You've already told her to shut up several times, so that's repetitive and
boring as well.
On Jan 4, 2012, at 13:48, "Mark Iverson-ZeroPoint"
wrote:
> Mary Yugo stated/asked,
> “Same response to the same repetition of absolute nonsense about Rossi and
> Defkalion. You always seem to obje
What about Jed Rothwell's secret source who just came back with glowing reviews?
On Jan 3, 2012, at 4:35, Jouni Valkonen wrote:
>
>
> On 2 January 2012 04:35, OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson
> wrote:
> Not having direct access I think it's difficult for any of us to determine
> whethe
Enjoy your trip. Alaska must be quite an experience this time of year. I intend
to have pondered your papers when you have returned.
On Jan 2, 2012, at 11:37, Horace Heffner wrote:
> I have to take care of a rental in Anchorage that was just vacated. Makes me
> a little nervous considerin
(You'll have to visit the URL at the end to follow the post's links)
For a surprisingly long time, communicating rich mathematical formulas has
been difficult on the Web, in e-mail, or in plain text discussion groups.
There are two tools that take the pain out of this process.
Writing
Codecogs o
What is Takahashi analogue to the deflated electron?
On Dec 30, 2011, at 13:21, Daniel Rocha wrote:
> Your theory is just too similar to what I imagine that should happen in Phase
> III that I get confused. You are correct in your stuff, but you don't use
> many equations, mostly your intuit
On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 11:58 PM, Horace Heffner wrote:
>
>
>
> The deflated state electron, pre-fusion, is not below ground state energy.
> It is a degenerate form of the ground state, or whatever state the
> hydrogen nucleus and associated electron occupy in the lattice.
>
How can the groun
On Dec 29, 2011, at 20:09, Horace Heffner wrote:
>
> On Dec 29, 2011, at 3:08 PM, Charles HOPE wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Dec 27, 2011 at 1:27 PM, Horace Heffner
>> wrote:
>>
>> On Dec 27, 2011, at 9:05 AM, pagnu...@htdconnect.com wrote:
On Tue, Dec 27, 2011 at 1:27 PM, Horace Heffner wrote:
>
> On Dec 27, 2011, at 9:05 AM, pagnu...@htdconnect.com wrote:
>
> Horace,
>>
>> Thanks for the comment.
>>
>> What is needed are some toy models with some simple simulations.
>> I will check out your theory.
>> Do you believe any "new physi
I'm going through Takahashi this week. How could a BEC exist at room
temperature?
On Dec 27, 2011, at 22:41, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
> Bose-Einstein Condensate
On Tue, Dec 27, 2011 at 12:23 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax
wrote:
> At 01:35 AM 12/27/2011, Charles Hope wrote:
>
>
> On Dec 26, 2011, at 22:10, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Then there is that pesky Coulomb barrier. What I found, though, was
>> tha
http://incompetech.com/gallimaufry/care_less.html
On Tue, Dec 27, 2011 at 4:57 PM, wrote:
> In reply to OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson's message of Tue, 27 Dec
> 2011
> 10:56:38 -0600:
> Hi,
>
> Quote:
> "I think they will care less about any theoretical arguments that"
>
> This is
On Tue, Dec 27, 2011 at 4:16 PM, Horace Heffner wrote:
>
>
> The conventional D+D fusion reaction, using mass differences, is:
>
> D + D --> 4He + 23.847 MeV
>
>
OK, I get it. Am I correct that the conventional theory says this reaction
doesn't really occur (it's either 3He + n, or 3H + H), or i
org/
>
> and enter "Miles helium" and "McKubre helium".
>
>
> On Dec 27, 2011, at 8:00 AM, Charles Hope wrote:
>
>> How's that? According to what theory?
>>
>>
>>
>> On Dec 27, 2011, at 11:01, Jed Rothwell wrote:
>>
How's that? According to what theory?
On Dec 27, 2011, at 11:01, Jed Rothwell wrote:
> Jouni Valkonen wrote:
>
>> If I have understood correctly, the correlation is meaningless, because
>> there are orders of magnitude too tiny amounts of helium compared to
>> observed heat.
>>
>
> You do
On Dec 26, 2011, at 22:10, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
> Then there is that pesky Coulomb barrier. What I found, though, was that
> there was ample opinion among quantum physicists that it was possible that
> the unexplored conditions of condensed matter just might provide some pathway
> arou
On Dec 26, 2011, at 16:57, Mary Yugo wrote:
> With Rossi and Defkalion truly acting and writing like clowns, it's not hard
> to see why there is no major press coverage or much of anything else going
> on, a full year after the original announcement and hoopla. And Aussie
> Guy's extravag
low profile, which
> I trust you understand.
>
> AG
>
>
> On 12/26/2011 11:24 AM, Charles Hope wrote:
>> Have you yet revealed your name, or the name of your company?
>>
>>
>>
>> On Dec 25, 2011, at 19:48, Aussie Guy E-Cat wrote:
>>
>
Have you yet revealed your name, or the name of your company?
On Dec 25, 2011, at 19:48, Aussie Guy E-Cat wrote:
> I support McKubre's "Conservation of Miracles" or as I put it, "Different
> Dog, Same Leg Action" ;)
>
> AG
>
>
> On 12/26/2011 11:04 AM, Terry Blanton wrote:
>> On Sun, Dec
Yes, links. Mailers are supposed to preserve links inside the brackets. It's a
little known fact, but hopefully all the writers of mail software remember it.
On Dec 24, 2011, at 19:38, Mary Yugo wrote:
>
>
> On Sat, Dec 24, 2011 at 3:25 PM, David Roberson wrote:
> I have no trouble with a
If you wrap the link in , it should better survive travel.
On Dec 24, 2011, at 12:21, Mary Yugo wrote:
>
>
> On Sat, Dec 24, 2011 at 9:13 AM, Mary Yugo wrote:
>
> Sometimes email clients are not kindly to links and interpret/parse them
> badly!
>
>
>
The very first act I'd do is run my own home and office from the technology. In
winter the windows would be wide open to enjoy the fresh air as we roasted in
the balmy heat pouring from my heaters that were attached to nothing. That's
just me.
On Dec 24, 2011, at 12:57, Mary Yugo wrote:
>
Another secret contact! Why can't your friend create a throwaway hotmail
account like anyone else?
On Dec 23, 2011, at 12:27, Mary Yugo wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 7:37 AM, David Roberson wrote:
> Hello Mary,
>
> I wonder if you could ask your source to explain the bump in the curve
>
Tiresome accusations like this ought to be banned from this list. Have you ever
once seen a paycheck cut for the job of Internet trolling? Really? Really?
Because it sounds like an awesome part time job, frankly.
On Dec 19, 2011, at 8:10, Aussie Guy E-Cat wrote:
> Cude what does this have
What happened to these men and their device? How can a functional generator
fail to be mass produced all these years later?
On Dec 16, 2011, at 13:15, "Jones Beene" wrote:
> Robert
>
> Ø Before the courts determine a victor, who will the "people" identify as
> the inventor? I believe that
Are there any examples of pathological science persisting 20 years without
being properly debunked? Are there any examples of new science remaining on the
fringe for 20 years before being finally accepted into the mainstream?
It's not relevant, because his criticism is against innumeracy, which applies
to such delusions as astrology and homeopathy, but not cold fusion, where the
most serious advocates are scientists, who certainly know their differential
equations.
Why would anyone mention cold fusion in 2011, and
Yeah, I was wondering if anyone would notice the irony.
On Dec 14, 2011, at 21:27, Mary Yugo wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 5:35 PM, Charles Hope
> wrote:
> Ha! No soup for you, Mary! And no, you can't have anybody else's, either.
>
> I'm
Ha! No soup for you, Mary! And no, you can't have anybody else's, either.
I'm sure whoever visits will be sworn to secrecy. To protect the trade secrets,
of course, because they don't have a patent on what they're about to mass
produce!
On Dec 14, 2011, at 19:38, Alan J Fletcher wrote:
>
How else do we know what the instruments said, but by recording them?
On Dec 3, 2011, at 16:06, Jed Rothwell wrote:
> Mary Yugo wrote:
>
> Ah. Depends on how much you trust that when Rossi says it's off, it's
> really off. Remember the "stable! stable!" video.
>
> I trust the instrume
On Nov 30, 2011, at 0:22, Aussie Guy E-Cat wrote:
> We exchange emails several times a day.
It doesn't concern you at all that this brilliant engineer is taking hours each
day to answer what must be hundreds of such emails? Maybe he should hire an
assistant to work the front of the house?
Institutions don't like to become irrelevant. They would reverse their policy
and eat crow before that. They would claim they believed in its possibility all
along, but were waiting for conclusive evidence. But they wouldn't fade into
obscurity without making an attempt.
On Nov 28, 2011, at
I mean, you're joking that vortex isn't the Internet.
On Nov 27, 2011, at 18:42, Jed Rothwell wrote:
> Charles Hope wrote:
>
> Joking, yes?
>
> No, I believe Larsen is serious. It is hard to judge.
>
> - Jed
>
On Nov 26, 2011, at 23:25, Jed Rothwell wrote:
> This is an outrage! I object! Larsen called me "the textually prolific
> Internet poster-commenter Mr. Jed Rothwell." Textual, yes. Prolific, sure.
> But I do not post on the Internet. This is a mailing list, not the Internet.
Joking, yes?
Ok, replace "evidence" with "reasonable indication", but I believe the original
point remains.
On Nov 27, 2011, at 16:16, Jed Rothwell wrote:
> Charles Hope wrote:
>
> That's fine, but then Rossi and his believers need to quit complaining or
>
That's fine, but then Rossi and his believers need to quit complaining or
expressing alarm when folks see this misdirection and reasonably interpret it
as evidence of a scam. They should admit that fraud is a rational conclusion.
On Nov 27, 2011, at 13:05, "OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnso
On Nov 26, 2011, at 22:32, Jed Rothwell wrote:
> If you are talking about his experimental results, I will stop believing them
> when:
>
> 1. When Mary Yugo finds a stage magician who can tell us how to fake this,
> even when the machine is opened up to inspection.
Opened up to exactly how
On Nov 26, 2011, at 19:52, Berke Durak wrote:
.
>
> Actually, some women will find your statement offensive - are ladies
> precious flowers unable to speak up for themselves and that should be
> protected from vulgar language?
Absolutely. And American ladies never, ever use foul language. We
On Nov 26, 2011, at 21:07, Craig Haynie wrote:
>
>
> 5) The registered address for the Leonardo Corporation is 8 Town Farm
> Rd, New Boston, NH.
>
> https://www.sos.nh.gov/corporate/soskb/Corp.asp?414253
>
> And there's nothing there.
>
What does this mean? There's no building at the addres
Rossi is a businessman who wants to make money. Solid testing would be awesome
marketing but he doesn't want to attract attention, yet he invites AP reporters
to observe tests. He doesn't need black box tests because he already has
customers, and though a satisfied customer is the best marketin
a scammer, arriving to the conclusion that MY is also a scammer seems
> almost unavoidable.
>
> Which water car are you selling, MY?
>
> MY theory is the simplest!
>
> :- :-) :-)
>
> On Fri, Nov 25, 2011 at 3:29 AM, Mary Yugo wrote:
>
>
> On Thu
t; quoting public 10 kW system at $0.54 / Watt with a min life of 20 years.
> Wonder what he quotes for 100 MWs?
>
> AG
>
>
>
> On 11/25/2011 2:59 PM, Charles Hope wrote:
>
>> On Nov 23, 2011, at 23:08, Aussie Guy E-Cat
>> wrote:
>>
>> Sign a co
On Nov 23, 2011, at 23:08, Aussie Guy E-Cat wrote:
> Sign a contract for delivery, put your money into Escrow and do what ever
> Black Box test you wish. What is so hard to understand?
>
> AG
What's hard to understand is how Rossi will prevent you from chopping open your
new ecat, analyzing
On Nov 24, 2011, at 19:49, Jed Rothwell wrote:
> Mary Yugo wrote:
>
> I'm curious. How do you think Rossi protects his IP when he sells 100 of the
> E-cats in a batch to an unnamed client.
>
> I answered that question already. Please reread my message.
>
He claims to have a self-destruct
So far, nobody seems to be able to predict Rossi's actions as well as Mary can.
The rest of us are stumped, but her hypothesis explains the behavior.
On Nov 24, 2011, at 17:07, Aussie Guy E-Cat wrote:
> We don't know that was what went down.
>
> AG
>
>
> On 11/25/2011 8:03 AM, Jed Rothwel
I'm finding Cude's responses informative in this thread, and it seems to me
that he's adequately proven his case now that dispute has been withdrawn.
On Nov 23, 2011, at 17:49, David Roberson wrote:
> This is getting a bit out of hand. It does not make sense for me and this
> poster to con
I've tossed a few posters into my filter, generally for an excess of unamusing
puns, but I never understood the theory of compounding the annoyance with long
announcements of same.
On Nov 21, 2011, at 0:56, Jouni Valkonen wrote:
> Apparently, Mary is less pathological case than Cude, but pr
On Nov 20, 2011, at 18:45, Akira Shirakawa wrote:
> On 2011-11-21 00:33, Daniel Rocha wrote:
>> Jed, that is NOT possible. He would still see people answering the same
>> things over and over again. What makes MY annoying is not the arguments,
>> but the repetition. But the repetition is not on
On Nov 20, 2011, at 13:05, Mary Yugo wrote:
>
>
> And why in the world would you trust people who install large industrial
> devices? In my experience they have a lot of practical knowledge on how to
> do their jobs according to instructions and protocols but not the formal
> education t
On Nov 20, 2011, at 0:52, David Roberson wrote:
>
> I made a good faith effort to explain the system to one of them to no avail.
> That particular one refused to discuss the operation of Rossi's 1 MW system
> in details point by point.
> It is apparent that he realized that his argument wa
Rossi said he'd sell to anybody except the military.
On Nov 19, 2011, at 23:17, Aussie Guy E-Cat wrote:
> On 11/20/2011 2:30 PM, Mary Yugo wrote:
>> What Rossi could do would be twofold. First, ally himself with some deep
>> pockets.
>
> Deep pockets? How much deeper can you get but the mili
Moving into acceptance? Seems to me that governments are taking the same policy
of Cude, Yugo, and Park.
On Nov 18, 2011, at 0:09, "Craig Brown" wrote:
> I never said they DID believe Rossi. This has nothing to do with Rossi, "this
> sector" refers to LENR in general where Rossi is only o
On Nov 15, 2011, at 11:17, Jed Rothwell wrote:
> Many things about Rossi make no sense. He is not a predictable person, and
> not easy to understand. His motivations are obscure. He is complicated. His
> business practices seem risky and ineffective to me. He does many things that
> make him
On Nov 14, 2011, at 20:12, Jed Rothwell wrote:
> Charles Hope wrote:
>
>
> Rossi can be devious, but I have not seen any evidence that he lies about
> engineering data.
Except that you wrote
> Mind you, the list of his statements we compiled includes some diametr
On Nov 14, 2011, at 14:04, Mary Yugo wrote:
> My working theory on why he behaves that way is that he's scamming.
There are two problems with that.
He's shifty and does not inspire confidence.
He's not taking all the money he's being offered.
Granted that Rossi is producing anomalous heat, nevertheless absolutely
everything else about this story stinks to high heaven. The conundrum which
nobody can decipher is why someone with a real effect, or a scammer, would
operate in such a bizarre manner. The only conclusion left is that the ef
I'm interested in your criticisms of mainstream physics. Is there widespread
agreement with your opinions on, say, QED? If not, what is preventing
mainstream physicists from seeing it?
Sent from my iPhone.
On Nov 1, 2011, at 4:25, Danny Ross Lunsford wrote:
> My strongest reason for believ
Jed, in your opinion, why does Rossi bother with these demoes, if they don't
impress fence sitters, and he doesn't need new investors?
Sent from my iPhone.
On Oct 28, 2011, at 22:37, Jed Rothwell wrote:
> I wrote:
>
> This test has been a colossal disappointment.
>
> I know Rossi pretty w
Maybe there was an acquisition since the arrangement was made.
Sent from my iPhone.
On Oct 22, 2011, at 12:29, Peter Gluck wrote:
> If somebody can understand this. please explain:
>
> Mattia Battistich
> October 22nd, 2011 at 9:59 AM
> Dear Dr. Rossi,
> 1) A few weeks ago I remember readi
I'm just interested in what kind of unpowered system can use insulation to
increase its temperature after the power has been shut off.
It seems to me Jed has a point.
Sent from my iPhone.
On Oct 17, 2011, at 21:37, Robert Leguillon
wrote:
> Mr. Rothwell never attacked me personally. He
I'm sorry, but how does Stremmenos' letter ruin Rossi's chances of obtaining
damages?
Sent from my iPhone.
On Oct 13, 2011, at 15:42, "Jones Beene" wrote:
> Thanks, Akira ... More drama indeed! Move over, James Bond there is new
> poker-faced gambler in town.
>
> This is looking almost like
One can make the case that displaced old workers can't be retrained, and so
should be kept alive on transfer payments, but their children should be able to
take part in the new economy, as software workers, so there should never be a
permanently displaced class.
Sent from my iPhone.
On Sep 1
If I understand the translation, this means that Defkalion never requested
permission to build a plant where it was thought they would. How does this
reflect poorly upon Rossi?
Sent from my iPhone.
On Sep 3, 2011, at 10:56, Susan Gipp wrote:
> Another evidenche that the whole e-cat story is
Quite impressive for a company we were told was thrown together hastily this
spring.
Sent from my iPhone.
On Aug 7, 2011, at 13:39, Akira Shirakawa wrote:
>>> They have dozens of experts and hundreds of millions of dollars, and a
>>> board of directors that would be suitable for any Fortun
Sent from my iPhone.
On Aug 6, 2011, at 18:54, "OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson"
wrote:
>
>
> ... They don't want to hear about the fact that when government employees
> "spend" their money it boosts the economy in exactly the same manner as what
> would be "spent" from individuals
It's not reserved for poor countries, but weak countries. Thus, poor Libya,
having given up its nuclear ambitions, gets smacked around with a large trout,
whereas poor DPRK is allowed to fire missiles randomly around its region, and
it receives a finger wag.
Craig, truly brilliant post.
Sent
Consider how futile it should be to make a prediction six months out, as Rossi
did regarding October, if reliability was still being addressed the entire
time. That does not smell right. One can only predict confidently about well
controlled processes. Why arbitrarily box oneself in like that?
Was going to blog about this tonight. The punchline is that, contrary to the
graph, the isotopic composition is very terrestrial.
Sent from my iPhone.
On Aug 1, 2011, at 13:37, Terry Blanton wrote:
> Like Art's Parts, these artifacts of the Roswell crash show isotopic
> anomalies:
>
> htt
Among all the Millises and the Millses, I'd say Milli was practically born for
this field.
Sent from my iPhone.
On Jul 27, 2011, at 16:04, Jed Rothwell wrote:
> See:
> http://coldfusionnow.wordpress.com/2011/07/23/viareggio-cold-fusion-conference-science-politics-and-an-italian-competitor/
>
I would have guessed the water would stop swirling within 10s, long before
boiling, which in my oven I attain by setting it to 5:30.
> The reason for swirling it was just that a lot of microwave ovens seem to
> heat from the top, and if you don't get it swirling, you end up with a cup of
>
This style of quotation is nonstandard and difficult to follow for large
messages. Regular email clients handle the creation and display of nested
quotations in an agreeable manner, which your formatting breaks. If you prefer
to use a word processor for composition, please begin a reply, copy th
probably be a whole lot simpler and easily extensible
> compared to what we have
> now.
>
> What is missing from much of physical theory is a physical model first...
> Before the mathematics.
> After relativity and QM came along, the mathematical physicists began to
> d
l theories contain
> such abstract mathematical constructs... I think it would be quite fruitful
> to re-examine theoretical concepts with a fresh approach based on rational
> physical constructs.
> -Mark
>
>
> From: Charles Hope [mailto:lookslikeiwasri...@gmail.com]
> Sent:
On May 26, 2011, at 4:09, Joshua Cude wrote:
> The language of physics is math.
>
This is a deep statement, worth unpacking. It means that if an idea can't be
written mathematically, it is not physics. I suspect that the sort of answer
that Mark seeks could not be written mathematically.
What a profound statement. Thank you!
Sent from my iPhone.
On May 25, 2011, at 15:44, Rich Murray wrote:
> Let's encourage non ad hominem, civil, polite, gracious, patient,
> evidence and detail oriented, genteel, lightly humorous, collaborative
> communication -- one of the finest cultural i
How about giving a few examples of the sort of answer you'd find satisfactory?
Sent from my iPhone.
On May 25, 2011, at 20:33, "Mark Iverson" wrote:
> Robin beat me to the punch... I was changing spark-plugs and serpentine belts
> on my car!
>
> Robin hits the nail on the head... Anything m
This paper is pretty harsh.
http://iopscience.iop.org/1367-2630/7/1/127/pdf/njp5_1_127.pdf It's difficult
to imagine how the CQM advocates could have adequately addressed these
questions.
Sent from my iPhone.
On May 21, 2011, at 3:23, mix...@bigpond.com wrote:
> In reply to OrionWorks -
Is there anyone who believes Mills' hydrino theory who also understands quantum
mechanics?
Sent from my iPhone.
On May 15, 2011, at 16:08, "Mark Iverson" wrote:
> I renamed this thread cuz I'd like to hear opinions as to WHY an engineer
> succeeded where ALL the scientists failed in optimizi
Where was this suspicious pre-demo mentioned?
Sent from my iPhone.
On May 13, 2011, at 22:48, "Jones Beene" wrote:
> No disagreement to speak of - not to mention in a couple of months I might
> be arguing Terry's position and he might have mine. But the truth will out,
> and therefore let m
The aether that was debunked a century ago, or a different one?
Sent from my iPhone.
On May 13, 2011, at 21:53, John Berry wrote:
>
> Well, explain how it is to be tested and we'll give it a shot.
>
> T
>
>
> My opinion is that the conservation of energy is generally accurate and than
>
That's the mini supernova argument. We don't know what's inside the reactor,
but we know it doesn't resemble a supernova, so we are obliged to assume that
any copper found is just regular copper that migrated. It's way too fanciful to
assume otherwise at this point.
Sent from my iPhone.
On
This very interesting paper
http://astro1.panet.utoledo.edu/~srf/isotopes/li1.pdf is all about isotope
ratios varying from region to region.
Sent from my iPhone.
On Apr 30, 2011, at 15:56, "Jones Beene" wrote:
> From: Jed Rothwell
>
>
>
>
>
> Ø Anyone reviewing the astronomical da
I didn't see tensors mentioned in the Wikipedia page. Tensors of what degree?
Wouldn't you be dealing with a distribution of them anyway?
Sent from my iPhone.
On Apr 24, 2011, at 10:28, David Jonsson wrote:
> I have really found a bad thing. On the link below they talk about effective
> ma
I was referring to the report Jones Beene refers to, unseen, by an unnamed
author, which uses thermodynamics to raise questions.
Sent from my iPhone.
On Apr 20, 2011, at 9:58, Jed Rothwell wrote:
> Charles Hope wrote:
>
>> Expert opinion, indeed. Not bad enough that the box
Expert opinion, indeed. Not bad enough that the box is black but we're reacting
to a secret report shown only to Levi, the contents of which can only be
guessed at?
Sent from my iPhone.
On Apr 20, 2011, at 0:14, "Jones Beene" wrote:
> Robin.
>
> My initial reaction is that the assumptions
Ok that's the sort of possible issue I was referring to in terms of their
policies being acceptable.
I have a domain already and can have a mediawiki set up there probably this
weekend, if others share your concerns.
If you would prefer to do it, or can get it up faster, feel free.
Sent f
ki.com/index.php/Directory:Andrea_Rossi's_Cold_Fusion_Energy_Catalyzer_(E-Cat):_Frequently_Asked_Questions
>
>
> On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 12:35 AM, Esa Ruoho wrote:
> Hear hear!
>
>
>
> On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 12:21 AM, Charles Hope
> wrote:
> I'll l
le for the purely textual components...
>
> please contact me if you would like to collaborate / contribute...
>
> On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 23:21, Charles Hope
> wrote:
>> I'll look into setting up a wiki, which will be more convenient than passing
>> around a word document.
>>
>
I'll look into setting up a wiki, which will be more convenient than passing
around a word document.
Sent from my iPhone.
If the waste is identical to the fuel, that means no reaction involving it
actually occurred, by definition. The material is at best merely a catalyst for
a reaction with other fuel and waste.
Sent from my iPhone.
On Apr 15, 2011, at 22:52, Axil Axil wrote:
> The scam status of the Ross
Describe in what way? How was the Wikipedia page insufficient?
Sent from my iPhone.
On Mar 27, 2011, at 20:52, David Jonsson wrote:
> Can someone help me?
>
> More specifically: I need to be able to describe the acceleration component
> perpendicular to the direction of the flow.
>
> http:
So why is it bad to have spent fuel around active fuel rods?
Sent from my iPhone.
On Mar 15, 2011, at 20:32, Terry Blanton wrote:
> I was puzzled what was going on with F4. Now I understand. The spent
> fuel ponds not only protect spent fuel; but, they temporarily store
> active fuel rods wh
One wonders how this accounts for the curvature of light under the influence of
gravity.
Sent from my iPhone.
On Feb 27, 2011, at 15:08, Ron Kita wrote:
> Greetings Votrex-L:
>
> Possible: Gravity Modification or Gravitational Shielding ?
>
> There is an interesting paper by Professor R
There is no mathematical definition of fringe. A topic is fringe if the
majority of scientists subjectively feel it is. Wikipedia is an excellent tool
for judging such mass subjectivity.
Sent from my iPhone.
On Feb 27, 2011, at 11:29, Jed Rothwell wrote:
> Let me add that we are talking a
Isn't it more likely that the skeptics simply think the field is a joke, rather
than that they're intimidated by the weight of the positive evidence?
Sent from my iPhone.
On Feb 24, 2011, at 10:52, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
> At 01:30 AM 2/24/2011, you wrote:
>> Not being able to concede a
It seems like the field needs a new improved experiment showing helium/heat.
Joshua, can you specify some parameters that would convince you?
Sent from my iPhone.
>
What part of the country are you in?
Rossi will see any work at replication as an attempt to steal his pot of gold.
I wouldn't bother asking for his blessing.
Sent from my iPhone.
On Feb 22, 2011, at 16:18, "Dennis" wrote:
> >>>Like or not, unless another experimenter or group - more open
On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 12:00 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax
wrote:
>
> The massive rejection of cold fusion, which extended to rejection of a
> graduate student thesis solely because it involved cold fusion research, and
> once the news of that got around, cut off the normal supply of labor for
> replic
inite
> external universe or hyperverse, must be inexplicable, "causeless",
> ie, totally "magical"...
>
> This has in recent thousands of years been a common insight for
> advanced explorers of expanded awareness in many traditions.
>
> Rich Murray "loo
I'm thinking your findings of irreversibility reflected the idiosyncrasies of
floating point math represented in binary numbers, and not the physics itself.
Sent from my iPhone.
On Feb 18, 2011, at 22:17, Rich Murray wrote:
> does classical mechanics always fail to predict or retrodict for 3
Also, the fact that both meters were pegged. That sounds more like an event,
and less like the momentary exposure of a shielded catalyst.
On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 4:43 PM, Jones Beene wrote:
> From: albedo5
>
>
>
> If we had a spectrum, we would know what it was - or more to the point,
> what
1 - 100 of 103 matches
Mail list logo
