensed Ni on the side walls
could be LENR active though.

On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 10:09 PM, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Mats Lewan is said to have seen the QX produce deep blue color when
> running at 100%. Even at 30%, the QX produces light at between 400 to 500
> nm that I saw recorded with my own eyes recorded on the spectrograph as
> seen in the video. I don't beleive the info on light production that is
> coming from Rossi. That info might be self serving. Rossi might be  seeing
> what he wants to see. Rossi says that the light produced was measured at
> 1100nm. This is infrared light and is not even visible. How can Rossi get a
> valid blackbody heat reading when the QX is running at 30% power level?
> Those people at the Demo should have reacted to this discontinuity in logic
> during the demo in real time.
>
> On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 11:08 PM, bobcook39...@hotmail.com <
> bobcook39...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Higgins—
>>
>>
>>
>> I agree with your comment about a high voltage (short) at the beginning
>> of the reaction in the QX reactor.  It is consistent with the flash of
>> light which can be seen at the end of the reactor upon the initial power
>> application.
>>
>>
>>
>> Your assessment does not address the source of energy during the off
>> phases of the control circuit.  I would argue that the reaction producing
>> heat is occurring in the Ni electrode with the Li acting as a good
>> convective heat transfer agent from the electrode to the outer
>> circumference  of the reactor where the water cooling occurs.
>>
>>
>>
>> The electric current is generated by the net positive charge  that
>> results from the reaction that produces energetic alphas that cross the
>> annular space where the dusty plasma exists and charge the outer surface of
>> the reactor.
>>
>>
>>
>> I disagree with Axil that the suncell hydrino reaction is like the QX
>> reaction.  The spectra of the two reactions are not reported to be alike.
>>
>>
>>
>> Bob Cook
>>
>> .
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> *From:* Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com>
>> *Sent:* Thursday, November 30, 2017 10:50:23 AM
>> *To:* vortex-l
>> *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:Rossi dog & pony show with full audio
>>
>> The QX is a downsized version of the SunCell with the plasma ball reduced
>> to the size of a speck of dust. You can understand what is happening inside
>> the QX by looking at what is happening inside the SunCell. The metal used
>> in the QX is aluminum whereas the metal used to support the plasma inside
>> the SunCell is silver.Lithium is not a reactant and remains in the vapor
>> form

[Vo]:Rossi dog & pony show with full audio

2017-11-30 Thread Bob Higgins
In the experiments I am aware of, waveforms were only tried as applied to
the heater coils (or in my case to a magnetic field coil).  There was no
evidence of enhanced XH.  This could be because the waveform was not well
"coupled" to the active medium.  These were heat driven Parkhomov-like
experiments.  In the case of others that have seen benefit from such waves,
the stimulus was applied more directly to the reaction medium -
electrolysis or to the hydrogenated wires.   I believe there could be
benefit in such stimuli, but it would have to be appropriately coupled to
the reaction.

In a conversation I was having with MFMP folks, I had this to say about
what I thought was described for the QX reactor and power supply:


*Since it has been suggested/said that Li is present inside the QX, during
a discharge it will be in gas phase; and when it is turned OFF, it will
condense on the inside of the tube and conduct across the electrodes.
Then, upon re-start, the tube will be shorted with this condensed Li metal
path and a high current will be needed to heat the Li to boiling.  Once the
Li path evaporates, the tube will have to be run in gas discharge mode.  So
initially the tube is a short and needs a high current, low voltage to
begin, and then it has to switch into gas discharge mode which is low
current high voltage.  Also, in the gas discharge mode, the supply will
have to be ballasted as a current source.  This is why the supply is
complex, the waveform is complex, and why it is also difficult to
characterize what energy has been supplied over time to the tube.  There is
the claim that there is balanced electron/ion flow.  That would be the H+ &
Li+ positive ions and e- negative electrons conducting bodies.*

* In a plasma tube, the plasma itself can be at 2700K while the glass
itself can be kept cool with water cooling.  The heat is transferred by the
plasma atoms striking the glass, and there will be a cooler gas buffer zone
around the inside of the glass where it is too cool to be in plasma state -
insulating the core plasma discharge.  The higher the gas pressure, the
more power that must be added to the plasma to compensate for the cooling
of the glass tube on the plasma.  This tells me that the gas pressure
inside the QX is probably pretty low, probably under 50 torr, and maybe
more like 10 torr.  The problem you would have is keeping the Li from
condensing on the glass tube in that cool zone and shorting out the plasma
discharge.  It may take care of itself - as the lithium condenses on the
glass, the plasma will go to it instead of the electrodes causing the Li to
re-boil (sort of like an arc discharging to a piece of metal wire brought
into the gap between a spark discharge).*

* Rossi has not demonstrated that his tube produces XE to any of us.  We
basically have to take the unreliable, untrustworthy word of a technically
incompetent scoundrel that he is producing any XE - and on a waveform that
would be very difficult to characterize by someone that is technically
sound.*

On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 10:31 AM, JonesBeene <jone...@pacbell.net> wrote:

> Bob
>
>
>
> Have you (or MFMP) experimented with any variation of the Dardik superwave?
>
>
>
> I think it is more than coincidence that Rossi, Brillouin, Kimmel,
> Energetics etc, etc have employed interfering waveforms as the input power.
>
>
>
> Even if Rossi’s recent effort was a null result, it is true that his PS
> seems unusually lossy.
>
>
>
> Sadly, that is the most hopeful thing that anyone can honestly say about
> it….
>
>
>
>
>
> *From: *Bob Higgins <rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com>
>
>
>
>- the demo served no net purpose - except possibly to those there that
>were granted greater access to the data.  You and I should take it as a
>presumed null experiment since there was inadequate data shared to show any
>XE.
>
>
>
> JonesBeene wrote:
>
>
>
>
>- The most important Euro Patent from Dardik, El-Boher et al entitled
>"Pulsed low energy nuclear reaction power generators" EP 1656678 B1 with a
>grant date of 2004. This is also known as the "superwave" patent. It is
>similar and precedes the Brillouin IP - and will also rain on the Godes
>parade, if it turns out that structured waveforms are the key to success.
>
>
>
>
>


[Vo]:Rossi dog & pony show with full audio

2017-11-30 Thread Bob Higgins
To most of us here, the issue of patent infringement unimportant.
Infringement would only become an issue once the device was going to
product, and it would only go to product if it was usefully producing XE.
The real issue is that so little was demonstrated in this meeting that what
Rossi has could be anything from nothing (a funky looking resistor) to
anything you wish to imagine.  So, the demo served no net purpose - except
possibly to those there that were granted greater access to the data.  You
and I should take it as a presumed null experiment since there was
inadequate data shared to show any XE.

On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 8:33 AM, JonesBeene  wrote:

>
>
> “We may agree that the demo is crazy but is it crazy enough to have a
> chance of being correct ?”
>
>
>
> Ha - ‘Bohring’ as it may sound, that may be a decent summation of the
> current situation, but so is the observation that at least 60 watts
> electrical is going in from the wall and only 50 watts thermal is coming
> out, so there is no gain at all.
>
>
>
> It really doesn’t matter that the loss is in the power supply ! This
> particular kind of loss is unavoidable and must be included in the calcs.
>
>
>
> The only power measurement which is relevant is at the wall plug - since
> it is abundantly clear that at least two interfering frequencies are being
> used to produce a waveform, which is necessary and lossy. Rossi was hiding
> the waveform issue as far back as 5 years ago, and we know it is relevant.
> The Q-pulse which is part of Brillouin's IP is similar – very similar - but
> the original idea comes from Dardik and the Israeli company ENERGETICs,
> both now out of the picture.
>
>
>
> The most important Euro Patent from Dardik, El-Boher et al entitled
> "Pulsed low energy nuclear reaction power generators" EP 1656678 B1 with a
> grant date of 2004. This is also known as the "superwave" patent. It is
> similar and precedes the Brillouin IP - and will also rain on the Godes
> parade, if it turns out that structured waveforms are the key to success.
>
>
>
> Two relevant remaining questions are: can these structured waveforms be
> produced with less loss by using a dedicated power supply, and why does
> this demo of Rossi not infringe on the Dardik IP? Or on Brillouin’s similar
> IP for the Q-pulse?
>
>
>
> Dardik’s successors (including Mckubre who is on one of the old patent
> apps) along with Violante have already demonstrated small thermal gain with
> superwaves as far back as 2008. They are probably doing this in Texas, now
> as we speak and they are probably watching Rossi to see if he has made a
> breakthrough but he has not.
>
>
>
> No one issure who currently holds the basic superwave patent (since the
> demise of Energetics LLC) but the USPTO fees are being maintained, so
> somebody realizes the value. Bottom line - as always in measuring input
> power, when unusual waveforms and interfering waves are used as input power
> the losses in the power supply MUST BE included as part of input.
>
>
>
> This is likely to be exactly what SRI told Brillouion and it is probably
> why Godes has gone silent. The losses in the power supply for making
> superwaves cannot be lessened enough to show large gain. It is likely that
> both Godes and Rossi could minimize the losses somewhat, and show COP in
> the range of 1.5 to 2 but even then, they would be infringing on EP 1656678
> B1.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>


[Vo]:dark matter update--Mills' hydrinoes are a good bet

2017-11-16 Thread Bob Higgins
While the Carnot efficiency certainly goes up with temperature, the
lifetime of the materials go down rapidly above about 500C.  Most
commercial high reliability systems operate at about 300C.  The Sterling
engine will have its share of material problems at 600C hot end, but is
going to be a non-starter with the hot end at 3000C.  Of course, he could
always insulate and take the heat out at 600C while taking the hit in
efficiency.

At 3000C, you will have substantial optical radiation - what happened to
Mills' plan to use PV conversion?  I always thought that the high energy PV
conversion he planned was much farther out than what he stated.

On Thu, Nov 16, 2017 at 12:51 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:

> Mills could also use the Kilopower solution. At 3000C, the effect must be
> way over 38%.
>
> On Thu, Nov 16, 2017 at 2:36 PM,  wrote:
>
>> In reply to  JonesBeene's message of Wed, 15 Nov 2017 18:15:22 -0800:
>> Hi,
>> [snip]
>> >Sooner or later, it is likely that Mills will have a defector – unless
>> of course he really has a breakthrough, but all indications are that this
>> is the latest in a long string of over-hyped failures.
>> >
>> [snip]
>> I don't think it's actually a failure, but rather shifted to the back
>> burner, in
>> favor of a design he thinks may be more likely to work. I suspect he went
>> looking for another conversion technology after I pointed out to him that
>> silver
>> vapor wouldn't condense to a liquid in a cavity with a uniform
>> temperature of
>> over 3000 degrees.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Robin van Spaandonk
>>
>> http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
>>
>>
>


Re: [Vo]:UDH, wimps, and dark matter

2017-11-09 Thread Bob Higgins
But why would such large particles be weakly interacting?

On Thu, Nov 9, 2017 at 8:14 AM, JonesBeene  wrote:

> Recently there have been a flurry of News articles about the lack of
> success in finding DM - but the favored candidate is still the WIMP
>
>
>
> AFAIK there is no satisfactory definition for WIMPS {after all they are
> dark and hard to observe} other than
>
>
>
>1. Weakly interacting to an extreme but massive
>2. Mass-energy of between 50 and 100 GeV fits into current theory
>3. Suspiciously close to the Higgs in mass and other features
>
>
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weakly_interacting_massive_particles
>
>
>
> Since they are weakly interacting to a spectacular degree, they could and
> probably do exist primarily in another dimension or as part of the Higgs
> field. One possible decay channel would be for the Higgs boson to decay to
> two WIMPs, each having a rest mass energy of half of the 126 GeV Higgs or
> about 63 GeV for the WIMP. A putative buckyball of UDH would have about the
> same mass equal to 60 atoms of UDH as in the carbon model.
>
>
>
> This is the candidate for WIMPS not yet considered – and in effect it is
> UDH in the form of a bound H60 buckyball – perhaps hidden in the Higgs
> field which itself is another dimension.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>


Re: [Vo]:Pondering epos and implications to the ether

2017-10-21 Thread Bob Higgins
That's one of the cool characteristics of the epo vacuum lattice that I am
proposing.  The smaller the scale, the more nonlinear the propagation
medium will be.  Thus, the smaller the wavelength of the photon, the more
nonlinear the medium and the smaller the soliton.

On Sat, Oct 21, 2017 at 10:44 AM, Eric Walker <eric.wal...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Sat, Oct 21, 2017 at 9:23 AM, Bob Higgins <rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> The photon cannot be stretched out too far, or an atom would be unable to
>> absorb its energy in an acceptable time.
>>
>
> I think this would be the case if the usual four dimensions were
> involved.  If a further dimension came into play, it is possible to imagine
> the surface of the expanding wave having a large (and possibly increasing)
> area, while the energy of the photon is transmitted at a specific,
> point-like location.
>
> We already see evidence of photons of different energies having different
> cross-sectional areas to their wavefronts.  High energy gamma rays interact
> with nucleons or even constituents of nucleons, but not atoms as a whole.
> Lower energy gamma rays interact with an entire nucleus but not individual
> nucleons.  Yet lower energy photons interact with and eject electrons from
> atomic orbitals but are transparent to nucleuses and nucleons.  Photons at
> even lower energies are transparent to atoms but interact with antennas and
> other macroscopic bodies.  In this sense there is an ever-expanding area of
> interaction as the photon energy decreases, and vice versa as the energy
> increases.
>
> The limiting case are perhaps the photons involved in extremely low
> frequency (ELF) radio waves [1].  Frequencies in the 3 Hz range correspond
> to wavelengths of 100,000 km.  In my mind that entails a very large area
> wavefront.  I doubt there is a point-like photon involved in this case.
>
> Eric
>
> [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extremely_low_frequency
>
>


[Vo]:Pondering epos and implications to the ether

2017-10-21 Thread Bob Higgins
Too bad that Don Hotson is now deceased.  It would be wonderful to get his
thinking on these questions.

While I described a vacuum lattice comprised of epos, each having an
elementary magnetic dipole and a freely polarize-able electric dipole at a
right angle, I didn't describe the effect of the matter (charges) in the
universe that create a cosmic magnetic strain and electric polarization of
this vacuum epo lattice.  This cosmic strain in the vacuum lattice may be
the zero-point energy.  It is the effect of this cosmic strain in the
vacuum epo lattice upon the epo alignments connecting the charges in real
space that causes gravitational and inertial mass.

Because of this, it is not clear to me that there would ever be a static
negative mass - much to the consternation of Woodward would like to have
such exotic matter to create warped space and wormholes.  Zero mass is the
domain of photons in real space or epos in negative energy space.

I am obviously stretching the boundaries of my understanding here of even
my own hypothesis.  The interesting thing is to presume the hypothesis is
true and expand upon it until predictions can be made that would be
falsifiable.

On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 11:22 PM, Eric Walker  wrote:

> I wrote:
>
> Assume with Hotson that there is a negative energy sea with negative
>> energy charges.  I wonder whether, contrary to Hotson's wishes, a positive
>> mass would nevertheless fall out of general relativity for such negative
>> energy charges. Even weirder would be a negative mass.  The weirdest of
>> all, though, would be *no* mass.
>>
>
> If E = mc^2 is to remain an invariant, it would seem that Hotson must
> either agree to negative mass:
>
> (-E) = (-m)c^2,
>
> or have another trick up his sleeve.
>
> Eric
>
>


[Vo]:Pondering epos and implications to the ether

2017-10-21 Thread Bob Higgins
The photon cannot be stretched out too far, or an atom would be unable to
absorb its energy in an acceptable time.  The problem with the other
speculations about soliton being a description of a photon is that the
soliton is only a solution in a NONLINEAR propagation medium - the solution
solution does not exist in linear space.  Previously, those speculating the
soliton solution could not identify what the required nonlinear propagation
medium would be.  With my proposal of the vacuum being a lattice of epos
having an elementary magnetic field dipole, the electric and magnetic field
of the photon would cause strain in the lattice whose stress-strain
relationship would be highly nonlinear at the small scale.

On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 10:57 PM, Eric Walker <eric.wal...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 12:51 PM, Bob Higgins <rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> Some have postulated that the photon is a soliton solution because such a
>> solution can be constrained in size and would not naturally spread out in
>> propagation.
>>
>
> I wonder about this assumption about photons not spreading out.  Perhaps
> the spreading out is very gradual and occurs over unfathomably large
> distances.  That might provide the basis for an alternative explanation to
> the Hubble constant and the redshift.
>
> Eric
>
>


Re: [Vo]:Pondering epos and implications to the ether

2017-10-21 Thread Bob Higgins
Hi Eric,

I think Hotson suggests that epos have 0 mass.  As I understand it, only
positive energy charges have mass.  According to Hotson, protons and
neutrons are comprised of electron and positron lattices - perhaps in a
stabilized positronium-like cluster.  Each of the electron and positron has
mass because every charge has mass.  Epos loose their mass by becoming a
quasi-neutral particle due to orbiting at the Planck scale.  However, due
to the counter-rotation, epos do appear to have an elementary magnetic
dipole, and also have a freely rotate-able electric dipole at right angle
to the magnetic axis.  I find it fascinating that the most elementary
construct of the ether would have magnetic and electric fields constrained
at right angles!

The epo's electric dipole does not count as a charge termination, hence no
mass.  Thus, in the vacuum, there are no monopolar charges and no magnetic
monopoles.  Even the electron in positive energy space (according to
Hotson) is not really a monopolar charge.  I think he thinks of the
electron as a dipolar charge with the positive portion pointing into
imaginary space.  Think of it as a ball floating on the surface of water.
The air-water boundary being the real/imaginary (or real/other-dimension)
boundary.  The negative charge points into the air and the positive charge
points into the water.  In the spinor solution of Dirac's equation for the
epo, as the electron and positron orbit, they get rotated across this
dimensional boundary and switch between being electrons and positrons in
synchronism.

On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 10:54 PM, Eric Walker <eric.wal...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 6:54 PM, Bob Higgins <rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> Hotson says that only positive energy charges have mass and the epos are
>> part of the negative energy sea.
>>
>
> Assume with Hotson that there is a negative energy sea with negative
> energy charges.  I wonder whether, contrary to Hotson's wishes, a positive
> mass would nevertheless fall out of general relativity for such negative
> energy charges. Even weirder would be a negative mass.  The weirdest of
> all, though, would be *no* mass.
>
> Eric
>
>


[Vo]:Pondering epos and implications to the ether

2017-10-18 Thread Bob Higgins
Hi Robin,  Thanks for taking the time to read it and comment.  I can reply
on a few ...

On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 1:27 PM,  wrote:

> In reply to  Bob Higgins's message of Wed, 18 Oct 2017 11:51:30 -0600:
> Hi,
> [snip]
> >   - Epos are a spinor solution, and apparently the electron and positron
> >   are found to be different “phases” of the same elementary particle –
> the
> >   electron.
> >
> >
> >   - During the spinor orbiting of the electron and positron, the phase of
> >   each particle changes – the electron becomes a positron and at the same
> >   time the positron becomes an electron.  The result of this “switching
> >   phase” is that the epo can present a DC dipole electric field.
>
> No phase change is needed for this. A positron and an electron in close
> proximity already comprise a dipole.
>
Well, an epo is an orbiting pair - orbiting around their barycenter.  So,
it only appears as a dipole because of discretized time.  According to
Hotson, the discretized time causes the electron and positron positions to
blink back and forth between being a particle and a wave.  In particle
space, it orbiting pair appears like a polarizable dipole.  He says that
when they are waves they can pass through each other which implies
counter-rotation.

>
> >The
> >   phase where this switch occurs can be changed causing the dipole to
> point
> >   in any direction for an individual epo.
> >
> >
> >   - Since the electron and positron are orbiting, the pair produces a
> >   magnetic dipole.
>
> I think this is wrong. To be orbiting one another, they must either both be
> moving clockwise, or both anti-clockwise, in both cases they create no net
> magnetic field at a distance, sine they have opposite electric charges.
>

I will have to study Hotson's argument for this, but he implies that they
are counter-rotating.  Thus, they will produce a dipole magnetic field.  It
is somewhat difficult to follow the argument, because part of it is the
spinor solution of the Dirac equation.

>
> >This is the fundamental magnetic dipole.  There is no
> >   such thing as a magnetic monopole.  The fundamental particle is the
> >   electron and its phase shifted companion the positron which form
> epos.  Epos
> >   can only produce a magnetic dipole.
> >
> >
> >   - Like magnetized spheres, the epos will naturally form a lattice,
> >   primarily oriented by the magnetic dipoles.
>
> I think a better analogy would be an salt crystal, e.g. NaCl. bound by
> electrical forces, not magnetic.
>
> >
> >
> >   - Epos have no inertial or gravitational mass.
>
> I don't think we can conclude this. Just as a test mass in the center of
> the
> Earth would experience net zero gravitational force from the planet, so
> any mass
> in the universe would experience net zero gravitational force from the
> uniform
> epo field.
>

Hotson says that only positive energy charges have mass and the epos are
part of the negative energy sea.


> [snip]
> Regards,
>
> Robin van Spaandonk
>
> http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
>
>


[Vo]:Pondering epos and implications to the ether

2017-10-18 Thread Bob Higgins
Greetings Vorts,



For some time I have been trying to understand some of the implications of
Hotson’s hypothesis for the epo as a solution to Dirac’s equation.  Here
are some fundamental observations which may prove to be too simplistic (but
they are fun to think about):

   - When a free electron and free positron approach each other, they do
   not annihilate, instead, they form a metastable positronium “atom” in which
   the electron and positron orbit their barycenter.  Positronium is
   essentially an excited state of this “atom”.


   - Almost immediately [absent special boundary conditions] the
   positronium atom gives up energy (2x511keV) to shrink to its lowest energy
   state.  In its naturally shrunken state, the orbit radius is at a
   minimum Planck scale – it can go now lower.  This is an “epo” as
   described by Hotson.


   - At such small scale, the epo is essentially a charge neutral particle.


   - Epos are a spinor solution, and apparently the electron and positron
   are found to be different “phases” of the same elementary particle – the
   electron.


   - During the spinor orbiting of the electron and positron, the phase of
   each particle changes – the electron becomes a positron and at the same
   time the positron becomes an electron.  The result of this “switching
   phase” is that the epo can present a DC dipole electric field.  The
   phase where this switch occurs can be changed causing the dipole to point
   in any direction for an individual epo.


   - Since the electron and positron are orbiting, the pair produces a
   magnetic dipole.  This is the fundamental magnetic dipole.  There is no
   such thing as a magnetic monopole.  The fundamental particle is the
   electron and its phase shifted companion the positron which form epos.  Epos
   can only produce a magnetic dipole.


   - Like magnetized spheres, the epos will naturally form a lattice,
   primarily oriented by the magnetic dipoles.


   - Epos have no inertial or gravitational mass.


   - The epo lattice IS the vacuum ether.

>From an electromagnetic standpoint, the electric field is propagated by
stimulated electric dipole orientation of the epos – the epos all line up
their head-tail electric fields to go along the electric field solution
lines of the stimulated electric field.

   - Since the epo lattice is held in place by the magnetic dipoles of the
   epos, the forced alignment of the epos’ electric dipole to the external
   electric field causes a strain in the epo lattice.


   -  Notice that within the most fundamental “atom” of the universe, the
   epo, the electric and magnetic fields are orthogonal.  This is why an
   applied electric field always creates a strain in the magnetic field
   lattice and an applied magnetic field always creates a strain in the
   electric field.


   - The electric/magnetic stress-strain relationship is nonlinear at the
   epo scale, and as an ensemble, the nonlinearity becomes less and less
   significant as the whole lattice is strained on a larger scale.

Did you ever wonder what a photon IS?  I have looked for good answers to
that question, but all of the answers were unsatisfyingly circular,  and
only resulted in a description of photon behavior.  How is a photon
constrained in “free space” to have a finite size?  Some have postulated
that the photon is a soliton solution because such a solution can be
constrained in size and would not naturally spread out in propagation.
However,
a soliton is a solution to propagation in a NONLINEAR medium.  Well, here
we have a ether lattice whose response at the small scale is fundamentally
nonlinear.  Thus, the epo ether would seem to support propagation of
solitons.



An interesting observation of this hypothetical ether is that it is
comprised of a mass-less lattice of electron-positron pairs, each pair in a
degenerate Planck scale orbit.  However, the free electron and free
positron each have mass.  The electron and positron in a positronium orbit
(higher energy) have mass.  What changes as the positronium collapses to
form an epo, that allows it to become totally mass-less?  Is the loss of
mass the result of the spinor orbit solution in the epo’s most degenerate
orbital?

Other ponder-ables:

   - How does zero-point energy fit into the concept of an epo lattice as
   the ether?


   - It is easy to see how EM waves propagate through this epo lattice as
   the ether, but how are gravitational waves propagated through such an ether?


   -  It is also easy to see how one can visualize pilot waves forming in
   such a lattice, obviating the need for the quantum mechanical wave-particle
   duality.


   - If the epos have no mass, what constrains EM propagation in an epo
   ether to the speed of light?


   - What experiment could falsify this hypothesis of an epo lattice ether?

I would really like to stimulate a chain of discussion on this topic.


[Vo]:Article: This Overlooked Theory Could Be The Missing Piece That Explains How The EM Drive Works

2017-10-15 Thread Bob Higgins
In case you haven't found it yet, you can go to the web site of one of the
authors (Paulo Castro) and download a .pdf copy of this paper:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/320330808_A_POSSIBLE_EXPLANATION_FOR_THE_EM_DRIVE_BASED_ON_A_PILOT_WAVE_THEORY

While the full article is on the site,  there is a blue button, "Download
full-text PDF".  If you press it, you get the article, not take to a
pay-wall.

Bob

On Sun, Oct 8, 2017 at 12:32 AM, Russ George  wrote:

> Alas once again the world of vulture science has placed this seemingly
> interesting paper behind a paywall. We need a grand inquisitor to take on
> the world of science again but this time to apply the screws to those in
> science who put knowledge behind paywalls. The world cannot afford nor
> should it tolerate this sort of perverse capitalism. Science trolls
> greedily guarding the bridges to knowledge need to be eliminated.
>
>
>
> *From:* Axil Axil [mailto:janap...@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Sunday, October 8, 2017 8:23 AM
> *To:* vortex-l
> *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:Article: This Overlooked Theory Could Be The Missing
> Piece That Explains How The EM Drive Works
>
>
>
> What the pilot wave theory applied to the EM drive does not explicitly say
> is that a coherent wave pattern acts like a large particle. The Em drive
> becomes a large particle. It goes to reason if the EM drive where made
> coherent then the EM drive would be very much more powerful because the
> coherent resonant pilot wave would coherently coupled with the EM drive
> making everything a single giant particle.  A superconductive EM drive
> would do that.
>
>
>
> On Sat, Oct 7, 2017 at 9:55 PM, Jack Cole  wrote:
>
> This Overlooked Theory Could Be The Missing Piece That Explains How The EM
> Drive Works
>
> http://flip.it/R11OHO
>
>
>


[Vo]:Article: This Overlooked Theory Could Be The Missing Piece That Explains How The EM Drive Works

2017-10-08 Thread Bob Higgins
Pilot wave theory posits that particle positions can be known and there is
no wave-particle duality.  Instead, a "pilot wave" guides the particles
through the slits and standing waves in the "medium" are what produces
apparent wave-like behavior of particle motion.  Pilot wave theory itself
does not hypothesize what the "medium" comprises that is able to propagate
the guiding wave.  I think Pilot Wave Theory fits perfectly with Hotson's
EPO ether.

Continued investigation of the EM-drive may be the crack in physics that
finally shows that conventional quantum mechanics is an arcane, obsolete,
and incomplete formulation of the physics of small matter.  Just because
quantum mechanics mostly works, doesn't mean it is a good formulation of
the problem.

On Sat, Oct 7, 2017 at 7:55 PM, Jack Cole  wrote:

> This Overlooked Theory Could Be The Missing Piece That Explains How The EM
> Drive Works
>
> http://flip.it/R11OHO
>


[Vo]:Info about the fuel me356 uses in his reactor.

2017-09-16 Thread Bob Higgins
th each other or some other vector property
> that has to be orthogonal ? Or could it be an artifact of stresses in the
> carbon tape.
>
> I wonder if he was also able to look at the composition of the spikes in
> the later picture. Its interesting he attached them in reply to Axil after
> Axil was talking about UDH but would such material show up in these images.
> On the other hand can Nickel crystals form sharp spikes like this? very
> curious.i would live to see their composition. At least if conductive I
> wonder if the affect the EM environment strongly especially in a glow
> discharge.
>
> Nick's images of marks on wood look intriguing to me too it's a good
> approach I think to look for analogues.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On 16 Sep 2017, at 04:50, Bob Higgins <rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> The photos of ME356's fuel are fascinating.  I don't know what to make of
> the fractal growth on the carbon sticky tape.  I would love to see an EDS
> of the fractal growth.  Ni crystals do tend to grow when there is
> sufficient heat and in the absence of oxygen, but the Ni crystals are
> normally spiky spears (as is seen in some of the photos).  I can't believe
> that the fractal growth is metallic hydrogen - just too far fetched Axil.
>
> I can speculate about what ME356 does to prepare his fuel.  Here are a few
> thoughts:
>
>- The fuel is Ni or Ni alloy wire wound into a coil shape that will
>fit into a reactor tube.
>
>
>- From what we have seen, it doesn't seem like ME356's reactor runs a
>current through this coil - it is possible, but it is risks short term
>burnout limiting the life of the reactor.  My guess is that it is just a
>coiled up wire fuel inside of a fused silica or ceramic tube that contains
>the fuel coil and H2 gas.
>
>
>- ME356 talks of pre-treating his fuel.  He says that the longer he
>pre-treats the fuel the more active it is in producing LENR.  I think the
>pre-treatment consists of putting the Ni coil inside a vacuum chamber, that
>has been evacuated to less than 1 micron.  The wire is heated and cooled
>until it stops outgassing.  Then the chamber is filled with about 10 torr
>of H2, the wire is heated, and the wire or an adjacent Ni electrode is
>driven with RF at one of the ISM band frequencies.  This will provide some
>sputter-like activation of the surface.
>
>
>- After the hot sputter processing, take the coil out and put it into
>the reactor tube and heat in H2 for LENR.
>
>
>
>


[Vo]:Info about the fuel me356 uses in his reactor.

2017-09-15 Thread Bob Higgins
The photos of ME356's fuel are fascinating.  I don't know what to make of
the fractal growth on the carbon sticky tape.  I would love to see an EDS
of the fractal growth.  Ni crystals do tend to grow when there is
sufficient heat and in the absence of oxygen, but the Ni crystals are
normally spiky spears (as is seen in some of the photos).  I can't believe
that the fractal growth is metallic hydrogen - just too far fetched Axil.

I can speculate about what ME356 does to prepare his fuel.  Here are a few
thoughts:

   - The fuel is Ni or Ni alloy wire wound into a coil shape that will fit
   into a reactor tube.


   - From what we have seen, it doesn't seem like ME356's reactor runs a
   current through this coil - it is possible, but it is risks short term
   burnout limiting the life of the reactor.  My guess is that it is just a
   coiled up wire fuel inside of a fused silica or ceramic tube that contains
   the fuel coil and H2 gas.


   - ME356 talks of pre-treating his fuel.  He says that the longer he
   pre-treats the fuel the more active it is in producing LENR.  I think the
   pre-treatment consists of putting the Ni coil inside a vacuum chamber, that
   has been evacuated to less than 1 micron.  The wire is heated and cooled
   until it stops outgassing.  Then the chamber is filled with about 10 torr
   of H2, the wire is heated, and the wire or an adjacent Ni electrode is
   driven with RF at one of the ISM band frequencies.  This will provide some
   sputter-like activation of the surface.


   - After the hot sputter processing, take the coil out and put it into
   the reactor tube and heat in H2 for LENR.


[Vo]:Magnetic experiment in progress

2017-09-12 Thread Bob Higgins
Note that the magnetic field of the sun is coupled to that of each of the
planets.  However, evanescent magnetic field intensity falls as the cube of
the distance from the center, so the inner planets are coupled a lot less
than the outer planets.  As I mentioned before, the magnetic field of the
sun can affect that of the Earth and hence protect the Earth more or less
from cosmic ray flux; and the cosmic ray flux nucleates lower atmosphere
droplets to form clouds.

Interestingly the magnetic field polarity of the sun goes through massive
reversal every 11 years.  This would seem to heat the crap out of Mercury.
Some cycles it would seem that the magnetic field of the sun would add to
that of the Earth and the next cycle detract from the Earth's field.
Certainly this magnetic field dither would cause heating to some extent in
the Earth and could provide a stimulus for the "mixing up" and
"re-formation" of the Earth in its own magnetic field reversal.

It is not clear though how the magnetic field reversal of the sun every 11
years plays into the 10,000x longer period for the Earth's field reversal.
If the sun's own complete field reversal every 11 years doesn't trip the
Earth's field reversal, it is hard to see how a much smaller CME event
would stimulate a reversal at the Earth.

On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 8:54 AM, JonesBeene  wrote:

>
>
> Mother Nature has positioned all of us within a gigantic solar/magnetic
> experiment – a work in progress
>
> https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2017/active-region-on-
> sun-continues-to-emit-solar-flares
>
>
>
> If there are recurring weather or earthquake anomalies today or tomorrow,
> even though Irma has tapered off, some of the blame could point to the sun.
> The next storm – Jose - is looking strangely erratic… But there is more.
> Much more.
>
>
>
> Is it time for… ta da … a Magnetic Pole Reversal?
>
>
>
> And can any of the recent weather anomalies also fit into a picture of
> magnetic instability in the core of earth, possibly locked into a long
> range positive feedback arrangement with the sun?
>
>
>
> Magnetic Pole Reversals happen every few hundred thousand years. Earth has
> settled into a pattern of a pole reversal about every 200,000 years for the
> last 100 cycles. However, it has been almost 4 times that long since the
> last reversal which was about 800,000 years ago.
>
>
>
> This phenomenon could happen soon, but I’m glad it did not happen on 911
> for a number of reasons.. We already tend to blow up every minor
> coincidence to biblical proportions, so to speak.
>
>
>
> Anyway - get ready to replace all of your compasses, fellow travelers.
>
>
>
> You heard it first on vortex, which is strangely appropriate to hurricane
> season, no?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>


[Vo]:Sunspots, hurricanes and dense hydrogen

2017-09-08 Thread Bob Higgins
What most people don't know also is that the cosmic ray flux affects the
weather.  Galactic cosmic rays are variable and depend in part on our solar
system's orbital position in the spiral arm.  Cosmic rays variably affect
the weather by penetration into the lower atmosphere, nucleating water
droplets, and hence forming clouds.  The amount of cosmogenic cloud
formation depends on the cosmic ray rate and average energy.

Solar activity varies the solar magnetic field which changes the Earth's
magnetic field, and hence the Earth's magnetic protection from cosmic
rays.  Of course, greater solar activity also affects the rate of solar
generated high energy particles which behave similarly to cosmic rays.

Increased cosmic ray/solar particle flux causes more clouds and causes a
net cooling on the Earth.  Increased solar magnetic fields cause increased
Earth's magnetic fields that shield from cosmic rays.  So, increased solar
magnetic fields means less clouds on Earth and higher temperatures on the
Earth.

As I understand it, the link between solar magnetic fields, solar particle
flux, cosmic ray flux, and clouds is not part of present climate models.

On Fri, Sep 8, 2017 at 10:16 AM, JonesBeene  wrote:

> Periodically, the cross connection between abnormal solar activity and
> hurricanes is mentioned in the ALT-SCI press.
>
>
>
> https://www.inverse.com/article/36183-solar-flare-hurricane-irma
>
>
>
> Of course this year is no exception as the strongest storm in a decade and
> the strongest solar flares in the past 11 year cycle are aligned in time.
>
>
>
> It is a complex interaction but there seems to be something beyond
> coincidence going on in this alignment. Often water temperature is said to
> play a role in hurricanes, but this year the Ocean water temperature in
> hurricane alley is normal
>
>
>
> Perhaps the sunspot itself is not the driving force for more intense
> storms on earth but instead, the sunspot feeds a greater tonnage of dense
> hydrogen into the solar wind, and that dense hydrogen becomes the driving
> mechanism for the extra power of the storm.
>
>
>


Re: [Vo]:Mizuno latest

2017-09-04 Thread Bob Higgins
Hi Russ - Yes, that may be true, but Mizuno did not talk about sputtering
during the final deposition.  Should we presume there was a bias and a
deuterium plasma?  I hate missing details.

On Mon, Sep 4, 2017 at 10:16 AM, Russ George <russ.geo...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Bob,
>
>
>
> One can sputter the daylight with Pd in a simple D2 plasma under very
> simple conditions!
>
>
>
> *From:* Bob Higgins [mailto:rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Monday, September 4, 2017 11:42 AM
> *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com
> *Subject:* [Vo]:Mizuno latest
>
>
>
> Jed,  can I make a request?  Acknowledging your fluency in Japanese and
> relationship with Mizuno ...
>
> In Mizuno's paper, he describes the deposition the preparation of the Ni
> and the Pd with a good deal of text, but in the final part of the
> preparation (page 8, figure 10) he describes heating the ceramic heater
> wrapped in Pd wire to 700-800°C for 10-20 hours to deposit Pd on the Ni
> surface.  This may be the most important part of the process, yet he only
> spent 1 small paragraph describing the deposition.
>
> The melting point of Pd is 1550°C and the boiling point of Pd is 2960°C.
> Clearly, at the specified temperature of the ceramic heater, the vapor
> pressure of the Pd is very, very low.  So, without plasma, it is hard to
> understand how any Pd is deposited at all.  Mizuno only describes D2 as
> being in the chamber - there is no Ar that is normally used in sputtering
> (energetic Ar ions are used in sputtering to have a better probability of
> knocking off atoms of the metal due to the high mass of Ar).  Mizuno
> doesn't describe a DC plasma condition that would have been used for
> striking a glow near the ceramic heater with Pd wire for deposition.
>
> *Can you ask Mizuno if he can provide an explanation of the mechanism of
> Pd deposition used in conjunction with the ceramic heater wound with the Pd
> wire?  Was it an evaporation process, sputtering, or ion plating
> technique?  Was a plasma active during the Pd deposition?  Was it a
> deuterium plasma?  Was there a DC voltage applied between the heated Pd
> wire and the cathode?*
>
> Also, Mizuno shows SEM photos of the Ni mesh cathode surface before and
> after the treatment.  The after photo shows micron scale bulbous growth
> that I surmise from his deposition method cannot be all Pd.  It appears
> that the surface morphology of the Ni has been vastly altered, and probably
> has only a small film thickness of Pd on top of that.  His Ni mesh cathode
> has a lot of area, and he only has a small amount of Pd wire on the ceramic
> heater.
>
> *Can you ask Mizuno what he believes is the thickness of Pd that he has
> deposited by his final deposition process?  I.E. in Figure 32, how thick is
> the Pd film on top of the Ni? *
>
>
>
> Regards - Bob Higgins
>


[Vo]: f13C or faux13C

2017-09-04 Thread Bob Higgins
As I understand it, there are two hydrino-like transitions that could
occur, perhaps on a 12C atom.  Suppose that the 12C is subject to catalytic
hydrino formation wherein one of its electron enters a (1/p) state.  Such
an electron would enter an orbital around the nucleus that is smaller than
the s orbital and would screen one of the protons from the remainder of the
electrons.  This would cause it chemical and spectral properties to appear
as 12B instead of 12C.  This would be a very unusual find because real 12B
decays with a half-life of 20ms and should not be seen in the experiment.
Finding a stable signature of 12B would be a likely indicator of formation
of the hydrino state of 12C.

Now consider that a hydrino hydride ion, described by Mills as H-(1/p)
could enter a hydrogen nucleus and bind so tightly as to become an
innermost orbital below the s orbital.  A similar thing would happen in
that this tightly bound negative charge would screen a proton as far as the
remainder of the 12C electrons are concerned - it would have a mass of 13,
but would chemically and spectrally appear as 13B, not 13C.  13B has the
same uniqueness in discovery as the 12B - because real 13B has a half-life
of only 17ms and hence should not be found in the experiment.  It would
only be determined to be 13C accidentally if there were no spectra taken -
I.E. in a high resolution mass spectrometer test only.  This aspect is
certainly not out of the question, as 13B would not be anticipated to be
found because real 13B would quickly decay most of the time to 13C anyway.
If they were to test for the x-ray spectra of B, perhaps the hydrino
hydride of 12C could be detected.

Note, however, that 13C is stable and is about 1% of natural C.  It is not
used for dating.  Interestingly, the natural variation of 13C is nearly
+/-1%.  Could the hydrino hydride of 12C cause a measurement uncertainty in
the isotopic ratio of 13C/12C?

I estimate that hydrino states would be as stable in atoms with multiple
electrons as they are with hydrogen having a single electron.  The reason
is that the additional electrons of, say a 12C, provide a possible means of
evanescent coupling to the innermost (hydrino) electron and provides some
opportunity to transfer energy without photon transfer and relieve the
hydrino state.

Bob

On Mon, Sep 4, 2017 at 9:44 AM, JonesBeene  wrote:

> Here is a detail which came up earlier – the embedded proton concept works
> best in the context of the Mills’ “hydrino hydride” where the proton and
> two very tight electrons combine into a stable ion which replaces carbon’s
> innermost orbital electron. The innermost orbital of carbon would need to
> have a binding strength which is resonant with dense hydrogen in order to
> do this so Rydberg values come into play.
>
>
>
> Holmlid, Mills, Miley, Mayer, Meulenberg and others who have written on
> the subject of dense hydrogen have different thinking on the details. They
> could all be partly correct with Mills being the most accurate for this
> detail (but he does not mention 13C).
>
>
>
> The innermost carbon electron is bound at slightly less than 490 eV which
> is exactly the 18th Rydberg multiple… yet it is not clear how significant
> that detail is in the context of coal formation.
>
>
>
> -
>
>
>
> In prior thread, the premise was suggested that there are two different
> species (allotropes) of carbon which are being called carbon-13. One of the
> two species is the normal isotope with 7 neutrons, but the second is
> carbon-12 with a deeply embedded proton of UDH (the ultra-dense hydrogen)
> of Holmlid.
>
>
>
> This result has happened with some types of carbon during the 100 million
> year formation process of decay from ancient vegetation under pressure in
> coal beds, especially anthracite and mineral graphite. This type of coal is
> often used to manufacture the kinds of graphite where physical anomalies
> have been witnessed.
>
>
>
> Here is another piece of evidence which points to a thermal anomaly with
> carbon which could be explained with this hypothesis. (Thanks to Can for
> the link)
>
> The Replication of an Experiment Which Produced Anomalous Excess Energy.pdf
> 
>
> More on those details later…
>
>
>
>
>
> 
>
>
>


[Vo]:Mizuno latest

2017-09-04 Thread Bob Higgins
Jed,  can I make a request?  Acknowledging your fluency in Japanese and
relationship with Mizuno ...

In Mizuno's paper, he describes the deposition the preparation of the Ni
and the Pd with a good deal of text, but in the final part of the
preparation (page 8, figure 10) he describes heating the ceramic heater
wrapped in Pd wire to 700-800°C for 10-20 hours to deposit Pd on the Ni
surface.  This may be the most important part of the process, yet he only
spent 1 small paragraph describing the deposition.

The melting point of Pd is 1550°C and the boiling point of Pd is 2960°C.
Clearly, at the specified temperature of the ceramic heater, the vapor
pressure of the Pd is very, very low.  So, without plasma, it is hard to
understand how any Pd is deposited at all.  Mizuno only describes D2 as
being in the chamber - there is no Ar that is normally used in sputtering
(energetic Ar ions are used in sputtering to have a better probability of
knocking off atoms of the metal due to the high mass of Ar).  Mizuno
doesn't describe a DC plasma condition that would have been used for
striking a glow near the ceramic heater with Pd wire for deposition.

*Can you ask Mizuno if he can provide an explanation of the mechanism of Pd
deposition used in conjunction with the ceramic heater wound with the Pd
wire?  Was it an evaporation process, sputtering, or ion plating
technique?  Was a plasma active during the Pd deposition?  Was it a
deuterium plasma?  Was there a DC voltage applied between the heated Pd
wire and the cathode?*

Also, Mizuno shows SEM photos of the Ni mesh cathode surface before and
after the treatment.  The after photo shows micron scale bulbous growth
that I surmise from his deposition method cannot be all Pd.  It appears
that the surface morphology of the Ni has been vastly altered, and probably
has only a small film thickness of Pd on top of that.  His Ni mesh cathode
has a lot of area, and he only has a small amount of Pd wire on the ceramic
heater.

*Can you ask Mizuno what he believes is the thickness of Pd that he has
deposited by his final deposition process?  I.E. in Figure 32, how thick is
the Pd film on top of the Ni? *

Regards - Bob Higgins


[Vo]:f13C or faux13C

2017-08-27 Thread Bob Higgins
Jones,

There seems to be a number of flaws in this hypothesis.  First of all, the
only way a shrunken neutral hydrogen can "hang around" in an atom of 12C is
if it has become in range of the strong force of the nucleus.  In that
case, it would become a part of the nucleus and would be ripped to pieces
in the process.  It is much more likely that it would be quickly scattered
out of the 12C atom.  If a hydrino hydride had entered the atom and became
a part of the lowest orbital in 12C, it would screen one of the positive
charges and would appear as 13B, which would really be unusual because the
half-life of real 13B is only 17ms.  The only way a hydrino hydride
entering a nucleus could appear as 13C is if it entered an atom of 12N.
However, 12N has a half-life of only 11 ms, so you wouldn't find any 12N
hanging around for a hydrino hydride to enter.

As I understand it, Holmlid's work proposes no UDH in an atomic form - only
in a cluster form.  So, he is completely out of this proposition to begin.

On Sun, Aug 27, 2017 at 4:35 PM, JonesBeene  wrote:

>
>
> Here is a premise which may be worth consideration, even if the evidence for 
> it is not yet certain and the details are fluid. After all, this is vortex – 
> not Fusion Technology… plus… the proposition is falsifiable, should it gather 
> any traction.
>
>
>
> The premise involves the isotope carbon-13 and its abundance/identity. 
> Standard physics says that 13C is 1.1% of all carbon. However, in fossils the 
> ratio can range from as high as 5% to almost neglible. This shouldn’t happen 
> with a true isotope. Likewise many plants either exclude it via fractionation 
> or else exploit it (as they have vastly different signatures). Anomalies of 
> 13C are also huge in meteorites –larger than other common elements such as 
> iron. This variability of isotope ratios is problematic but has been “kept in 
> the closet” so to speak - since one technique for dating of fossils depends 
> on the assumption of a steady ratio.
>
>
>
> The present premise - which attempts to explain the isotope anomalies and 
> other oddities of carbon (esp magnetic) is that some of the apparent 13C in 
> nature is not really an isotope at all - but instead is normal 12C plus UDH 
> tightly bound as a unit – to be explained. If even a few ppm were not 
> isotopic, then among other things, the economics of coal and coal cleaning 
> become favorable.
>
>
>
> The work of Leif Holmlid and others has suggested the possibility of a very 
> dense form of hydrogen labeled as UDH or ultradense hydrogen. The hydrogen 
> isomer could act more like a neutron in properties than atomic hydrogen and 
> has been called a “virtual neutron.” In a departure from Holmlid, Miley has 
> suggested that a version of this species is inverted and mobile as a single 
> neutron-like unit instead of as a cluster. Then… there is Mills who has a 
> charged version with an extra electron. All of these views can be merged.
>
>
>
> The lifetime of this species could be very long. The compact spatial 
> dimension would indicate that UDH could “nest” in the inner orbital of a few 
> host low Z atoms of the proper IP resonance. UDH- (aka hydrino hydride) when 
> bound as 13C would increase by only one part in 100,000 the dimensions of a 
> carbon atom, and would not drastically affect the redox chemistry of the 
> host. The host atoms would have a measured mass increase of 1 AMU.
>
>
>
> Thus a measureable mass difference (deficit) exists between this faux-13C and 
> true 13C to provide a way to validate or falsify this suggestion. 
> Falsifiability is most important if this is to gain traction.
>
>
>
> When hydrogen is densified catalytically into UDH – which would be expected 
> under the parameters of coal formation for instance… decaying vegetation 
> provides all the ingredients, even the iron oxide catalyst. A new type of 
> compressed molecular species becomes what is measured as 13C. Thus, we have a 
> natural process, aided by a catalyst (iron oxide)which would present a tight 
> molecule of supposed AMU 13 which would not be broken by normal ionization in 
> a mass spectrometer (although other electrons would ionize). The UDH- would 
> be bound at ~490 eV.
>
>
>
> It might be possible to harvest the "faux-13C” (f13C) from crushed coal using 
> magnetic (diamagnetic) separation of coal nano-powder. The f13C could have 
> very valuable properties due to the potential energy of the UDH.
>
>
>
> One aim of this – if you haven’t guessed it, is to find a both a additional 
> source of LENR energy and also a way to justify the cost of extreme 
> nano-cleaning of coal… rather the BS we hear from the coal industry about 
> “clean coal”.
>
>
>


[Vo]:Santilli "neutrons"

2017-07-17 Thread Bob Higgins
The trouble with these type of experiments is that it is extremely
difficult to prove that electronic measurement of neutrons is valid in the
presence of the "mini-EMP" arc pulses.  A much better test for neutrons
would be to use the BubbleTech (non-electronic) neutron detectors and show
bubbles being produced at a significant rate compared to control periods
with the same detectors.

On Mon, Jul 17, 2017 at 8:34 AM, Jones Beene  wrote:

> Of interest:
>
> A video which purports to show neutrons being created from arcing through
> hydrogen gas
>
> This seems to fit into the concept of dense hydrogen masquerading as a
> virtual neutron...
>
> https://www.globenewswire.com/Tracker?data=p5l_Ag1pSky4LmG9K
> pKRbX3ayWu0Cnp9SmLl7BlillCm_qJcvnonV1XYOS-S_NGOkH73UUat9mh
> 69JyoXUXvFk1rTLypqP_zKJl8zQwi3BohM6RimKFx8m8CPU97XW4RpbZ4Bg1
> oJVNzoQVA9aOnkkpGOoFNRB1A7SXNnr_lHP0=
>
>


[Vo]:"Type A nickel" ?

2017-06-20 Thread Bob Higgins
If you want Ni + Cu, just get some constantan thermocouple wire and cut it
up into pieces.  Then you may want to ball mill to make into powder.

On Tue, Jun 20, 2017 at 2:43 PM,  wrote:

> In reply to  AlanG's message of Mon, 19 Jun 2017 23:22:32 +:
> Hi Alan,
>
> You might also try with Cu instead of silver, if your budget extends that
> far.
> Since the creation of the powders takes some time, you could do both in
> parallel?
>
> >Nickel and Silver are mutually insoluble (or only with great difficulty)
> >as has been pointed out. Following Jones' original post, I'm preparing a
> >simple experiment to test "mechanical alloying". I will ball-mill ~2 um
> >powders of the two metals for several hundred hours, using 3/8" tungsten
> >carbide balls for media. SEM/EDS will be used to examine the resulting
> >mixture.
> >
> >If the results appear to be successful, a further test will be done by
> >exposing the amalgam to flowing hydrogen at various temperatures,
> >looking for radiation as a signature of nuclear activity. Advice and
> >suggestions for this test are welcome.
> >
> >AlanG
> >
> Regards,
>
> Robin van Spaandonk
>
> http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
>
>


[Vo]:"Type A nickel" ?

2017-06-20 Thread Bob Higgins
Well, Jones, I hate to keep bringing up that Holmlid and Mills are nearly
opposite apples and oranges.  Holmlid's technology involves creation of
high potential energy *multi-atom clusters* in the Rydberg state (electron
in a high energy state that is nearly ionized), and somehow (thermodynamic
improbability) catalyzing these large high energy clusters into a higher
energy compact form (UDD/UDH).  As you well know,
Vavra/Mills/Paillet-Muelenberg are proposing that *single atoms* are
shrunken to a state below the classic ground level by *removing* energy
from the electron via evanescent means (non-photon exchange), resulting in
a very *low energy* compacted *single atom* of small physical size.  What a
magic material it would be to enhance the formation of both types of exotic
matter.

On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 10:58 AM, Jones Beene <jone...@pacbell.net> wrote:

> Hi Bob,
>
> Yes - good observation and I should have brought this up earlier (but the
> posting was too long to begin with). A mechano-alloy would never be uniform
> and would be an admixture of grains.
>
> The fact that nickel and silver are mutually insoluble means that one
> would have to abandon any hope of D+D fusion in a matrix as the main
> operative mechanism for gain. But of course, that is a given when you do
> not use deuterium - and thus, anything related to Ni-H has already
> abandoned the possibility of fusion resulting in helium.
>
> It would be an insurmountable problem if the criterion for success of a
> metal matrix were to be only the inter-atomic spacing of the alloy and the
> strengthening against cracks. Thus the analogy to Type A Pd (when compared
> to Ni-Ag) is not strong unless there is more going-on than fusion. In fact
> it is a weak analogy if we do not accept a compound process which involves
> "densification".
>
> In the end, what I am proposing is that silver is special for its nuclear
> properties - and anything else is simply a bonus. That would imply that the
> fact that it works well with palladium could be twofold, and involves not
> only fusion but more. I hate to keep bringing up Holmlid, but his findings
> are the key to both Ni-H and Pd-D, from my perspective.
>
> In both cases (Pd-D or Ni-H) - anomalous thermal gain is explained as a
> two-step process, which must first involve the conversion of the normal
> hydrogen molecule into the dense atomic form. With Pd-D, this would mean
> that UDD (aka "pychno") is a necessary first step -- following which which
> UDD can fuse or it can react in other ways. But with Ni-H... where the
> nickel is a mechano-alloy with silver, with crude spacing and dirty grains,
> the operative reaction would be very different and probably involves the
> "quasi-neutron."
>
> Importantly, silver could promote densification. We see this possibility
> most clearly in the Mills SunCell. Mills goes to great lengths in his most
> recent patent application to explain how silver does this, since the
> element was not one of his original catalysts and was avoided for many
> years.
>
> This probably means that the delay which Mills BLP seems to be currently
> experiencing (in a meaningful public demo, and in the rumor mill) relates
> to gamma radiation following silver activation. The activation in not due
> to a real neutron, but to UDH (hydrino) as a surrogate neutron.
>
> On 6/19/2017 8:23 AM, Bob Higgins wrote:
>
> Jones,  As you have discussed, the Type A Pd that appears to be LENR
> active is an actual alloy.  In an alloy you expect an atomic level crystal
> lattice alteration - the lattice constants of the alloy are uniform and
> different than with Pd alone.  However, what you describe as a "mechanical
> alloy" is unlikely to be anything other than an admixture of grains of Ag
> with grains of Ni.  An "alloy" and a "mechanical alloy" are two vastly
> different things.  It is sort of like the nickel silver not having any
> silver - the mechanical alloy has no alloy.
>
> True alloying would alter the lattice constants by creating a new crystal
> structure incorporating the alloy metal at the basic atomic
> crystallographic level; hopefully in a way that allows more H to enter the
> lattice.  Also, forming a true alloy would potentially lower the vacancy
> formation energy of the Ni; which, in some theories would raise the LENR
> rate.  OTOH, if a "mechanical alloy" is formed, the only difference
> achieved will be creation of dirty grain boundaries between solid grains of
> Ni and Ag.  It is possible that effects could occur at such grain
> boundaries, so it can't hurt to try.  It is just hard to envision what
> would promote LENR by creating a "mechanical alloy".
>
> On Sun, Jun 18, 2017 at 6:10 PM

[Vo]:"Type A nickel" ?

2017-06-19 Thread Bob Higgins
Jones,  As you have discussed, the Type A Pd that appears to be LENR active
is an actual alloy.  In an alloy you expect an atomic level crystal lattice
alteration - the lattice constants of the alloy are uniform and different
than with Pd alone.  However, what you describe as a "mechanical alloy" is
unlikely to be anything other than an admixture of grains of Ag with grains
of Ni.  An "alloy" and a "mechanical alloy" are two vastly different
things.  It is sort of like the nickel silver not having any silver - the
mechanical alloy has no alloy.

True alloying would alter the lattice constants by creating a new crystal
structure incorporating the alloy metal at the basic atomic
crystallographic level; hopefully in a way that allows more H to enter the
lattice.  Also, forming a true alloy would potentially lower the vacancy
formation energy of the Ni; which, in some theories would raise the LENR
rate.  OTOH, if a "mechanical alloy" is formed, the only difference
achieved will be creation of dirty grain boundaries between solid grains of
Ni and Ag.  It is possible that effects could occur at such grain
boundaries, so it can't hurt to try.  It is just hard to envision what
would promote LENR by creating a "mechanical alloy".

On Sun, Jun 18, 2017 at 6:10 PM, Jones Beene  wrote:

>
> One further detail about the possible advantage of using silver alloyed
> with nickel in LENR, instead of pure nickel - with hydrogen as the gaseous
> reactant, instead of deuterium.
>
> If this were to work for LENR gain, the identity of the nuclear reaction
> is not the same. Obviously, such an alloy as Ni-Ag (assuming it is made via
> mechanical alloying)... would be unlikely to produce helium from fusion, as
> happens in Pd-D... since there is no deuterium (although a alpha emission
> following proton nuclear tunneling is not ruled out.) But there is an ideal
> alternative reaction.
>
> First - a detail which you may not be aware of is the composition of
> control rods in nuclear fission reactors going back 50 years. As it turns
> out - silver has been commonly used as an alloy in control rods, along with
> boron. Part of the explanation is here but there is more to it than meets
> the eye. Silver is like a magnet for neutrons more so than any other
> element across the entire spectrum.
>
> http://large.stanford.edu/courses/2011/ph241/grayson1/
>
> In short, silver has a high cross section for neutrons of all energies
> whereas boron and cadmium and other absorbents generally work with neutrons
> of a narrow energy range. Silver wants them all and this could imply more,
> if Ag works with nickel.
>
> But where are the neutrons to being with? - oops - there are none, or so
> it seems.
>
> But lets broaden this suggestion to include Holmlid's results. Holmlid
> shows that UDH can be made simply by flowing hydrogen over a catalyst. If
> so then we could end up with a neutron substitute, which is the so-called
> "quasi-neutron".
>
> This presumed particle is larger than a neutron, but otherwise could be a
> substitute. This quasi-neutron could also be what Widom and Larsen are
> claiming as an active particle of LENR.
>
> The crux of the issue is this. Silver has a high cross-section for
> neutrons of all energies and the quasi neutron could also favor silver -
> but this is not proved. If it happens, the energy of the gamma should be
> less, since the mass-energy of UDH is less. Also the half-life following
> activation is very short and there is little or no residual radioactivity.
>
> Jones
>
>
> Much has been said about Type A palladium and its special reactivity with
>> hydrogen, some of which is due to the alloy being one fourth silver. Since
>> pure palladium doesn't work as well, it might be said that most of the
>> reactivity seen in cold fusion has been due to the special properties of
>> the alloy, which is a 3:1 ratio (75% Pd 25% Ag).
>>
>> In many ways, nickel can be considered to be a surrogate of palladium.
>> Nickel resides directly under Pd in the Periodic table, and has an
>> identical valence electron structure. This leads one to wonder about an
>> alloy of nickel and silver, based on transposing the results of cold fusion
>> to protium, instead of deuterium.
>>
>> Unfortunately, in the historical context - and going back 300 years in
>> metallurgy, the term "nickel silver" refers to a well known alloy of
>> copper, nickel and zinc which contains zero silver. Essentially, nickel
>> silver is a brass alloy that looks like much like the more expensive silver
>> and is much stronger and more durable - making it a great substitute for
>> most common uses.
>>
>> This old alloy was created to serve exactly the same purpose as silver
>> for attractive shinny flatware but not as prohibitively expensive - about
>> 20 times less expensive per unit of weight than silver. This semantic
>> confusion did not lead to neglect of finding a real alloy of nickel and
>> silver since these two metals are indeed 

[Vo]: MFMP starting to test me356 reactor today

2017-05-29 Thread Bob Higgins
Now at 15:15 local time for the researchers, the test has been running for
45 minutes.  The rolling average COP=1.04 and perhaps is climbing slowly.
This test is using the heat exchanger with the flow calorimetry being run
on the cooling water side of the heat exchanger (not the reactor side).
Cooling water flow is pretty constant and flow rate is mulitply measured.

On Mon, May 29, 2017 at 6:52 AM, Brian Ahern  wrote:

> Has the testing concluded? It is now 3 PM in  Czech.
>


Virus-free.
www.avg.com

<#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>


[Vo]: MFMP starting to test me356 reactor today

2017-05-29 Thread Bob Higgins
I believe the Monday test is just being setup.  Apparently Me356 has setup
a freshly prepared reactor for today's test.

MFMP is using 2 different high-end power analyzers for measurement of the
input power.  To Me356's credit, he has worked hard to accommodate the
continued testing even though the first two days of testing yielded null
results.  Let's see what happens.

On Mon, May 29, 2017 at 8:14 AM, Jones Beene  wrote:

> Looks like a major problem has been spotted, suggesting why me356 honestly
> thought he was getting excess heat:
>
> His power meter was reading 0.452 KW
>
> vs
>
> 1.112 KW from MFMP meter
>
> Yikes... such a significant deficit error in measuring input power will
> certainly give the appearance of OU. The inventor most likely believed he
> was getting gain - or he would never have scheduled the testing.
>
> This conclusion assumes the MFMP meter is accurate. The error does not
> explain COP=6 and there is still the chance of seeing lesser gain.
>
>
>


Virus-free.
www.avg.com

<#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>


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

2017-05-26 Thread Bob Higgins
I was only working from data I extracted from the plots.  It may prove to
be a little better when the raw data itself is analyzed.

The first 10 minutes would not necessarily be better because the heater was
being driven with more power.  It may measure more accurately because the
water was closer to room temp.

The steam was very effectively sparged - no bubbles were coming out of the
water.  At the end, the copper cooling coil was raised from the water and
steam came out from the holes in the tubing.

Apparently due to a broken cable, Me356 could not remotely control his
water pump.  Instead he instructed Bob Greenyer to make manual changes to
the flow setting.

On Fri, May 26, 2017 at 3:44 PM, Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Bob Higgins <rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>> Calculated values for COP from the data graphs during this sparge test
>> varied from 0.5-0.7 depending on the span of time taken.
>>
>
> That is a low recovery rate. I think because the bucket was small and they
> ran the test for a long time, letting the water get hot.
>
>
>
>>  At the conclusion of the test, there would have been unrecovered heat
>> left in the device, and of course, the short rubber outlet hose was not
>> insulated, so the COP would be expected to be <1 if there was no excess
>> heat.  If the actual COP had been >2, the measured COP values would
>> probably have been consistently above 1.0 . . .
>>
>
> Probably. Especially in the first 10 minutes before the water in the
> bucket gets hot, I would expect it to be well above 1.0.
>
> The beauty of this technique is that you can take any time segment and
> compute the enthalpy: 10 minutes, 20 minutes or whatever. The problem is,
> as the water in the bucket heats up, more heat escapes. Eventually, heat
> losses equal input heat and the temperature stops rising. In other words,
> this technique only works in the adiabatic phase, which does not last for
> long with such a small bucket.
>
> me356, the man of mystery, says that it did not work because "the
> circulation pump was incorrect set. It cooled too hard to achieve working
> temperature." In tests of this nature, things often go wrong. That's why
> you have to plan to be there for several days. You have to cut the inventor
> a lot of slack. Be patient.
>
> Here is what I wrote at lenr-forum --
>
> Evidently [the me356 gadget] it is not working at the moment. Let us hope
> we find out if it ever did work. Assume he gets the pump working correctly,
> and he puts everything in conditions that he believes should work. Assume
> also that his instruments then show excess heat, but the MFMP project
> instruments disagree. In that case, we can be pretty sure he made a
> mistake. That outcome wouldn't surprise me in the least. It might take a
> few days to figure out what the mistake is.
>
> Whatever happens, I should say that my estimate of me356 has gone way up.
> Just by letting these people in the door he enhanced his own credibility a
> great deal. Kudos to him. I take back the insults I wrote here previously.
>
> If it turns out the gadget does not work, then me356 wasted a year chasing
> a phantom, and he should have invited outsiders to check his results
> earlier. That often happens. Working in secret with no independent
> confirmation is a stupid thing to do.
>
>
> - Jed
>
>


[Vo]: MFMP starting to test me356 reactor today

2017-05-26 Thread Bob Higgins
The first MFMP test of the Me356 reactor was a steam sparge test that was
asked for by Jed Rothwell.  The reactor's output steam+entrained water were
cooled in a bucket of water and discharged into the bucket.  By measuring
the temperature rise of the water vs. time, the output power (heat) could
be calculated.  This first test just concluded with what appears to be [my
opinion] a negative result for excess heat based on calculations from the
graphed data posted during the test.  Calculated values for COP from the
data graphs during this sparge test varied from 0.5-0.7 depending on the
span of time taken.  At the conclusion of the test, there would have been
unrecovered heat left in the device, and of course, the short rubber outlet
hose was not insulated, so the COP would be expected to be <1 if there was
no excess heat.  If the actual COP had been >2, the measured COP values
would probably have been consistently above 1.0, but they were not [again,
my opinion].  A more exact reading on the result will come from direct
analysis of the raw data.

The MFMP team will return tomorrow for additional testing using other, more
accurate measurement methods.



Virus-free.
www.avg.com

<#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>


[Vo]: MFMP starting to test me356 reactor today

2017-05-25 Thread Bob Higgins
I do not believe the Aura device is a plasma electrolysis system.  I
believe it is a Ni-H system with a dry reactor that is electrically
stimulated.  The water is from cooling of the reactor.  MFMP will be
measuring wall plug power as the input to the Aura device with two
different power analyzers.  The wall plug power should not be as hard to
measure as plasma electrolysis input power.

I agree that there are serious issues with measuring the power of a plasma
electrolysis system by measuring voltage and current.  With the bubbles
popping up and instantly changing the cell voltage and current, it doesn't
surprise me in the least that ultrasound and low RF signals are detected.

I also agree that measuring steam accurately is an issue.  However,
measuring steam via heat exchanger or by sparging the steam is conservative
- if anything it will report less energy than actually exists in the steam
(with any entrained hot water).  Thus, the COP measured would be lower than
the actual device is producing.

On Thu, May 25, 2017 at 6:24 AM, Brian Ahern  wrote:

> May I make a prediction?
>
> When the COP is around 6-8 and the process is plasma  electrolysis, the
> input is invariably under reported.
>
> The plasma is actually a series of sporadic arcs. Measuring the I(t)  and
> V(t) simultaneously is impossible for all but the most sophisticated test
> equipment.
>
> If the plasma electrolysis is not in operation, but boiling is; then we
> face the issue of dry versus wet steam which causes errors consonant with a
> COp around 6-8.
> --
> *From:* Adrian Ashfield 
> *Sent:* Thursday, May 25, 2017 3:53 AM
> *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com
> *Subject:* [Vo]: MFMP starting to test me356' reactor today
>
> Four members of MFMP are in Czechoslovakia and starting to do a black box
> test of me356' reactor.
> It is supposed to be similar to his previous model that has been running
> several months now.
>  It was reported to be ~10 Kw with a COP >6.
>
> See http://www.e-catworld.com/2017/05/23/mfmp-on-site-
> preparing-for-me356-testing/
>


Re: [Vo]:quantum thermodynamics and the Second Law--

2017-05-20 Thread Bob Higgins
This is interesting thinking.  The idea that angular momentum, linear
momentum, and energy are "conserved" is a hypothesis created and supported
(as I understand it) by observation, not by derivation based upon a
fundamental principle.  While it would be a violation of the hypothesis,
trading between these conserved quantities would not invalidate a
fundamental premise (am I correct?).

So, Bob, when you say, "Trading nuclear potential energy for metal lattice
electron orbital (thermal) angular momentum is LENR", what is the nuclear
potential energy that you are saying is being traded (exchanged) into the
electron orbital angular momentum?  What in the nucleus do you envision
being traded?

Clearly the nucleus is not as well understood as we imagine.  If you read
Norman Cook's book, "Models of the Atomic Nucleus", you will see the sorry
state of things.  Present models for the nucleus predict fission as
occurring in equal portions, but experiment shows that is far from the
case.  Even though we rely heavily on engineering of nuclear fission, the
models don't predict the characteristics of the reaction.  Could the
"smallness" of the constituents in the nucleus allow interaction with a
zero-point field, where at such small scales physics is different than we
know?  Could the trading of "conserved" quantities be commonplace at such
small scales?

On Sat, May 20, 2017 at 7:30 AM, bobcook39...@hotmail.com <
bobcook39...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> The following link contains interesting views on the subject of this
> thread.
>
>
>
> IMHO these are key LENR concepts.   Trading nuclear potential energy for
> metal lattice electron orbital (thermal) angular momentum is LENR.
>
>
>
> http://www.quantamagazine.org/the-quantum-thermodynamics-
> revolution-20170502/
>
>
>
> The following is excerpted from the article on thermodynamics:
>
>
>
> “Imagine a vast container, or reservoir, of particles that possess both
>
> energy and angular momentum (they’re both moving around and spinning).
>
> This reservoir is connected to both a weight, which takes energy to
>
> lift, and a turning turntable, which takes angular momentum to speed up
>
> or slow down. Normally, a single reservoir can’t do any work — this goes
>
> back to Carnot’s discovery about the need for hot and cold reservoirs.
>
> But the researchers found that a reservoir containing multiple conserved
>
> quantities follows different rules. “If you have two different physical
>
> quantities that are conserved, like energy and angular momentum,”
>
> Popescu said, “as long as you have a bath that contains both of them,
>
> then you can trade one for another.”
>
>
>
> In the hypothetical weight-reservoir-turntable system, the weight can be
>
> lifted as the turntable slows down, or, conversely, lowering the weight
>
> causes the turntable to spin faster. The researchers found that the
>
> quantum information describing the particles’ energy and spin states can
>
> act as a kind of currency that enables trading between the reservoir’s
>
> energy and angular momentum supplies. The notion that conserved
>
> quantities can be traded for one another in quantum systems is brand
>
> new. It may suggest the need for a more complete thermodynamic theory
>
> that would describe not only the flow of energy, but also the interplay
>
> between all the conserved quantities in the universe.
>
>
>
> The fact that energy has dominated the thermodynamics story up to now
>
> might be circumstantial rather than profound, Oppenheim said. Carnot and
>
> his successors might have developed a thermodynamic theory governing the
>
> flow of, say, angular momentum to go with their engine theory, if only
>
> there had been a need. “We have energy sources all around us that we
>
> want to extract and use,” Oppenheim said. “It happens to be the case
>
> that we don’t have big angular momentum heat baths around us. We don’t
>
> come across huge gyroscopes.”
>
>
>
> _”Popescu, who won a Dirac Medal last year for his insights in quantum
>
> information theory and quantum foundations, said he and his
>
> collaborators work by “pushing quantum mechanics into a corner,”
>
> gathering at a blackboard and reasoning their way to a new insight after
>
> which it’s easy to derive the associated equations. Some realizations
>
> are in the process of crystalizing. In one of several phone
>
> conversations in March, Popescu discussed a new thought experiment that
>
> illustrates a distinction between information and other conserved
>
> quantities — and indicates how symmetries in nature might set them apart.”
>
>
>
>
>



Virus-free.
www.avg.com

<#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>


Re: [Vo]:JCMNS Vol. 23 uploaded

2017-05-11 Thread Bob Higgins
My primary observation about the Budko-Korshunov experiment(s) is that it
is reporting on a variable space that has never been reported to show XH.
The temperature was too low and the pressure was too high to replicate
positive experiments with Ni + LiAlH4.  The experimenters could not hope to
reproduce the Piantelli reports with the described apparatus.  Low
temperature Ni-H XH is only credibly reported by Piantelli with his unique
apparatus.  Of course, Rossi claims low temperature XH, but there has been
no paper disclosing the fuel or conditions nor, any replication of his low
temperature Ni-H claims - relegating his work to unreliable hearsay about
something undisclosed.

The authors inadequately described their apparatus to fully understand the
geometry of their SS reactor vessel.  Hypothetically, using a thick
stainless steel vessel for the fuel would interfere with application of all
but the lowest frequency stimulus to the fuel (the SS container will not be
magnetic, but will be a conductor even at high temperature).  The low
frequency DC pulses and low frequency AC magnetic fields would penetrate
the SS, but the 20kHz magnetic stimulation may be attenuated (this could
all be modeled with a proper description of the apparatus).  To Axil's
point, there will be no electric field excitation when using a stainless
steel reactor vessel.

I am not discouraged by this report but I am glad it was published.  It is
simply a variable space to consider avoiding in future experiments.

On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 2:40 PM, Jed Rothwell  wrote:

> I uploaded the Journal of Condensed Matter Nuclear Science, Vol. 23:
>
> http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/BiberianJPjcondensedv.pdf
>
> I regret to say that it includes yet another study of Ni-H that showed no
> excess heat:
>
> Budko, K. and A. Korshunov, *Calorimetric Investigation of Anomalous Heat
> Production in Ni-H Systems*. J. Condensed Matter Nucl. Sci., 2017. *23*:
> p. 85-90.
>
> http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/BiberianJPjcondensedv.pdf#page=90
>
> - Jed
>
>


Re: [Vo]:MFMP plans to verify claims made by "me356"

2017-05-09 Thread Bob Higgins
Jones,

I believe the system he has designed is for heating his house.  I imagine
it is to feed conventional radiators as would a conventional home heating
boiler.  It is not designed as a test vehicle for someone to measure.

I mentioned the scale because it can be used to measure mass change vs.
time.  This is an MFMP scale, not one owned by Me356.  It will be for
confirmation of mass flow measurement (for example for confirmation that
the inlet liquid water flow meter is reading correctly).

When making black box measurements, the intentions for the design engineer
for his box are irrelevant and unimportant as long as the nature of the
inputs and outputs are understood well enough that proper measurement
instruments can be brought to the site.

On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 2:28 PM, Jones Beene <jone...@pacbell.net> wrote:

> Hi Bob,
>
> No argument that MFMP should not attempt to change anything on their own
> initiative. This is about the inventor and his motivation.
>
> Any mention of a gram scale indicates that they will be measuring steam
> production, which means that phase change is going to be a systemic and
> unnecessary problem. The inventor should realize that phase change can be
> extremely problematic with no redeeming feature, so why have it as part of
> any black box -- when it easy to provide another mechanism? Does he not
> want to convince potential investors?
>
> What is the rationale for not using a heat transfer fluid like mineral
> oil/ therminol? If anything the temperature control should be more accurate
> than with water, which is always problematic due to pressure surges and
> flash steam at the interface with the reactor - not to mention calcium
> deposits and corrosion.
>
> Using water, instead of a heat transfer fluid makes no sense to me, given
> the history of LENR and especially the duplicity of Rossi which is looming
> over everything these days.
>
> If anything, the cost of heat transfer fluid should be low, perhaps less -
> but mostly it will show that the inventor has put some thought into the
> problems of accurate measurement of heat output.
>
> On 5/9/2017 12:21 PM, Bob Higgins wrote:
>
> Jones,
> In making a "black box" test, one cannot readily change the system control
> of what is inside the black box.  One must be prepared to measure the black
> box as it is designed to work. If that means water in and steam out, then
> that is what must be measured accurately.  MFMP does not want to be in the
> position of altering the flow rate that is a controlled state variable in
> Me356's system.  If MFMP did not measure XH after having changed something,
> the reason could be that the system control had been changed causing the
> device not to work.  MFMP must be prepared to accurately measure the
> performance without relying on measurements of steam quality, pressure, and
> temperature measurements.  Sparging is a good way to go as Jed suggests.
> Proper setup and use of a heat exchanger with steam will work perfectly
> fine too - it will underestimate the output heat if anything.
>
> The reason one could never rely on a test made of Rossi's device is not
> because there was steam, it was because he never allowed a public test with
> independent well prepared testers using their own equipment for
> evaluation.  The tests Mats Lewan performed were not well prepared through
> no fault of his own.  If you read his book, you would see that he had to
> improvise the testing at the last minute or there would have been no
> measurements.
>
> On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 11:00 AM, Jones Beene <jone...@pacbell.net> wrote:
>
>>
>> The problems with the proposed testing is HUGE and must be changed- as of
>> now, this is looking like the oldest scam in the book -
>> wet-steam/dry-steam. Rossi has been successful in making the wet-steam scam
>> into an art form. To have any credibility - this test must not involve
>> steam at all. There are good options which do not involve steam.
>>
>>
>
>


Re: [Vo]:MFMP plans to verify claims made by "me356"

2017-05-09 Thread Bob Higgins
I am only peripherally involved in these tests - I will not be on site.  My
understanding is that more than one flow meter will be taken (one may be
embedded in a separate heat measuring system) and they are bringing a gram
accurate scale capable of up to 100kg that will be used as part of flow
meter verification by mass and by volume.

On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 1:58 PM, Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Bob Higgins <rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>> The reason one could never rely on a test made of Rossi's device is not
>> because there was steam, it was because he never allowed a public test with
>> independent well prepared testers using their own equipment for evaluation.
>>
>
> Yup. As Rick Smith pointed out, the enthalpy of steam could have been
> measured reliably with industry standard methods. But it wasn't.
>
>
> On another subject in the other discussion: You people will bring a flow
> meter, right?
>
> - Jed
>
>


[Vo]:MFMP plans to verify claims made by "me356"

2017-05-09 Thread Bob Higgins
Jones,
In making a "black box" test, one cannot readily change the system control
of what is inside the black box.  One must be prepared to measure the black
box as it is designed to work. If that means water in and steam out, then
that is what must be measured accurately.  MFMP does not want to be in the
position of altering the flow rate that is a controlled state variable in
Me356's system.  If MFMP did not measure XH after having changed something,
the reason could be that the system control had been changed causing the
device not to work.  MFMP must be prepared to accurately measure the
performance without relying on measurements of steam quality, pressure, and
temperature measurements.  Sparging is a good way to go as Jed suggests.
Proper setup and use of a heat exchanger with steam will work perfectly
fine too - it will underestimate the output heat if anything.

The reason one could never rely on a test made of Rossi's device is not
because there was steam, it was because he never allowed a public test with
independent well prepared testers using their own equipment for
evaluation.  The tests Mats Lewan performed were not well prepared through
no fault of his own.  If you read his book, you would see that he had to
improvise the testing at the last minute or there would have been no
measurements.

On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 11:00 AM, Jones Beene  wrote:

>
> The problems with the proposed testing is HUGE and must be changed- as of
> now, this is looking like the oldest scam in the book -
> wet-steam/dry-steam. Rossi has been successful in making the wet-steam scam
> into an art form. To have any credibility - this test must not involve
> steam at all. There are good options which do not involve steam.
>
>


Re: [Vo]:Can 'Apollo Fusion' Bring Us Clean Nuclear Energy?

2017-04-04 Thread Bob Higgins
What about the waste products from a hybrid fusion-fission reactor using
natural U fuel?  Would the neutron source drive the fission products to be
either stable elements or to radioisotopes with shorter half life?

What about using LENR as the neutron source?  Some LENR fuels are reputed
to cause "undesirable" neutron emission.  Suppose that were harnessed.

On Tue, Apr 4, 2017 at 7:55 AM, Jones Beene  wrote:

> Robin,
>
> You and I shared similar hybrid design thoughts on a modular mass-produced
> sub-critical reactor 15 years ago... but the basis of the Apollo design
> goes back before "cold fusion" and is still not very smart IMO -- since it
> depends on 3He and extremely expensive magnets. It is DOA even after 28
> years of planning since it retains most of the disadvantages of fusion.
> Here is some history.
>
> https://www.researchgate.net/publication/261511370_Apollo_-_
> An_advanced_fuel_fusion_power_reactor_for_the_21st_century
>
> The main goal for lowest net cost nuclear power from U - and this has been
> obvious for 40 years to almost everyone in the industry - is to to avoid
> the huge problem where 30% and up of the net cost of new plant goes to
> bankers. Instead of one-off, there needs to be a single modular design,
> smaller in capacity for use as multiple units, built on a batch flow
> (aircraft style) production line at a rate of many per month. Financiers
> sometimes get more than half of the net cost in the USA, since the reactor
> itself takes 10 years to complete and they want to drag it out. A modular
> design can be rail mounted and actually removed at the end of service.
>
> The next obvious design goal is go subcritical - use natural U fuel with
> no enrichment and use multiple small makeup sources of neutrons to avoid
> the extreme cost of a reactor built to contain a meltdown. The "tabletop
> accelerator" was never fully developed for mass production, but it would
> work in multiples as neutron generators in a subcritcal design that
> benefits from overlapping neutron multiplication ratios - and is especially
> suitable as a thermionic topper.
>
> mix...@bigpond.com wrote:
>
>> In reply to  Jack Cole's message:
>> Hi,
>> [snip]
>>
>>> http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/energy/a25922/apollo
>>> -fusion-startup-googler-nuclear-power/
>>>
>> Not much on the company website. I wonder if they are going to implement
>> the model I suggested here on vortex a little while back? ;)
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Robin van Spaandonk
>>
>> http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
>>
>>
>>
>


Re: [Vo]:Frangibility, Holmlid and "below absolute zero"

2017-04-03 Thread Bob Higgins
This is a fun discussion, Jones, but an important aspect of this troubles
me.  You are likening UDD, UDH with sub-ground-state hydrogen; and the way
Holmlid defines UDD/UDH, they are unrelated phenomena.  Holmlid describes
UDD/UDH as forming (near reversably) from Rydberg matter, a well above
ground state quasi-molecule or condensed matter particle of hydrogen.  In
fact, each of the atoms in this Rydberg matter are on the verge of
ionization!  So, the overall Hamiltonian for this Rydberg matter is just
slightly lower than for the same number of atoms each in a Rydberg state -
that's why the Rydberg matter is meta-stable, because there is a local
minimum of the Hamiltonian.  Yet Holmlid goes on to say that the Rydberg
matter can spontaneously switch (approximately reverse-ably) to the UDD/UDH
compact form, implying that the Hamiltonian for the compact form is nearly
equivalent to that of the high energy Rydberg matter form.  Now, compare
this to the Hamiltonian for a sub-ground-state hydrogen atom (hydrino or
Maly/Vavra, Meulenberg, Paillet... shrunken hydrogen).  The shrunken
hydrogen will have a much smaller Hamiltonian than the UDD/UDH
Rydberg-related matter.  In fact, the shrunken hydrogen has an energy
deficit below the hydrogen ground state that is greater than the excited
energy of the Rydberg state above the ground state.  Rydberg matter does
have enough angular momentum to have a photon exchange where, as SVJ has
said (I remembered), there is not enough angular momentum in the shrunken
hydrogen to exchange a photon.  UDD/UDH and shrunken hydrogen are two
completely different hypothetical things.

While the shrunken hydrogen has insufficient angular momentum for photon
exchange, I would be interested to hear discussion on whether shrunken
hydrogen can interact with phonons.  Would it require shrunken hydrogen
condensed matter to interact with phonons?  Can shrunken hydrogen condensed
matter interact with phonons in ordinary condensed matter?  Would that
phonon coupling be evanescent?

On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 7:58 AM, Jones Beene  wrote:

> Dense hydrogen is nothing if not cold. Its deflated electron, its sole
> contact with the world, has lost most of its angular momentum. How cold is
> UDD or UDH, and can it remain cold on contact with adjacent warm matter?
> That is the start of a house of cards - to be presented below.
>
> Last year a thread here touched on the reality of temperatures "below
> absolute zero" and the early experimental evidence for such:
>
> http://www.nature.com/news/quantum-gas-goes-below-absolute-zero-1.12146
>
> ...where it was stated in a prestigious journal that a peculiarity of the
> below-absolute-zero gas is that it mimics 'dark energy,' the putative
> anti-gravity force which pushes Universal expansion against the inward pull
> of gravity. This leads to an interconnection between dark matter and dark
> energy - both being ostensibly cold.
>
> Curiously, achieving ultracold involves laser cooling (aka Doppler
> cooling) using coherent photons which are very hot. Several ironies place
> the Holmlid experiments within the realm of ultracold (whether he rejects
> the concept or not). Another slant on negative temperatures which fits his
> situation is the realm of Casimir dimensions (few nm range): "Evidence for
> the Existence of 5 Real Spatial Dimensions in Quantum Vacuum"- Quantum
> Temperatures Below Zero Kelvin" by Calvet.
>
> http://www.journaloftheoretics.com/Articles/3-1/calvet-final.htm
>
> Dense hydrogen could be the key to opening an unexplored world of quantum
> temperatures below zero K, along with time dilation in a model that agrees
> with cosmology and recent findings on a Universal scale. Moving on to
> "frangibility"... for those not familiar with the term - it connotes the
> failure mechanism of ultracold, like thin ice. The end result of ultracold
> dynamics is not fusion, decay or immediate annihilation of protons into
> energy, but the quark–gluon plasma (aka quark soup) which is a state of
> matter in quantum chromodynamics (QCD) that can take on the various
> identities, including that of its longest lived component - muons.
>
> There is a semantics issue relative to any experiment having a persistent
> "coldness" (zone composed of dense hydrogen) existing in a relatively hot
> reactor, yet "refusing" to heat up - seemingly violating common sense and
> laws of thermodynamics. The implication is that dense hydrogen is both cold
> and experiencing time dilation. Dark energy would be suspected to exhibit
> an altered time property (Feynman). Unfortunately, it may be necessary to
> invoke both of these far-out notions in order to explain the muons of
> Holmlid... but an adequate explanation from less controversial physics has
> not been forthcoming and probably never can be.
>
> Can dense hydrogen, irradiated by a weak laser beam, really be so fragile
> that it fractures into subatomic debris... even assuming it was "frozen" in
> the 

Re: [Vo]:Niobium - Iridium thermocouples

2017-03-27 Thread Bob Higgins
Presently I am using k-type thermocouples outside of their comfortable
range to 1200C.  Bob Cook was suggesting the Nb-Ir thermocouples in place
of k-type.  MFMP has used before a b-type thermocouple, but it was quite
expensive.  I would love to find an inexpensive (but controlled) s-type or
b-type thermocouple because they would be easy to integrate into my
system.  If the Nb-Ir thermocouple were readily available at low cost and
had a reasonable S/N I would welcome that too.  When you buy from Omega,
they have controls to insure the alloys are in spec. so as to control the
voltage vs. temp to a standard.  I would like the same assurance for
alternative thermocouple types too.  I also need lead wires to the junction
of about 40".

On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 1:09 PM, a.ashfield <a.ashfi...@verizon.net> wrote:

> Bob,
> What do you want the thermocouples for?  ie what temperature?
> I have never used Niobium - Iridium thermocouples in the glass industry.
> We always used type S, and type B for more stable results over years
> duration, for things like furnace crowns at 1550C, but this had the
> disadvantage of smaller output.  The platinum migrates to the Rh leg over
> time, but we found a minimum wire diameter was also necessary for long life
> due to crystallization of Pl.
> AA
>
> On 3/27/2017 2:30 PM, Bob Higgins wrote:
>
> Regarding the Nb-Ir thermocouples ... Bob, can you suggest a source for
> these thermocouples and their voltage calibration data?  For my
> experiments, the cost of the hardware is coming out of my own pocket - not
> someone else's deep pocket.  For k-type thermocouples, the
> voltage-temperature profile is built into my DAQ.  For the Nb-Ir, I
> suspect, I will have to read the voltage and convert it to temperature with
> a custom LUT in Labview.  All doable if the voltage is not too low to be
> noisy and if the couples are not too expensive.
>
> On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 11:43 AM, <bobcook39...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Jones—
>>
>>
>>
>> You note regarding the Lugano test and Higgins assessment the following:
>>
>>
>>
>> “The systemic optical false assumptions have rendered any further
>> conclusion unscientific. Levi was reportedly paid an enormous amount of
>> money by Elforsk and yet made stupid errors, notably failing to use high
>> temp thermocouples for verification - plus he also failed to calibrate near
>> the running temperature - unforgivable, since his errors have poisoned the
>> positive aspects.”
>>
>>
>>
>> I recently made the same comment about using good high temperature T/C’s
>> to Higgins with respect to his own Ni-H automated test at MFMP.  I
>> suggested he use a Nb-Ir couple for high temperature measurements of the
>> outside of his glow stick-like experiment.  The couple is good for more
>> than 2000 C I believe.
>>
>>
>>
>> With a high temperature LENR heat source the Niobium/Iridium combo is a
>> reasonable thermo-electric source of power as well, and it could well
>> replace Pu-238 as a reliable, long-term power supply for remote locations
>> or space applications without the hazard associated with Pu-238.
>>
>>
>>
>> Bob Cook
>>
>
>


[Vo]:Niobium - Iridium thermocouples

2017-03-27 Thread Bob Higgins
Regarding the Nb-Ir thermocouples ... Bob, can you suggest a source for
these thermocouples and their voltage calibration data?  For my
experiments, the cost of the hardware is coming out of my own pocket - not
someone else's deep pocket.  For k-type thermocouples, the
voltage-temperature profile is built into my DAQ.  For the Nb-Ir, I
suspect, I will have to read the voltage and convert it to temperature with
a custom LUT in Labview.  All doable if the voltage is not too low to be
noisy and if the couples are not too expensive.

On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 11:43 AM,  wrote:

> Jones—
>
>
>
> You note regarding the Lugano test and Higgins assessment the following:
>
>
>
> “The systemic optical false assumptions have rendered any further
> conclusion unscientific. Levi was reportedly paid an enormous amount of
> money by Elforsk and yet made stupid errors, notably failing to use high
> temp thermocouples for verification - plus he also failed to calibrate near
> the running temperature - unforgivable, since his errors have poisoned the
> positive aspects.”
>
>
>
> I recently made the same comment about using good high temperature T/C’s
> to Higgins with respect to his own Ni-H automated test at MFMP.  I
> suggested he use a Nb-Ir couple for high temperature measurements of the
> outside of his glow stick-like experiment.  The couple is good for more
> than 2000 C I believe.
>
>
>
> With a high temperature LENR heat source the Niobium/Iridium combo is a
> reasonable thermo-electric source of power as well, and it could well
> replace Pu-238 as a reliable, long-term power supply for remote locations
> or space applications without the hazard associated with Pu-238.
>
>
>
> Bob Cook
>


Re: [Vo]:Should Mills and Rossi be lumped together?

2017-03-27 Thread Bob Higgins
I don't think anyone outside of Mills' team can say that he has made even
1W of excess heat from any of his devices.  The one quick bomb calorimetry
demo done was very crude calorimetry, was not believable, and a paper was
not published on it.  If Mills wants to convince his critics, he should
publish credible calorimetry of one of his devices over the course of a
reasonable time period (at least twelve hours).  He should describe the
experiment in detail, and provide data and analysis.  He wouldn't have to
publish anything about what is inside his black box.  He doesn't need to
wait on mythical photovoltaics to make this measurement.  He could
establish credibility with one such paper.  If he published a credible
paper, we would believe his result with some measure of confidence.  There
must be a reason he hasn't established his credibility this way.

Without having done this, he is relegating himself into the same class of
pseudo-science as Rossi: hyped un-demonstrated science.  He shows pretty
stuff, but the data is never published, and then he moves on to something
else.

On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 9:55 AM, a.ashfield  wrote:

> Brian,
>
> He has demonstrated the SunCell to various audiences.  Mills says he will
> demonstrate the SunCell producing power soon after the required
> photovoltaics are developed and in pace - later this year.  Obviously he
> can't do that before.
>
> You are saying he is a fraud and will never do that, without proof.  I
> have trouble understanding the vocal critics here who seem to be of a class
> "NO! What was the question?"  Strikes me as very unscientific.
>
> Slightly  related see.  http://www.scotsman.com/news/opinion/uk-should-be-
> generating-research-into-world-changing-cold-fusion-system-1-4400376
>
> AA
>
> On 3/27/2017 5:38 AM, Brian Ahern wrote:
>
> It has never been independently observed, but is often quoted.
>
>
> If it was true, he could openly demonstrate it operating.
>
>


Re: [Vo]:Should Mills and Rossi be lumped together?

2017-03-26 Thread Bob Higgins
Hi Robin,

*Sorry to have mis-associated the credit for this observation!*  It is a
good one.

Bob

On Sun, Mar 26, 2017 at 1:47 PM,  wrote:

> In reply to  Bob Higgins's message of Sat, 25 Mar 2017 09:33:46 -0600:
> Hi,
> [snip]
> >The predicted properties of the hydrino or any sub-ground-state hydrogen
> >suggest that it will be really hard to detect.  According to Meulenberg,
> >these states lack sufficient angular momentum to have a photon
> >transaction.
>
> Actually, that explanation for non-radiation is mine (see my web page).
> Mills
> has his own explanation.
>
> Regards,
>
> Robin van Spaandonk
>
> http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
>
>


Re: [Vo]:Should Mills and Rossi be lumped together?

2017-03-25 Thread Bob Higgins
There is also the possibility of one or more of the S orbital electrons of
the larger parent atom being taken into a sub-ground hydrino state.  In
which case, each of the electrons in such a state would screen a proton and
make those protons appear like neutrons.  For example, say one of the S
orbital electrons of 55Co went into a sub-ground state orbital screening
one if the proton charges.  The atom would appear chemically to have one
less proton and one more neutron - becoming 55Fe.  From a nuclear stability
standpoint, though it would still appear as 55Co presumably (but this is
also unstable in this case).

A pico-hydride implies that the hydrino hydrogen would be able to form a
shared chemical (electron) bond with the low abundance stable 54Fe.  I just
can't imagine a hydrino being able to share an electronic state with
another atom because the hydrino's electron is so tightly bound to the
hydrino nucleus - not an ordinary valence bond for sure.  In a high
resolution mass spectrometer, the 54Fe+picohydride would weigh more than a
55Fe and that should be observable.  They have such a spectrometer at
Purdue.

On Sat, Mar 25, 2017 at 9:46 AM, Jones Beene <jone...@pacbell.net> wrote:

>  Bob Higgins wrote:
>
> The predicted properties of the hydrino or any sub-ground-state hydrogen
> suggest that it will be really hard to detect...  It must be detected by
> proxy.  Like detecting the neutrino, detection of the hydrino will require
> new, inventive techniques
>
>>
>> Bob, I generally agree that new thinking is needed. This is why I brought
> up Dufour's ICCF20 talk and the iron-55 evidence, the so-called
> pico-hydride. It is a very elegant and simple way to confirm dense hydrogen.
>
> The dense hydrogen becomes attached (magnetically?) to iron 54 in such a
> way that on mass-spec analysis, it looks like 55Fe - but is NOT
> radioactive. Normal 55Fe is strongly radioactive.
>
> This looks like a brilliant solution to detection ! and could be the
> smoking gun for dense hydrogen , but it does not conform to Mills theory so
> he will never agree.
>


Re: [Vo]:Should Mills and Rossi be lumped together?

2017-03-25 Thread Bob Higgins
The predicted properties of the hydrino or any sub-ground-state hydrogen
suggest that it will be really hard to detect.  According to Meulenberg,
these states lack sufficient angular momentum to have a photon
transaction.  Thus, the hydrino hydrogen would not have telltale absorption
spectra of any kind.  It must be detected by proxy.  Like detecting the
neutrino, detection of the hydrino will require new, inventive techniques
and custom (probably expensive) equipment.  Mills probably doesn't care as
long as his SunCell works based on his insight from the hydrino hypothesis.

Once I was visiting a university professor friend who had developed a nifty
hydrogen sensor based on a metal film that was so thin it could not be seen
even under the SEM.  I commented that having an invisible technology is
wonderful for being able to safely share your device for testing.

On Sat, Mar 25, 2017 at 8:37 AM, Jones Beene  wrote:

> One of the better articles to appear on the subject of LENR in the context
> of a valid commercial effort appeared recently in C (which is becoming a
> top flight science journal) and was picked up by SciAm.
>
> https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/cold-fusion-
> lives-experiments-create-energy-when-none-should-exist1/
>
> Stephen Ritter, the author, relies a lot on his expert Howard J. Wilk ,
> who is an organic chemist, obsessed with Randy Mills’s progress, still
> trying to decide if the SunCell commercialization effort is real or scam.
> The situation with Rossi is a little clearer on the negative side, and
> should be resolved in a few months, at least in its legal aspects, but the
> idea that Mills could be a more sophisticated con-artist is hard for many
> to digest. RM has real and impressive academic credentials and other
> business accomplishments (software)... and "no priors", as Harry Bosch
> would say. Much of the following is quoted or paraphrased from Ritter's
> fine article.
>
> In 2014, Wilk asked Mills if he had ever isolated hydrinos, and although
> Mills had previously written in research papers and patents that he had,
> Mills replied that he had not. Moreover, it would be “a really, really huge
> task.” Side note: This is an outright cop-out by Mills - since he was
> actually showing vials of hydrino compounds as far back as 15 years ago. No
> matter what his credentials are, Mills has the habit of spreading blatant
> falsehoods, to a lesser degree than Andrea Rossi, but enough to make one
> wonder if the same character flaws are not deeply embedded.
>
> Almost everyone who has closely followed Mills agrees: If the SunCell
> generates hydrinos and megawatts, then there has to be demonstrable hard
> evidence: “Show us the hydrino!” Wilk mentions four possible explanations:
> Mills’s science is actually correct, [but harder to tame than it should be,
> possibly missing a single piece of understanding], it’s a complete fraud by
> a genius with no morals [this could be closer to Rossi], or it’s just
> simply bad science [providing a lavish livelihood at investor's expense],
> or it’s what Nobel Laureate Irving Langmuir called "pathological
> science"... which is a kind of logical delusion that Langmuir himself
> suffered from, at times. We could add that a mix of several of these is
> more likely. Even so, even the skeptics hope that there is some grain of
> truth involved in the claims.
>
> “I hope they’re right,” Wilk says but he has never been a true believer.
> “I think if hydrinos existed, they would have been detected by others in
> laboratories or in nature years ago and would be used by now.” As an
> wanna-be-believer, I would add that the "solar wind" should be an
> undeniable source of hydrinos and should have shown the needed hard
> evidence, based on Mills theory, since it has been studied since 1859. You
> have to imagine that in the past 27 years, Mills has spent millions on
> finding real particles. If not, why not?
>
> We on this forum have for years been coming to same conclusion as Ritter:
> "All the discussions about cold fusion and LENR end this way: They always
> come back to the fact that no one has a commercial device on the market
> yet, and none of the prototypes seem workable on a commercial scale in the
> near future." Plus, the inventors always follow one failed effort with what
> looks like a serial scam, a next big disappointment and never let 3rd
> parties test any device independently.
>
> A real product, even if only micro scale or a toy - not a legal proceeding
> or massive fund-raising effort, will be the ultimate arbiter of truth...
> but isolating dense hydrogen in the solar wind, with the agreement of NASA,
> would help immensely.
>
> Another possible way to confirm - from Dufour's ICCF20 paper is the
> iron-55 evidence, the so-called pico-hydride.
>
> This is dense hydrogen, which is attached (magnetically?) to iron 54 in
> such a way that on mass-spec analysis, it looks like 55Fe - but is NOT
> radioactive. 

Re: [Vo]:OT: Vertical farming

2017-03-18 Thread Bob Higgins
I think you might have missed my point.  The body dumps excess minerals and
vitamins out of your body through urination.  The body cannot separate zinc
and copper in its task of dumping an excess.  So, if you have a normal
amount of copper and supplement with zinc, the body will dump the excess
zinc and will take copper with it.  Since  you started with the correct
amount of copper, by dumping copper (along with the zinc excess) you become
copper deficient.  This also works the same way with sodium and potassium.
Take in too much sodium and the body's dumping of excess sodium can make
you potassium deficient.  All of these "companion" minerals should be taken
in balance.

Copper pipes passivate themselves pretty quickly with ordinary water, and
the water that comes out of your tap will not contain much after the first
year... Unless you have softened water.  Soft water really wants to grab
mineral salts and put them back into the water.  So, the combination of
softened water and copper pipes will lead to a lot of copper in the water.
I have softened water, but it is flowing through plastic pipes.

On Sat, Mar 18, 2017 at 4:43 PM, a.ashfield <a.ashfi...@verizon.net> wrote:

> Bob,
> The Molecular Multi does contain Zinc.   I believe Dr. Sardi has done his
> homework, although I suppose there are other opinions.   Sardi writes this
> about copper.
>
> Copper
>
> NOT PROVIDED IN THE MOLECULAR MULTI
>
> Copper is a strong oxidant. It is required for connective tissue
> (collagen) formation.
>
> The installation of copper in place of lead plumbing and piping has
> changed the whole approach to copper nutrition. Inorganically bound copper
> in dietary supplements and drinking water it much more damaging to the
> brain than bound copper in foods. The Alzheimer’s epidemic coincides with
> installation of copper plumbing in developed but not undeveloped countries.
> [Nutrients <http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26633489> 2015; Journal
> Trace Element Research <http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22673823> 2012]
> AA
>
> On 3/18/2017 1:51 PM, Bob Higgins wrote:
>
> So, will the suppliers of the vegetables grown in this manner supply a
> pill in the package for the missing nutrients in their prodcuts?
>
> It is not as easy as it sounds to find an acceptable supplement.  The
> Formula Inc "Molecular Multi" is far from complete.  Where are the calcium,
> copper, and vanadium?  The body's regulatory system dumps excess zinc and
> copper together (without discrimination).  If copper and zinc are not taken
> simultaneously, dumping the excess zinc will cause a copper deficiency.
> Vanadium in trace amounts helps prevent (and treat) adult onset diabetes.
> The "Molecular Multi" may not even be "better than nothing".
>
> So why aren't we in more trouble today with the lack of the nutrients in
> farm produced vegetables?  Because meats are rich in many of those
> nutrients and most of us eat meat.  Despite the fact that I hate the
> thought of eating animals, I recognize that with today's marketplace foods,
> I would become malnourished by not eating meat.  Eating veal is even more
> nutrient rich because nutrient absorption by the young animals is far
> higher than older animals.
>
>


Re: [Vo]:OT: Vertical farming

2017-03-18 Thread Bob Higgins
So, will the suppliers of the vegetables grown in this manner supply a pill
in the package for the missing nutrients in their prodcuts?

It is not as easy as it sounds to find an acceptable supplement.  The
Formula Inc "Molecular Multi" is far from complete.  Where are the calcium,
copper, and vanadium?  The body's regulatory system dumps excess zinc and
copper together (without discrimination).  If copper and zinc are not taken
simultaneously, dumping the excess zinc will cause a copper deficiency.
Vanadium in trace amounts helps prevent (and treat) adult onset diabetes.
The "Molecular Multi" may not even be "better than nothing".

So why aren't we in more trouble today with the lack of the nutrients in
farm produced vegetables?  Because meats are rich in many of those
nutrients and most of us eat meat.  Despite the fact that I hate the
thought of eating animals, I recognize that with today's marketplace foods,
I would become malnourished by not eating meat.  Eating veal is even more
nutrient rich because nutrient absorption by the young animals is far
higher than older animals.

On Sat, Mar 18, 2017 at 11:13 AM, a.ashfield <a.ashfi...@verizon.net> wrote:

> It's easy enough to take a good vitamin supplement like Fgrmulas Inc's
> "Molecular Multi"
>
> AA
>
> On 3/18/2017 11:29 AM, H LV wrote:
>
> Good questions.
> Lets hope vertical farming is well studied before it becomes common place
> or it could become another agricultural folly.
>
> Harry
>
> On Sat, Mar 18, 2017 at 11:00 AM, Bob Higgins <rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> One of the problems with agricultural vegetables today is that they are
>> devoid of the micronutrients that the human body needs to be healthy.
>> These include a lot of trace minerals (boron, calcium, vanadium, iodine,
>> zinc, copper, magnesium ...) that are found in fresh soil; but for 100
>> years, these micronutrients have been farmed out (and not replaced).
>> Farmers only add N-P-K back to the soil because they found that doing so
>> would make green plants, but that doesn't mean that the resulting plants
>> are chemically nutritious for humans.  Historical farming was most
>> nutritious in flood plains because the flood silt would restore the
>> micronutrients to the soil.
>>
>> Plants cannot absorb these micronutrients as oxides or sulphates directly
>> - they must be broken down by consumption in bacteria within the soil and
>> chemically converted to metal chelates in the bacterial deficant before the
>> plants can absorb them.
>>
>> So, how in a vertical farm are the core nutrients and micronutrients
>> supplied to the plant in a way that the plant can absorb them?  Are they
>> growing the bacteria in a vat from which they extract the chelate-rich
>> water (absorb-able nutrients) for spraying on the plant roots?  Are the
>> resulting plants nutritious?
>>
>> On Sat, Mar 18, 2017 at 8:36 AM, H LV <hveeder...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Vertical farming is slowly becoming more common.
>>>
>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-_tvJtUHnmU
>>>
>>> Harry
>>>
>>
>>
>
>


Re: [Vo]:OT: Vertical farming

2017-03-18 Thread Bob Higgins
One of the problems with agricultural vegetables today is that they are
devoid of the micronutrients that the human body needs to be healthy.
These include a lot of trace minerals (boron, calcium, vanadium, iodine,
zinc, copper, magnesium ...) that are found in fresh soil; but for 100
years, these micronutrients have been farmed out (and not replaced).
Farmers only add N-P-K back to the soil because they found that doing so
would make green plants, but that doesn't mean that the resulting plants
are chemically nutritious for humans.  Historical farming was most
nutritious in flood plains because the flood silt would restore the
micronutrients to the soil.

Plants cannot absorb these micronutrients as oxides or sulphates directly -
they must be broken down by consumption in bacteria within the soil and
chemically converted to metal chelates in the bacterial deficant before the
plants can absorb them.

So, how in a vertical farm are the core nutrients and micronutrients
supplied to the plant in a way that the plant can absorb them?  Are they
growing the bacteria in a vat from which they extract the chelate-rich
water (absorb-able nutrients) for spraying on the plant roots?  Are the
resulting plants nutritious?

On Sat, Mar 18, 2017 at 8:36 AM, H LV  wrote:

> Vertical farming is slowly becoming more common.
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-_tvJtUHnmU
>
> Harry
>


  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   >