[Vo]:Copy of "A Brief Introduction to Cold Fusion" without YouTube ads

2021-09-17 Thread Jed Rothwell
Around July of this year, the number of people viewing my video fell.
Recently I watched the video and discovered that YouTube is stuffing
advertisements in front of it. I guess that is why fewer people are
watching it. There does not seem to be a way to override this. The
"monetization" option is not turned on. So, I downloaded it and put a copy
at LENR-CANR.org in mp4 format. You can view it anytime, or download a copy:

https://lenr-canr.org/Collections/Brief%20Introduction%20to%20Cold%20Fusion.mp4

This does not have the subtitles the YouTube one has. The YouTube version
is still here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HjvL4zNLOGw

The script in various languages is here:

https://lenr-canr.org/wordpress/?page_id=1618


Re: [Vo]:Scientific Papers sign of desperation among Big pharma

2021-09-10 Thread Jed Rothwell
Jonathan Berry  wrote:

It is not marginal, look at Africa, the places where they give Ivermectin
> routinely has basically no Covid death spikes, the places where they don't
> have the familiar looking waves.
>

These effects are more easily explained by demographics (many young people)
and by very poor data collection. They are not caused by the use of
ivermectin.

As I said, if ivermectin could have this effect, this would be clear from
the double-blind clinical testing. As noted above, many tests have been
done, and 70 in total will be done. That is more than enough to reveal an
effect. Furthermore, even if we assume that the most positive tests so far
are correct, the effect they show is so small it cannot begin to explain
the result in Africa or India.

Beware of wishful thinking and people who do not understand epidemiology
and statistics. The epidemiologists in India are right; the ivermectin
advocates are wrong. I am not aware of any epidemiological look at the
situation in Africa, but the population profiles and the poor quality of
health care and public health statistics are similar. You cannot draw
conclusions from the public health data. For example, in Uttar Pradesh
recent statistics indicate that no one has died from anything. Deaths are
zero in all categories. That can't be right. See:

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.08.04.21261604v1.full

QUOTE:

"For Uttar Pradesh, the raw mortality data obtained from a
Right-to-Information request contained anomalies, such as multiple
districts with zero deaths for numerous months."


Re: [Vo]:Scientific Papers sign of desperation among Big pharma

2021-09-10 Thread Jed Rothwell
Jonathan Berry  wrote:

Jed, You point me to a study where it was tested this way suitably, I
> suspect it will have been highly flawed if that was the result.
>

I suspect you will say that any result you disagree with is flawed by
definition.

But you are missing my point. Even if we assume the most positive studies
are correct, the effect is still marginal. It cannot explain the events in
India. The drug cannot be used instead of vaccines. If you are vaccinated,
there is no need to use ivermectin or anything else, including drugs that
we know actually work, such as remdesivir. We don't need these things any
more than we need iron lungs and the various therapies for dealing with
polio symptoms. The vaccine all-but ensures you will not get a serious
case. A third booster reduces the likelihood of infection by 95%. The
problem is fixed. The pandemic can easily be eradicated, and driven into
extinction in the human species. Vaccines are far cheaper than any other
drug. Even if ivermectin works, you have to take it for days, and you are
sick while you do that, which costs you a lot in lost productivity. Whereas
two doses of vaccine cost practically nothing.


Re: [Vo]:Scientific Papers sign of desperation among Big pharma

2021-09-10 Thread Jed Rothwell
Terry Blanton  wrote:

If you are truly interested, there are currently 76 clinical studies either
> on-going or completed for the efficacy of ivermectin on SARS-CoV-2.
>

76 is a lot of studies! I think we can be confident that if it has any
efficacy, that will be determined. A reliable, quantitative measure of
efficacy will emerge.

Some critics say that too much effort is being put into testing ivermectin.
Other, more promising drugs are not being tested because so many clinical
studies are being made of ivermectin.

Some supporters of ivermectin say the medical establishment has not
approved any pre-existing drug. It is dragging its feet. That is not the
case. Several drugs have been approved, such as remdesivir:

https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/coronavirus/diagnosis-treatment/drc-20479976


Re: [Vo]:Scientific Papers sign of desperation among Big pharma

2021-09-10 Thread Jed Rothwell
Terry Blanton  wrote:


> But effectiveness is absolutely conclusive
>>>
>>
>> No. If that were true, it would show up in the double-blind tests.
>>
>
> Many things work in vitro but not in the body, e.g.:
>

That's true too. It is important. But I was talking about a clinical
double-blind test with human patients. You give ivermectin to some of them,
and a placebo to others. You don't know who is getting what. If ivermectin
is effective, the ones who got it recover sooner, or their symptoms are
markedly less severe. Several double-blind tests have been done. They have
either shown no effect, or a very small effect. In no case has the effect
been large enough to cause what is reported from India. So, I conclude that
the Indian epidemiologists are right, and the field doctors are engaged in
wishful thinking, or they are ascribing good results to the drug which are
actually caused by the natural course of the epidemic. That may sound
unlikely, but there are many examples of that in the history of medicine.

If a drug works, that has to show up when you do enough double-blind
tests, with enough people. One test might fail because the doctors doing it
give the wrong dose, or they give it during the wrong phase of the disease,
or for some other reason. However, there have been multiple tests of
ivermectin. As far as I know, the doctors in the field in India have
reported their doses, methods, and so on, and the doctors doing clinical
trials know what procedures supposedly work. But they are not working.


Re: [Vo]:Scientific Papers sign of desperation among Big pharma

2021-09-09 Thread Jed Rothwell
Jonathan Berry  wrote:



> Why are they pushing an experimental that contains the harmful spike
> protein that has little beneficial effect and obvious harm?
>

COVID itself, and the common cold, both produce a million times more of
these spike proteins than the vaccine does. Yet the cold does not kill you.
Therefore, the protein is harmless.

It has to be the same spike protein. Otherwise it will not trigger the same
immune response.


Re: [Vo]:Scientific Papers sign of desperation among Big pharma

2021-09-09 Thread Jed Rothwell
Jonathan Berry  wrote:


> But effectiveness is absolutely conclusive
>

No. If that were true, it would show up in the double-blind tests. Many of
them have been done by proponents. None have shown more than a marginal
effect, and they were probably mistakes.

This is science. You have to use objective, scientific experiments.
Double-blind tests are the only way to be sure a drug is actually working.
The experiments show that ivermectin does not work. There is nothing more
to be said. There are no other standards of truth.

>


Re: [Vo]:Scientific Papers sign of desperation among Big pharma

2021-09-09 Thread Jed Rothwell
Jürg Wyttenbach  wrote:

> We no longer need any Ivermectin studies as we have real data from
> 1'000'000'000 people that now no longer worry CoV-19.
>
Leading Indian epidemiologists say there is no evidence that ivermectin had
an effect in India. They were interviewed in the New York Times and
elsewhere. Epidemiologists are better at judging these things than doctors
in the field. Doctors have often been mistaken about the efficacy of a
drug. The epidemiologists say the curves of the recent outbreaks indicate
the epidemic abated because of natural herd immunity in the hard hit
districts. The doctors took antibody tests from a sample of the population.
They found that the infection rate was far higher than official statistics
showed. It was high enough to achieve local herd immunity. Local herd
immunity is why there are multiple waves of an epidemic in different cities
over time.

Double-blind tests of ivermectin show either a very small effect, or none
at all, so it is not possible it has had a giant effect on the Indian
population. The doctors in the field are not more skilled in
administering the drug than the doctors doing the double-blind tests. The
doctors in the field have described their methods, dosage and so on.
Clinical double-blind tests did not replicate their claims. When a drug has
a small effect at best, the way ivermectin does, the only way to confirm
that effect is with a double blind test.


[Vo]:Bridging the Gaps: An Anthology on Nuclear Cold Fusion Kindle Edition

2021-08-11 Thread Jed Rothwell
Bridging the Gaps: An Anthology on Nuclear Cold Fusion Kindle Edition

by Randolph R. Davis

Published 2021

https://www.amazon.com/Bridging-Gaps-Anthology-Nuclear-Fusion-ebook/dp/B097465MT5


[Vo]:NASA and LENR

2021-07-26 Thread Jed Rothwell
The FAA's top space official outlines progress

— NASA does a deep dive on potential power sources for a moon base,
including “cold fusion.”

https://www.politico.com/newsletters/politico-space/2021/07/23/the-faas-top-space-official-outlines-progress-493703

Frontiers of Space Power and Energy
Document ID: 20210016143
Document Type: Technical Memorandum (TM)

https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20210016143

The part about cold fusion is on pages 15, 16 and 17. It begins:


Farther Term

LENR - Revived (after experiments earlier in the 1900s) in the late 1980s
[ref. 28] and dubbed “Cold Fusion,” what is now usually termed LENR (Low
Energy Nuclear Reactions) was an experimental discovery with replication
issues at the time and lacked an acceptable theory. Now, three decades of
extant worldwide experiments [ref. 29] indicate “something nuclear” is
real. However, there does not yet exist a cogent, verified theory and
therefore LENR has been looked at with askance by the physics community.
There are now extant recent weak force and other weak neutron-based
theories (not “hot” fusion) involving surface plasmons, electroweak
interactions explicable via QED on surfaces, collective effects, heavy
electrons, ultraweak neutrons, and utilizing neutron generation to obviate
coulomb barrier issues. There are now many patents and LENR is beginning to
evolve into the marketplace. Given a validated theory to engineer, scale,
and make safe, LENR would obviously be a major world energy revolution,
especially with observed energy density levels surpassing those of chemical
energy. In fact, LENR has been observed in the tens to hundreds and
theoretical possibilities into the many thousands times chemical energy
density levels. In the Widom-Larsen Theory [ref. 30], H2 is adsorbed or
“loaded” onto a metal surface and the resulting surface plasmon initiates
collective effects. Some energy is added and several types of energy appear
to work. From the LENR experiments and a sizable body of applicable related
research, nano cracks/asperities in the surface morphology concentrate
energy over an area and produce high localized voltage gradients. Such
voltage gradients excite collective electrons to combine with protons in
the surface plasmon to form ultraweak neutrons. These neutrons readily
interact, producing neutron rich isotopes which undergo beta decay and
transmutations. The heavy electron cloud converts the beta decay to heat,
sans worrisome radiation and coulomb barrier issues, in agreement with
experiment(s). . . .

etc.


Re: [Vo]:Some ICCF-23 videos uploaded already

2021-06-10 Thread Jed Rothwell
  This has been brought up to date every day.

On Wed, Jun 9, 2021 at 5:41 PM Jed Rothwell  wrote:

> See:
>
> http://ikkem.com/iccf-23_oralab.php
>


[Vo]:Some ICCF-23 videos uploaded already

2021-06-09 Thread Jed Rothwell
See:

http://ikkem.com/iccf-23_oralab.php


[Vo]:Reminder: ICCF23 starts June 8 (or June 9)

2021-06-04 Thread Jed Rothwell
ICCF23 starts on June 8, 2021, or on June 9, depending on your time zone.
The preliminary program is here:

http://ikkem.com/iccf-23_program.php

Registration is free, but you have to register to see the presentations.


Re: Dave Beaty Re: [Vo]:ufo report to be coming out in a month

2021-05-22 Thread Jed Rothwell
Michael Foster  wrote:


> Everyone just assumes that these visitors must be from civilizations far
> advanced from our own. That may or may not be true.
>

If they are actually visitors from other civilizations, they have to be far
advanced. They cannot be from anywhere in the solar system. Our robot
probes have now visited every planet and most large moons. There is no sign
of intelligent life anywhere in the solar system. So if there are non-human
visitors they must have crossed interstellar space. To do that, they have
to be far advanced over us. We could not begin to do that, except -- as I
noted -- with tiny spacecraft that cannot be controlled when they arrive.


Re: Dave Beaty Re: [Vo]:ufo report to be coming out in a month

2021-05-21 Thread Jed Rothwell
I wrote:


> I think there is no likelihood aliens would need help from us, and no
> likelihood they crashed or their equipment failed. A technology capable of
> crossing interstellar space with devices as large as this would be
> "indistinguishable from magic" (Clarke) and it would be hundreds or
> thousands of years ahead of anything we could understand -- or make. It
> would be so reliable there is no chance it would fail catastrophically.
>

Having said that, let me add that I have no earthly idea what might be
causing these UFO reports. I have no hypothesis. I think I can rule out
some hypotheses. It seems unlikely that a civilization can send
macroscopic, controlled vehicles across interstellar space, yet these
vehicles might crash on earth. I suppose I cannot rule it out, but it is
like suggesting that a modern desktop computer which performs 3 billion
operations per second might slow down and take 10 minutes to add 2 + 2 = 4.
Or that a pickax might shatter when you use it to make a hole in a
styrofoam block. Technology does not fail that drastically. Things are more
reliable than that.

I am not interested in UFOs because as far as I know, there is not enough
data to form a reasonable hypothesis. We'll just have to wait until we know
more, which may be never. I am not interested in questions with no
near-term potential answers. I don't care about the so-called Big Questions
such as "how did the universe begin?" Honestly, I am not much interested in
any question that is not likely to lead to making money soon, or making
life better, or fixing problems such as pollution, global warming, or cheap
access to outer space, or better food. I admit I am a philistine!


Re: Dave Beaty Re: [Vo]:ufo report to be coming out in a month

2021-05-21 Thread Jed Rothwell
Jones Beene  wrote:

In that case, the most likely thing ET would need to continue their mission
> is replacement of advanced chips and electronics. To get these parts,
> however, they might first need to intervene somehow in the normal process
> of R on earth by influencing progress and directing it in a certain way
> to meet their needs, not ours.
>

Every breakthrough in semiconductors was made by people without help from
extraterrestrials. The people who made these breakthroughs documented their
work very carefully, for patent purposes. The history has been preserved in
detail. There is no doubt the people came up with the ideas themselves.
There is no mystery or gaps in the development process. Individual
discoveries were not great leaps of imagination. They were not extremely
surprising or unthinkable, especially compared to cold fusion. If Shockly,
Brattain and Bardeen had not discovered transistors, someone else soon
would have. Arguably, Lilienfeld did discover transistors in 1925. The Bell
Labs patent lawyers thought he did, and they wrote the patent so as not to
infringe on his patent. It is not likely Lilienfeld ever demonstrated the
effect, and his device might not have worked, but it was similar to first
devices from Bell Labs.

I think there is no likelihood aliens would need help from us, and no
likelihood they crashed or their equipment failed. A technology capable of
crossing interstellar space with devices as large as this would be
"indistinguishable from magic" (Clarke) and it would be hundreds or
thousands of years ahead of anything we could understand -- or make. It
would be so reliable there is no chance it would fail catastrophically.

That is not to say we could not send probes to other stars. There are
already laser, solar wind and other proposed devices that might do that.
But the payload would be measured in grams. Hundreds would be sent, and it
would take ~30 years to reach the nearest stars.

http://spaceref.com/interstellar/relaying-swarms-of-low-mass-interstellar-probes.html

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

If these aliens wanted to make some equipment, they could do it themselves,
easily. They would have universal replicators. That is, machines that can
make anything -- another idea Clarke was one of the first to describe.
Don't leave Alpha Centauri without one! We are quickly developing such
tools. 3-D printers are the first generation. Primitive, of course, and
only capable of using one material. Far more advanced ones that can use any
element are likely to be available in a few hundred years. A thousand years
at most, I expect.


Re: [Vo]:nuclear salt water reactor for propulsion in space

2021-05-05 Thread Jed Rothwell
I wrote:


> Ed Storms worked on the conventional fission rockets shown in this video.
> I asked him if he thinks this is plausible.
>

He does not think it is plausible, for reasons too complicated to describe
briefly.

- Jed


Re: [Vo]:nuclear salt water reactor for propulsion in space

2021-05-04 Thread Jed Rothwell
I like it!

Ed Storms worked on the conventional fission rockets shown in this video. I
asked him if he thinks this is plausible.

The paper is linked from the video discussion, here:

https://arc.aiaa.org/doi/abs/10.2514/6.1990-2371


[Vo]:How Pfizer Makes Its Covid-19 Vaccine

2021-04-28 Thread Jed Rothwell
Here is a *fascinating* look at the Pfizer production lines. Amazing! It
looks a lot like a top-quality  experiment. Which it is. See:

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2021/health/pfizer-coronavirus-vaccine.html


This has both text and short, high resolution video portions. It shows
close-ups of the equipment. It briefly explains many of the steps in the
processing. For example, it shows how the RNA is encased in lipids. For
much more detail about that step, see:

https://www.mdpi.com/2076-393X/9/1/65/htm

This will sound familiar to an experimentalist:

"A rack of 16 pumps precisely controls the flow of the mRNA and lipid
solutions, then mixes them together to create lipid nanoparticles. . . .

Synchronizing eight pairs of pumps is not an ideal solution, but Pfizer
engineers chose to scale up existing technology instead of trying to build
a larger, unproven type of precision mixing device. . . ."


New York Times articles about the pandemic are not behind their paywall, so
anyone can see this, I think.


Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC Carbon monoxide alarm

2021-04-07 Thread Jed Rothwell
The furnace is in the crawlspace, so I don't know if a leak from the flu
would come into the house. It sure would if the furnace were installed in a
closet in the house. Anyway, they replaced the whole kit and caboodle. I
prefer it that way. I now have faith in the CO alarm, but not too much
faith! Could it fail the next time? I wouldn't want to risk it.

One thing I learned is how remarkably clear headed, quick thinking and
analytical you can be at 6 in the morning when you jerked awake by an
ungodly racket 10 feet away. In a short time you think: "Is that smoke? I
don't smell it. It must be CO. Okay, throw open the windows and doors. Do I
have time to lower the thermostat and shut off the furnace before
evacuating? Surely I do; they wouldn't make the alarm trigger when you are
90% along the way to asphyxiation. The other alarms are not triggered.
Thermostat down, flame off . . . Okay, how do you turn off the unit
completely?? Ah, here. Furnace off . . . Alarm stopped. Good!"


Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC Carbon monoxide alarm

2021-04-07 Thread Jed Rothwell
bobcook39...@hotmail.com  wrote:

Did your old  furnace   have a closed combustion system with a separate
> fresh air pipe and   combustion gas exhaust?
>

They all do, as far as I know. I don't recall the model and it is now out
the door. The new one is a Trane S8B1:

https://www.trane.com/residential/en/products/gas-furnaces/s8b1/

They all have a heat exchanger. Air in the house circulates through the
exchanger. I think CO usually enters the house when the exchanger cracks or
develops a hole, and combustion gas mixes with the fresh air supply.
Perhaps, as you suggest, this was a leak from the flue. The equipment was
16 years old and I did not want to take a chance with a partial repair. In
my experience, trying to patch up old equipment is a mistake.



> I hope your mew finance does.  That exhaust pipe SHOULD NOT LEAK.  If it
> leaks a new furnaced may not resolve CO accumulation.
>

They replaced the flue up to the chimney, and some of the ducts. The old
flue and ducts were a mess. Maybe coulda been a leak there . . . I suppose
it would have cost a lot to have the flue fixed, and the problem might have
been in the heat exchanger. This kind of equipment is rated to last 15 to
20 years, so it was close to end of life. The maintenance company
recommends replacing rather than repairing after 10 years. That could be
self-serving.


[Vo]:OFF TOPIC Carbon monoxide alarm

2021-04-06 Thread Jed Rothwell
I strongly recommend that readers equip their houses with alarms for smoke
and carbon monoxide. A carbon monoxide alarm may have saved my life a few
days ago. Some of the things it did surprised me, and made me think it was
a false alarm, so let me describe what happened. If you ignore what you
assume is a false alarm, you might wake up dead.

Last year we had our house electric system repaired and brought up to code,
which includes adding hard-wired alarms for smoke and CO to every bedroom.
On April 5, at 6:30 a.m., the alarm located in the hallway above the
furnace return triggered continuously. I turned off the furnace and opened
doors to the outside. The alarm triggered again some minutes later.

There are three alarms in that area, one in the hall, and two in the rooms
beyond, but I think only the one in the hallway triggered. It continued to
beep periodically. It stopped for a while and then ended with a flurry of
short beeps after 9 a.m.:

9:14
9:18
9:22
9:24
9:28

Nothing after that. During these final bursts, I am sure only that one
alarm triggered. The unit also emitted a bright red light from inside, like
something from a 1960s science fiction movie.

CO gas is lighter than air. Apparently, it was trapped in the hallway
ceiling, which forms a bowl above 5 doors. It is surprising the gas took so
long to disperse. I should have put a fan in the hallway.

The HVAC guy came. He turned on the furnace again and used a hand-held
meter to confirm there was CO. The meter showed increasing concentration.
The concentration did not reach a high enough level to trigger the alarm.
The meter is more sensitive than the alarm.

At around 9 a.m. I suspected the alarm was malfunctioning, since only one
alarm triggered, and there were periodic beeps 3 hours after the furnace
was turned off. However, the hand-held meter confirmed there was a problem,
and since that time the alarm has not triggered. The furnace has remained
off.

I recommend you install a CO alarm on the ceiling or high up on the wall.

Without 21st century CO detection and mRNA vaccine technology, I might have
died twice in the last few months. You see why no one is more in favor of
progress and technology than me. Of course I also acknowledge the harm they
cause.

A new furnace will be installed tomorrow.


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

2021-04-06 Thread Jed Rothwell
I wrote:


> There are no gas stations in the middle of nowhere either. Granted, gas
> stations are much more prevalent than chargers. Also, when a gasoline car
> runs out of fuel, you can park it somewhere, get a ride to a gas station,
> bring back a gallon of fuel in a plastic tank, and refuel it. So it is
> easier to recover from running out of fuel.
>

No doubt in the near future you will start to see electric cars with flat
batteries, stranded by the side of roads and highways. The cars have
multiple alarms and a synthetic voice warning you there are only 10 miles
left, 5 miles left . . . they slow down as the battery charge gets close to
zero. But some people will ignore that.

As I said, it is easier to bring a gallon of gas to a stranded car than it
is to bring a generator. But not that different. I expect that tow trucks
and AAA trucks will soon have built-in electric chargers. When a car
battery is flat, it charges quickly. I think 5 or 10 minutes of charging
would be enough to go several miles to the nearest exit and the nearest
charging station. As I said, many electric cars are equipped with a GPS map
showing charging stations. I expect all tow trucks will soon have such
maps. So, it may not be so difficult to rescue an electric car.

The problem with these cars now is the limited range and the long time it
takes to fully recharge. If the range approaches 600 miles, that is about
as far as most people want to drive in one day. So, you can drive all day,
park, and recharge overnight. Or, you might drive for 400 miles, stop for
lunch and partially recharge, and then drive another 200 miles. The top
Tesla range today is 370 miles. For a long trip, you would have to stop
once or twice in a day and fully recharge, which takes anywhere from 1 to
12 hours, depending on the type of charger.

https://www.energysage.com/electric-vehicles/charging-your-ev/charging-a-tesla/


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

2021-04-06 Thread Jed Rothwell
Terry Blanton  wrote:

There's virtually no maintenance...just brakes and tires and very little of
> the former.
>

The brakes do not wear down because they have regenerative braking. Prius
brakes last a long time for the same reason.


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

2021-04-05 Thread Jed Rothwell
CB Sites  wrote:

It's interesting Jed,  there is a 12V car battery in the back of the car
> that is charged from the Li batteries, which is charged from the engine.
> The 12V is used for the car electronics.  I did see a youtube video of a
> guy that used a 2000W 12V inverter for emergency power to his house.  He
> claimed it was better than most gas generators.   So the same sort of
> story.  I've not tried it.
>

If you lived in Atlanta, you would try it. We have extended power failures
several times a year. They often last for hours; long enough that you are
supposed to throw away everything in the refrigerator. My 2 kW
inverter cost me about $100 and it has paid for itself with refrigerator
food costs alone. As I said though, I wish I could be sure it will go up to
2 kW without blowing the Prius fuse, making the car undrivable. The tow
would cost me more than all the money I have saved! Clearly, the car was
not designed for this. A Prius mechanic told me, "I guess it should work .
. ."

I used to have a gasoline powered generator with a lot more umph. I find
that 1.8 kW is enough with modern equipment. Refrigerators and lights use
far less power than they used to. For heat, I have a little propane stove
meant for indoor use on the dining room table. For Korean bbq. It must
produce several kilowatts of heat. I see you are not supposed to use them
indoors but we do:

https://www.amazon.com/Butane-Stove-Fuel-Canister-Catridge/dp/B083ZNCM52/ref=asc_df_B083ZNCM52/

Not dead yet. Although at 6:30 am on Sunday our carbon monoxide alarm went
off and it turned out to be a real alarm, so we might be dead were it not
for 21st century technology. It did not work at all the way I expected. I
shut down the furnace immediately, and opened doors and windows. Yet the
gadget would still beep once or twice hours later, every 10 or 20 minutes.
The guy from the HVAC company came and confirmed it was a CO with a hand
held meter.


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

2021-04-05 Thread Jed Rothwell
CB Sites  wrote:


> When home, I plug it in with the 115V charger device that plugs into a
> standard 3 prong outlet.  Nothing special.   It takes about 6-8 hrs for a
> full charge.   Most commutes for me are about 30miles so I never see the
> gas engine.  Last year my TOTAL gas consumption for this car was 1/2 of a
> tank regular.
>

I suppose the only problem with that . . . is that gas gets "stale." If you
don't use it. So I have heard.

Question: Does it have a convenient place to attach an inverter? So you can
use it as an emergency generator? I have a Prius with the starter battery
in the back. During an extended power failure, I attach a 2 kW inverter.
With trepidation, because I read that over 1800 W it will blow a fuse. So I
am careful not to put much of a load on it. 1.8 kW is enough to run a
modern refrigerator, several LED lights, and the internet. I made sure of
that with a cheap wattmeter.

This works well because the car motor only comes on a few times an hour. I
wish all hybrids, plug in hybrids and electric cars were equipped with 2
ordinary 120 VAC outlets.

Some people attach large inverters to the Prius traction battery. That's
enough to run your whole house. I don't want to mess with that. That has to
be dangerous!


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

2021-04-05 Thread Jed Rothwell
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.
>

It has not been discontinued. It is still for sale:

https://www.chevrolet.com/electric

Bob Higgins  wrote:

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.
>

There are no gas stations in the middle of nowhere either. Granted, gas
stations are much more prevalent than chargers. Also, when a gasoline car
runs out of fuel, you can park it somewhere, get a ride to a gas station,
bring back a gallon of fuel in a plastic tank, and refuel it. So it is
easier to recover from running out of fuel. People who drive electric cars
soon learn to deal with the limited range and the possibility of running
out. I drove an electric car for several months. The pandemic reduced my
need for a car so I gave it to my daughter. But anyway, I have some
experience with this. The GPS map shows all of the local charging stations.
In Atlanta there are hundreds. You could easily find one, and then plot a
course to it.

How often do you run out of fuel with a gasoline car? I only did once, when
I first learned to drive and I wasn't used to watching the fuel gauge, back
in the 1970s. Nowadays, cars have blinking lights and other warnings when
the fuel is low. Electric cars not only have blinking lights, they have a
synthetic woman's voice warning you how many miles you have left, and (as a
I said) a GPS map, and a button you press leading you to the closest
charger. I never came close to running out of charge, because I plugged in
at home.

Granted it would be different in the wilderness, but I doubt many GMC
Hummer owners actually drive off road into the woods. If they do, they
better learn to plot the route on the GPS or with a Google map to estimate
how many miles they will drive before they need to recharge. That is the
kind of thing you can do easily with 21st century technology, even
off-road. It would have taken hours to plan that in 1990, and the answer
would be inaccurate.


[Vo]:Whether Cold Fusion or Low-Energy Nuclear Reactions, U.S. Navy Researchers Reopen Case

2021-03-23 Thread Jed Rothwell
News report:

https://spectrum.ieee.org/tech-talk/energy/nuclear/cold-fusion-or-low-energy-nuclear-reactions-us-navy-researchers-reopen-case

Whether Cold Fusion or Low-Energy Nuclear Reactions, U.S. Navy Researchers
Reopen Case

Spurred on by continued anomalous nuclear results, multiple labs now
working to get to bottom of story

By Michael Koziol


Re: [Vo]:Many years later...

2021-02-26 Thread Jed Rothwell
Don't fret about it. We have thick skin in this business. Welcome back!

On Mon, Feb 22, 2021 at 10:10 PM Kyle Mcallister 
wrote:

> Hello again, Vortexians.
>
> It's been a long time, perhaps 10 years or so since I've been here. I
> can't recall exactly, but that was another life. You'd be surprised how
> much can change in that time, and how much you look back on with regret and
> sorrow.
> I'll start off by saying, if there are people here that were
> (fortunately?) not here back when I was, most of this won't make any sense.
> For that I apologize, and you can stop reading now if you wish. But there
> are still those here that do remember. We did have some good times, and
> some good discussions, and I'll always treasure those.
>
> But there were plenty of bad times and bad feelings that I think were left
> unresolved, and I take the blame for that. I wasn't a particularly good
> person back then, and upon the private suggestion of another member of the
> group, I finally took my leave and didn't plan to return. . . .


Re: [Vo]:It Might Be Over This Spring

2021-02-20 Thread Jed Rothwell
Note that one of the NYT projections also shows April as the date herd
immunity begins. Look at the graph with three choices labeled "CHOSE A
SCENARIO." Select the third choice:

Huge supply increase

5 million shots per day


The text changes to:


It’s a stretch, but if the pace increases to 5 million shots per day, we
could reach the herd immunity threshold by April. In that time, 80,000 people
could die from the virus.


I think 5 million shots per day might be possible, especially if the J
single-dose vaccine becomes available and if J does have production
problems. I read they have some problems now. Let us hope the problems can
be fixed quickly.


Re: [Vo]:It Might Be Over This Spring

2021-02-20 Thread Jed Rothwell
I wrote:

Taking into account one thing and another, the WSJ and the NYT estimates
> are not far apart.
>

WSJ predicts April, NYT predicts July. A 3-month difference is not gigantic
given all the unknowns. For example, what percent of the population will it
take for herd immunity to begin? The other day Fauci said he originally
assumed it was around 70% but now he thinks it may be more like 75% to 85%.
Possibly even 90%. If it is 85%, herd immunity will take longer. He said he
cannot pin it down closer than 75% to 85% mainly because we still don't
know how contagious it is.

Fauci was criticized for changing his mind and for giving such a broad
range of numbers. To me, that sounds like an honest biologist. Medicine and
biology are not exact sciences!

Fauci said we will eventually know more accurately how contagious it is.

See:

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/24/health/herd-immunity-covid-coronavirus.html

QUOTE:

Interviews with epidemiologists regarding the degree of herd immunity
needed to defeat the coronavirus produced a range of estimates, some of
which were in line with Dr. Fauci’s. They also came with a warning: All
answers are merely “guesstimates.”

“You tell me what numbers to put in my equations, and I’ll give you the
answer,” said Marc Lipsitch, an epidemiologist at Harvard’s T.H. Chan
School of Public Health. “But you can’t tell me the numbers, because nobody
knows them.”




> The gradations in orange color at the top of the NYT graph show that it
> emerges gradually.
>

I mean the blue color at the top.


Re: [Vo]:It Might Be Over This Spring

2021-02-20 Thread Jed Rothwell
Taking into account one thing and another, the WSJ and the NYT estimates
are not far apart. Herd immunity is not an absolute condition, and it does
not turn on all at once over a certain threshold. The gradations in orange
color at the top of the NYT graph show that it emerges gradually.


Re: [Vo]:It Might Be Over This Spring

2021-02-20 Thread Jed Rothwell
The WSJ article is behind a paywall. I hope this doctor is right. Other
estimates put herd immunity sometime around August. See:

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2021/02/20/us/us-herd-immunity-covid.html

(I think this NYT article is not behind the paywall.)

On Fri, Feb 19, 2021 at 9:13 PM Terry Blanton  wrote:

> A Johns Hopkins doctor says we will achieve herd immunity in April.
>
> https://www.wsj.com/articles/well-have-herd-immunity-by-april-11613669731
>


[Vo]:Re: CMNS: Physics Today does not allow references to peer-reviewed cold fusion literature

2021-02-17 Thread Jed Rothwell
There is no getting through to people like the editors at Physics Today. I
expect that even if everyone here were to write to them, they would reject
every message.

They think of themselves as fair, objective and open minded. Perhaps they
are open minded about some subjects, but not cold fusion. I regard this
above all as a failure of imagination, described by Giorgio de Santillana
in the book "The Origins of Scientific Thought:"

The failure of imagination explains, among other things, why men became so
reactionary-minded, even when they thought they were entertaining the most
lofty and liberal ideals. Something like that was to occur again in the
American South. When Aristotle, the great master of ethics, said that
slavery is a fact of nature, and that we shall need slaves so long as the
shuttle will not run in the loom by itself, he had registered one of those
great mental blocks which foretell the end of a cycle. And this leads us to
what is obviously crucial, the lack of an applied science.

Pure science is always a hazardous and unfinished affair, stretching out
its structures in perilous balance over the unknown. It does not suit men’s
whims or comfort their fears. In order to be accepted by a tough-minded
society, it must produce unquestionable and stunning results, as happened
with Newton’s laws. Otherwise, it will be told to lay off and not disturb
people’s minds unnecessarily.

As Martin Fleischmann said: "People don't want progress; it makes them
uncomfortable. They don't want it, and they shan't have it." "People" in
this case, include the editors at Physics Today, even though they
themselves would vociferously deny that.


[Vo]:Physics Today does not allow references to peer-reviewed cold fusion literature

2021-02-17 Thread Jed Rothwell
Here is an article in Physics Today: "Q: Harry Collins on acquiring and
using scientific knowledge."

https://physicstoday.scitation.org/do/10.1063/PT.6.4.20210217a/full/

It says: "And to debunk cold fusion, it had to be agreed that [Stanley]
Pons and [Martin] Fleischmann were not the right kind of scientists to be
doing the work. In neither case was it enough, at the time, simply to say
the results weren’t replicated, even though that is how we describe it in
retrospect."

I posted the following response, which was removed.


Jed Rothwell <https://disqus.com/by/disqus_uvQVCeaAV7/>  an hour ago
<https://physicstoday.scitation.org/doi/full/10.1063/PT.6.4.20210217a#comment-5272374398>
Removed

Collins said: " And to debunk cold fusion, it had to be agreed that
[Stanley] Pons and [Martin] Fleischmann were not the right kind of
scientists to be doing the work."

Pons and Fleischmann were not debunked. Their results were replicated in
over 180 major laboratories such as Los Alamos, China Lake, and BARC. These
replications were published in mainstream, peer-reviewed journals by many
distinguished scientists, such as the Chairman of the Indian Atomic Energy
Commission. Many of the replications were at very high signal to noise
ratios, for example, with excess heat ranging from 5 to 100 W, and tritium
ranging from 50 to 10E16 times background. Helium has been measured in many
labs at the same ratio to the heat as D-D plasma fusion. A review of the
subject is here:

https://lenr-canr.org/acrob...
<https://disq.us/url?url=https%3A%2F%2Flenr-canr.org%2Facrobat%2FMcKubreMCHcoldfusionb.pdf%3ArPdp1s1Kpk7x0SnRhk0DRQ5a91Y=4259234>

A collection of papers is here:

https://lenr-canr.org
<https://disq.us/url?url=https%3A%2F%2Flenr-canr.org%3AtYca3nQIoCXrAXAEE2YPJppMMyQ=4259234>

Furthermore, Pons and Fleischmann were experts in electrochemistry and
calorimetry, which are essential skills to reproduce cold fusion. Other
experts confirmed other aspects of the results. The designer of the Los
Alamos Tritium System Test Assembly and the Tokamak Fusion Tests Reactor
tritium detector confirmed the tritium, as did the experts at BARC and
elsewhere. The helium was confirmed in the three top U.S. helium detection
laboratories, in blind tests.


Re: [VO]:Sobering Energy Stats

2021-02-10 Thread Jed Rothwell
U.S. wind generation sets new daily and hourly records at end of 2020

https://www.renewableenergyworld.com/wind-power/u-s-wind-generation-sets-new-daily-and-hourly-records-at-end-of-2020/

QUOTE:

On April 10, 2019, daily electricity generation from wind turbines in the
United States (excluding Alaska and Hawaii) reached a high of 1.42 million
megawatthours (MWh). That record stood for a year and a half before it was
surpassed on several days in November and December 2020. Wind electricity
generation reached 1.76 million MWh on December 23, or about 17% of total
electricity generation on that day. On average, EIA estimates that wind
accounted for 9% of U.S. electricity generation in 2020.


This compares to 20% of total electricity generated by nuclear plants:

https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/nuclear/us-nuclear-industry.php


Re: [Vo]:Updated Gordon, F. Lattice Energy Converter (LEC)

2021-01-30 Thread Jed Rothwell
Robin  wrote:


> >work function where metal ions are transported by well known chemical
> >reactions through a liquid electrolyte in between the electrodes.
>
> Not always. There are "dry-cells" (not really very dry), and also cells
> with a solid electrolyte.
>



> >has similarities with a nuclear or atomic battery without the hazardous
> >radiation and they don't increase output with temperature. We settled on
> >calling it a LEC,
>
> Transporting gas ions may well result in a cell that has a high internal
> resistance. This may well explain why it acts
> as current source rather than a voltage source . . .


Frank says this is right. He will address these issues. This kind of
comment is helpful.

I have been urging him to gather up his comments from the slides and from
discussions like this, organize them, and put them into a sort of Guidebook
To The Experiment. I think he is doing that. It is better to have all the
details in one document, rather than having them only available in bits and
pieces scattered around the internet in discussion groups.


Re: [Vo]:Updated Gordon, F. Lattice Energy Converter (LEC)

2021-01-28 Thread Jed Rothwell
I asked Frank to address this issue of batteries. He posted a reply at
LENR-Forum, as follows:

https://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/thread/6508-frank-gordon-s-lattice-energy-converter-lec-replicators-workshop/?postID=151256#post151256

With regard to the possibility that the LEC is a battery: A LEC has many
similarities to a battery and we debated calling it a Hydrogen Ion Battery
but a LEC is much more. A battery is basically two electrodes of different
work function where metal ions are transported by well known chemical
reactions through a liquid electrolyte in between the electrodes. The LEC
does not have a liquid electrolyte and a LEC produces and transports gas
ions. A battery is also a voltage source and a LEC acts like a current
source. The output of a battery does not increase with temperature. A LEC
has similarities with a nuclear or atomic battery without the hazardous
radiation and they don't increase output with temperature. We settled on
calling it a LEC,

I'm working on a more detailed description but that will take some time. I
reviewed the description that Pam Boss wrote for the Galileo project that
Steve Krivit organize several years ago. It contained a lot more detail
that a high school student with minimal knowledge of electronics or
chemistry would need. The only guidance that I provided to Jean-Paul
Biberian was to send the cell diagram. As I included in the presentation,
he tried a rod of Pd-Ag alloy and it didn't work. I suggested that he
needed to codeposit some Pd onto the rod to make sure it had vacancies that
codeposition is know to produce. He did that and it worked. Jean-Paul is
very experienced and knowledgeable. In the case of Andrew Erickson, he was
new to the field but had some technical knowledge. I sent him the drawing a
description that is in the presentation and talked to him a couple times
and he produced a successful active working electrode. I presume that most
of the people in this forum are somewhere between Jean-Paul and Andrew in
experience and knowledge so hopefully the information that I supplied on
codeposition will be enough. If anyone is having trouble based on that
description or has specific questions, please let me know. I would also
like to know when people try to replicate and if they were successful or
not. Based on the issues/problems in replicating the results, I can be sure
to address those in the detailed description.


Re: [Vo]:Updated Gordon, F. Lattice Energy Converter (LEC)

2021-01-27 Thread Jed Rothwell
Robin  wrote:


> A potential of 0.1 V over a DVM with an input impedance of 10 MOhm is
> readily produced by a chemical reaction for
> several months. The power is only 1 nW.
> It could easily be the result of two different metals. I.e. an unintended
> battery.
>

Gordon does not think it is a battery. I asked him to address this issue in
an upcoming paper.


[Vo]:Updated Gordon, F. Lattice Energy Converter (LEC)

2021-01-24 Thread Jed Rothwell
I uploaded a new version of this paper:

Gordon, F. and H.J. Whitehouse, *Lattice Energy Converter (LEC) (PowerPoint
slides)*, in LENR Workshop in memory of Dr. M. Srinivasan. 2021: Indian
Institute of Technology Kanpur.

https://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/GordonFlatticeene.pdf

I added the Presentation Notes from the PowerPoint slides. The Acrobat
conversion was supposed to include these notes, but it didn't work. I had
to transfer them manually.

The video of this presentation is here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J4dzTWY_aWM=youtu.be

The version of the presentation given during the conference is in the
Session 3 video starting at minute 37:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bd6JCbnYuaU=youtu.be


Re: [Vo]:LENR workshop in memory of Dr. M. Srinivasan Tentative Schedule

2021-01-21 Thread Jed Rothwell
bobcook39...@hotmail.com  wrote:

Jed—
>
>
>
> That site requires a google registration.
>
>
>
> Is there another way tro access the workshop papers?
>

Are you sure it does? I just reached it again using another browser after
signing out, and in incognito mode. While incognito the Google e-mail
server does not know who I am.

We are talking about:

https://sites.google.com/view/lenr-workshop/home

I guess if you can't access it, I can't help you.


Re: [Vo]:LENR workshop in memory of Dr. M. Srinivasan Tentative Schedule

2021-01-20 Thread Jed Rothwell
I wrote:

Did you try the website they just opened? I don't think that requires a
> Google registration. See:
>
> https://sites.google.com/view/lenr-workshop/home
>

I just accessed it "incognito" so it must not require any registration.


Re: [Vo]:LENR workshop in memory of Dr. M. Srinivasan Tentative Schedule

2021-01-20 Thread Jed Rothwell
I recommend this presentation:

https://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/GordonFlatticeene.pdf

This is in Acrobat format with a link to the YouTube video presentation
with the voice-over. Acrobat format may be more convenient because you can
search through it or click on the link to the Rout paper.

The direct link to the video is here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J4dzTWY_aWM=youtu.be


Re: [Vo]:LENR workshop in memory of Dr. M. Srinivasan Tentative Schedule

2021-01-20 Thread Jed Rothwell
On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 5:47 PM bobcook39...@hotmail.com <
bobcook39...@hotmail.com> wrote:


> Is there a way to see papers without t registering via google?  I  AVIOPD
> GOOGLE.  I WOULD LIKE TO READ THE VARIOUS PAPERS.
>

Did you try the website they just opened? I don't think that requires a
Google registration. See:

https://sites.google.com/view/lenr-workshop/home

>


Re: [Vo]:LENR workshop in memory of Dr. M. Srinivasan Tentative Schedule

2021-01-20 Thread Jed Rothwell
Here is the website:

https://sites.google.com/view/lenr-workshop/home


Re: [Vo]:Data processing errors in the COVID-19 vaccination program

2021-01-19 Thread Jed Rothwell
Michael Foster  wrote:

This is serious stuff. In your opinion, Jed, is this something like an
> artifact of the unimaginably complex operating systems and networks we now
> have?
>

Not a bit. This is prosaic. This would have been easy to program, but the
people in charge did not get around to doing it. It was similar to the
failure to roll out the Obamacare website. That was fixed in a few months.
I hope this can be fixed more rapidly. I think it can, because this is a
very simple program. Much simpler than Obamacare. I meant it when I said I
could have done this with a 65 KB minicomputer in 1979. I did similar
things.

With modern computing systems, gathering the data and responding quickly to
millions of patients would be difficult. That would take a lot of
horsepower. But many companies offer this kind of service with cloud
applications. Gathering the data would be a big task, but scheduling the
appointments would be dead easy. I could run it on my desktop for the
entire state of Georgia in no time. The program would be simple. You would
have to consider some special aspects of the problem, such as people making
double or triple reservations, and steps to ensure that doses are not
wasted.

Jürg Wyttenbach  wrote:

The Pfizer & Moderna vaccine are one target vaccines not vectors.
>
> Both are already outdated due to new mutations, so be happy you didn't
> get the shot.
>

All of the experts I have read say that the mutations will not reduce the
efficacy of the vaccines.


Re: [Vo]:LENR workshop in memory of Dr. M. Srinivasan Tentative Schedule

2021-01-19 Thread Jed Rothwell
  Several presentations have now been uploaded to the upcoming LENR
Workshop in Memory of Dr. M. Srinivasan. You don't have to wait for the
Workshop. Some of the slide presentations have a voice-over so you get the
whole presentation. Mine does, and so does Frank Gordon's, which is
interesting. You can download the presentations and hear them now.

Maybe they all have voice-overs? I have not downloaded them all.

Tom Grimshaw did a video presentation.

See:

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1n9Fce0UMU4ch23mvCJ9XYAy8Ac43V5Tt9EwDlm6hocU/edit#



Incidentally, adding an audio track to a PowerPoint slide is harder
than you might think. I suggest you practice for an hour or so. Try playing
back several times. There are some tricky aspects of it. For example you
have to pause between slides or the audio track fades out and then booms
back at the next slide. The pretend laser pointer feature is hard to
use. You have to have three hands. It is even harder with the computer
mouse I use, because it has no buttons. (Don't ask . . .) You have to hold
the laser for a while and move it slowly, which I did not do, as you see
from my presentation.


[Vo]:Data processing errors in the COVID-19 vaccination program

2021-01-19 Thread Jed Rothwell
This is completely off topic, but I put a lot of thought into it, and I
would like to share it.

In the U.S., thousands more people will die because the vaccines already on
hand are not being administered quickly. If the vaccination program had
been properly organized, this could have been avoided. This should have
been done months ago. I, or any other superannuated programmer, would know
how to avoid this mess. Once again we see the cost of ignorance,
incompetence, and not letting experts do their jobs.


The rollout of the vaccine in Georgia is the worst in the US. Only 23% of
the vaccines have been administered. The feds are threatening to withhold
additional doses until this mess is straightened out. Rural hospitals are
getting more doses than they can use and throwing out unused ones, while
some urban hospitals have gotten nothing.

This is caused by incompetent leadership and by the fact that our
healthcare system is fragmented and chaotic in the best of times. The
hospitals are filthy and they often cause nosocomial infections. Billing is
ridiculous. Some have sent me the same bill 3 or 4 times after I pay it.
So, it is no surprise they cannot handle vaccination.

The county and drug store websites say they cannot accept appointment
applications for at least 2 weeks. My doctor's office sent me a form today
to sign up for a vaccination appointment. They actually advised me to sign
up with CVS and with the county health systems as well! If people do that,
there will be double and triple duplicate registrations and many people
will not show up for the appointments. I was able to register myself, and I
got an email response within minutes. But when I went back to get an
appointment for my wife the system did not work. No response. I called the
telephone number but they said they could do nothing.

I do not know why they are having physical difficulty transporting and
administering the vaccinations. The news reports have been sketchy. The
feds have no idea how many doses they have in stock. They gave the states
the wrong information a week ago. In Georgia it seems they have no idea
where the vaccines are, how many are needed, or how to distribute them, and
they cannot find people to administer them. There may be other difficulties
I have not read about.

I cannot judge what physical problems they are having, but now that I have
tried to sign up, I can see the problems with the data processing. In 1979
I was programming 64 KB minicomputers to do municipal applications rather
similar to this, such as keeping track of water bills in small cities.
These machines could process hundreds of thousands of transactions a month.
If you gave me one of those machines today, I could probably set up an
effective system to register everyone in Atlanta, and to assign an
appointment. It would work with printed text on punch cards, which were
mailed out to households. Nowadays the transaction goes over the internet,
but the principle is the same. It would collect applications, sort them,
assign an appointment, and mail back the confirmation card to the patient,
along with a cancellation card. Given the speed of those computers it would
probably run many hours overnight in batch processing, and then print out
and mail the cards the next day. This task can now be done in real time.
But again, the principle is the same.

I would have a file of patients with names, address, date of birth and so
on, and a file of providers such as hospitals and drugstores, with the
number of vaccinations each is capable of doing per day. I would work out
application specific details such as how to contact people after 1 p.m.
when some people have not come for their scheduled appointments and extra
doses are available. I would use zip codes to assign patients to the
closest provider.

In other words, I could spec out a system for doing this in a few days. I
could tell the programmers how to make a better system than we have in
Georgia. I could have done this back in April 2020, and we would have had
the whole thing up and running long before the vaccine became available.
This is Data Processing 101. It is the sort of thing people like me have
been doing since the 1960s. It is not rocket science. Bill Gates and I (the
same age) were both doing stuff like this in high school. Yet no data
processing system like this was ready in December. Not in Georgia, and not
in the Federal government. None of this is working now. Not at the state
level, the hospital I go to, or any drug store. Problems such as combining
the registration and the appointment allocation functions should be obvious
to any programmer. They are idiotic mistakes. This is a travesty.


[Vo]:LENR workshop in memory of Dr. M. Srinivasan Tentative Schedule

2021-01-18 Thread Jed Rothwell
I think this document can be read by anyone. Maybe not?


https://docs.google.com/document/d/1n9Fce0UMU4ch23mvCJ9XYAy8Ac43V5Tt9EwDlm6hocU/edit#


LENR workshop in memory of Dr. M. Srinivasan

22nd-24th Jan 2021

Tentative Schedule


[Vo]:A LENR workshop in memory of Dr M Srinivasan

2020-12-23 Thread Jed Rothwell
From: K P Rajeev 
Date: Wed, Dec 23, 2020 at 12:19 PM


Dear Dr Rothwell,
   I am Prof K P Rajeev of Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur and you
probably remember me as the co-author of late Dr Srinivasan of the
transmutation chapter in the recent "Cold Fusion" book published by
Elsevier in which you also published an article. We have built a small
group at IIT Kanpur to research the LENR phenomena both experimentally
and theoretically. The group includes Prof Pankaj Jain (Theoretical
Astro and High Energy Physics), Prof Raj Ganesh Pala (Chemical
Engineering) and me (Experimental Condensed Matter Physics). We have
also been lucky to get a couple of Ph.D. students.

   We would like to hold a workshop on LENR in memory of Dr Srinivasan,
tentatively during the third weekend of January 2021. We envisage an
online workshop with about twelve talks of about 30 minutes duration
followed by a 10 minutes discussion session. We request you to be part
of this workshop and give a talk. We look forward to a positive
response from you. Also, please let us know if you have any other
suggestions regarding this workshop.

With best regards

K P Rajeev
-- 
Professor
Dept of Physics
IIT Kanpur


Re: [Vo]:Re: merry Christmas

2020-12-23 Thread Jed Rothwell
I wrote:


> The ingredients are listed here. I think they are liquid at room
> temperature, not powder:
>

The lipid nanoparticles are similar to butter, according to one expert. I
think butter is considered a solid at room temperature. See:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eK0C5tFHze8=emb_logo


Re: [Vo]:Re: merry Christmas

2020-12-22 Thread Jed Rothwell
JonesBeene  wrote:


> It is not clear if this category (~3 percent) is anything more than a
> passing phenomenon
>

Other sources say the problems went away in one day or less. There have
been no reports of longer-term problems.

Other vaccines have stronger, more common effects, yet they are safe.




> After all, the injection is stored at  *extremely low temperature* and
> the human body is not accustomed to being injected with super cold fluid.
>

It is room temperature when injected.

A nurse I talked to described other low temperature injections. She said
most are in powder form, and are mixed with an all-purpose injectable
liquid. (She mentioned the name of the liquid but I forgot it.) I think the
COVID vaccines are frozen liquid. After the Pfizer one is warmed to an
ordinary refrigerator temperature it keeps for 5 days:

https://www.pfizer.com/news/hot-topics/covid_19_vaccine_u_s_distribution_fact_sheet#:~:text=After%20storage%20for%20up%20to,or%20stored%20under%20frozen%20conditions
.

The ingredients are listed here. I think they are liquid at room
temperature, not powder:

https://www.health.com/condition/infectious-diseases/coronavirus/pfizer-covid-19-vaccine-ingredient-list


Re: [Vo]:Re: merry Christmas

2020-12-22 Thread Jed Rothwell
Jürg Wyttenbach  wrote:

> Look at CDC presentation slide 6** column explained below:
>
>
> https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/acip/meetings/downloads/slides-2020-12/slides-12-19/05-COVID-CLARK.pdf
>
> 3% were no longer able to work afterwards...
>
Only for one day. Such reactions are common with many other vaccines. The
last several vaccines I got, for influenza, shingles, hepatitis A and B,
left me with very sore arms, unable to work for a day. Hepatitis in
particular is painful for several days. Both shingles shots gave me a fever
for 24 hours, of 101 deg F.

>


Re: [Vo]:Good news about the pandemic at last

2020-11-21 Thread Jed Rothwell
Michael Foster  wrote:

Yes, you are correct about the 6% figure. They merely stated that 6% of
> cases that listed covid19 as the sole cause of death failed to list the
> co-morbidities.
>

Correct. COVID-19 itself does not kill patients directly as often as it
leaves them open to secondary infections and things like that.


But you have fallen into the trap of the CDC's tricky manipulation of data.
> There have been up to 80,000 deaths per year supposedly caused by influenza
> (which strains?). The CDC then gives the mortality rate based upon an
> *estimated* number of infections. In other words, any number they want to
> make up.
>

No, they do not make up these numbers. The numbers are based on clinical
data from doctors and hospitals, and field studies. They are estimated
because ordinary influenza is not on the list of diseases that doctors must
report. Some forms of influenza have to be reported but not others. See:

https://medlineplus.gov/ency/article/001929.htm


They then state the mortality rate among *known* covid infections.
>

That is the only thing they can do. There are no other reliable numbers at
present. There will be more data after widespread antibody tests can be
performed. In any case, we know that COVID-19 kills at least 10 times more
people than influenza in a typical year. Influenza typically kills around
30,000, although some years a dangerous strain will kill many more. We know
that COVID-19 has only infected a small fraction of the population, because
people have taken precautions such as wearing masks, whereas influenza
infects a much larger fraction. If COVID-19 were to spread as widely as
influenza usually does, it would kill ~40 times more people than influenza.
It would also disable many people for life with permanent lung damage,
strokes, heart problems, amputations and so on. Influenza seldom does that.
So it is far more lethal and serious.



> These people at the CDC, the NIH and the FDA are corrupt to the nines.
>

Not the ones I know. They are hardworking scientists. I think you should
not generalize about people you know nothing about.


In the FDA, and I know this is hard to believe, many of the employees'
> salaries are actually paid by pharmaceutical companies.
>

That would be against Federal law. I know several people who work or worked
for Uncle Sam, such as my late mother. They cannot accept so much as a ham
sandwich from anyone. Where did you read that? Be careful what you believe.


Re: [Vo]:Good news about the pandemic at last

2020-11-20 Thread Jed Rothwell
Michael Foster  wrote:


> The CDC itself has said only about 6% of reported mortality could reliably
> be attributed to the virus.


No, it did not say that. You have misunderstood. Please stop spreading such
misinformation.


When you take that into account, the common cold probably has a higher
> mortality rate.
>

The common cold (rhinovirus) kills only about a thousand people per year in
the U.S., mainly people who are seriously ill from other diseases. Perhaps
you meant influenza, which kills 20,000 to 30,000 per year. COVID-19 will
probably kill ~350,000 people in one year. (It has killed 250,000 in 10
months.) Furthermore, influenza infects a much larger fraction of the
population than COVID-19 has infected so far. If COVID-19 were to infect a
similar fraction of the population, it would kill more than a million
people. This is much worse than influenza.


[Vo]:PLOS Writing Center guide to writing and publishing papers

2020-11-19 Thread Jed Rothwell
Someone from PLOS sent me a form letter addressed to Dr. Rothwell,
suggesting I visit their online guide to writing and publishing scientific
papers. I do not know whether to take that as a compliment or an insult. I
would like to think it means they are reading the JCMNS and other papers.
Anyway, their guide is pretty good:

https://plos.org/resources/writing-center/

"The PLOS Writing Center is your guide to preparing a successful manuscript.

Drawn from the cumulative expertise of researchers, professional scientific
editors, and journal staff, the Writing Center offers detailed, practical
guidance for writing each section of a research article."

It has various suggestions such as "do not use an acronym in the abstract."
And, "when you mention something in the abstract, be sure you discuss it in
the paper."


Regarding acronyms --

When I copy edit papers I often nitpick the use of acronyms. Here are the
rules I learned in high school. The first time an acronym appears in the
paper you should define it. Widely used technical terms come first with the
definition in parenthesis "SEM (scanning electron microscope)." Terms that
we use in this field that people outside the field may not know might be
presented in the opposite order: "cold fusion (CF)," "Fleischmann and Pons
(F)," "nuclear active environment (NAE)."

When a term is only used once or twice in a paper, I suggest you forgo the
use of the acronym. Just spell out "nuclear active environment" every time
you use it. It is a burden on the reader having to remember what the
acronym stands for.

"SEM" is so widely used, everyone knows what it means and most people refer
to it by the acronym, so perhaps you do not need to define that one. You
can use it even if it only appears once or twice.


[Vo]:Good news about the pandemic at last

2020-11-16 Thread Jed Rothwell
I realize this is off topic. And I expect everyone here has heard about it.
But I thought you would like to see some quantitative information.

Here is a note on temperatures. The second article says the Moderna vaccine
can be kept at -20°C. The Pfizer vaccine has to be kept at -75°C during
shipping and storage. It can be stored in an ordinary refrigerator for up
to 5 days before it is used. (https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-54889084)
I asked a nurse about this. She said there are several vaccines that
require cold storage. She said this will probably come as a powder, which
is mixed with room temperature fluid before inoculation. The older version
of the shingles vaccine was like this.



Good news! Moderna's vaccine is reportedly 95% effective. Here are the raw
numbers as reported by CNN:


15,000 vaccines administered. 5 people in that group got COVID-19. They had
mild cases.

15,000 placebos administered. 90 people in that group got COVID-19. 11 had
severe cases.


This is reported as 94.5% effective, which I think is too many digits of
precision. I would say >90%. But I quibble. I think there is no question it
is effective.


It seems the vaccine reduces the severity of the disease when it does not
prevent it completely


There were no severe side effects. There were some side effects in some
patients, such as headaches.


Fauci said this is good news. If the Pfizer and or the Moderna vaccines are
approved, the first ones may be administered in December to risk groups
such as doctors and nurses. Fauci predicted the general population may be
vaccinated from May to July 2021.


https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/16/health/Covid-moderna-vaccine.html


"Early Data Show Moderna’s Coronavirus Vaccine Is 94.5% Effective

Moderna is the second company to report preliminary results from a large
trial testing a vaccine. But there are still months to go before it will be
widely available to the public."



More good news, from CNN. This may drive down the stock market value of
Pfizer:


While the two vaccines appear to have very similar safety and efficacy
profiles, Moderna's vaccine has a significant practical advantage over
Pfizer's.


Pfizer's vaccine has to be kept at minus 75 degrees Celsius — or about
minus 103 degrees Fahrenheit. No other vaccine in the US needs to be kept
that cold, and doctors' offices and pharmacies do not have freezers that go
that low.


Moderna's vaccine can be kept at minus 20 degrees Celsius, which is about
minus 4 degrees Fahrenheit. Other vaccines, such as the one against
chickenpox, need to be kept at that temperature.


That means Moderna's vaccine can be kept in "a readily available freezer
that is available in most doctors' offices and pharmacies," said Dr. Tal
Zacks, Moderna's chief medical officer. "We leverage infrastructure that
already exists for other marketed vaccines."


Another advantage of Moderna's vaccine is that it can be kept for 30 days
in the refrigerator, the company announced Monday. Pfizer's vaccine can
last only five days in the refrigerator.


[Vo]:CleanHME Meeting presentations

2020-10-26 Thread Jed Rothwell
CleanHME Meeting presentations:

http://www.cleanhme.eu/?page_id=345


Re: [Vo]:Interstellar travel

2020-10-12 Thread Jed Rothwell
Okay, to summarize this discussion:

A radar would not be able to detect particles such as grains of sand or
small rocks. Therefore I suppose you need a powerful laser in the front of
the spacecraft to heat them and break them into molecules or plasma. It
would have to be turned on at all times because you cannot detect these
particles.

Even atoms and molecules would be large enough to cause damage. So you need
to push them out of the way. I suppose the only way to do this with known
science is to ionize them and then use a magnetic field to push them out of
the way. I do not know if you can ionize particles from a long distance
away. It would have to be very long!

Something like a science fiction "force field" would probably be the best
solution. I have no idea whether such a thing is possible.


Re: [Vo]:Interstellar travel

2020-10-08 Thread Jed Rothwell
Robin  wrote:


> 5) Interstellar gas is not the only problem. A grain of sand or a pebble
> would spell disaster.
>

You're gonna need a VERY high resolution radar and a laser.


Re: [Vo]:Interstellar travel

2020-10-08 Thread Jed Rothwell
Robin  wrote:


> A space ship traveling at half the speed of light would encounter these
> molecules traveling in the opposite direction at
> that velocity. Assuming that the kinetic energy of these particles is
> calculated using 1/2 m*v^2 (it's actually more at
> that speed), then the power associated with the impact on the hull of the
> ship is about 1/2 MW /cm^2.
> If we further assume that the hull is made of 1/2 cm thick Titanium, then
> it will reach it's melting point after an
> exposure of 4 milliseconds.
>

Arthur Clarke and others who thought about interstellar spacecraft
discussed this problem. In the 1970s, Clarke thought this could be fixed by
putting a giant piece of ice in front of the spaceship, to absorb the
particles. The ice would be gradually worn away. I guess the estimate of
the total mass of particles was smaller. Or he did his arithmetic wrong.

If these numbers are correct, I suppose the only way to overcome the
particles is by moving them out of the way. I guess a gigantic cow-catcher
would not work. A science-fiction "force field" would be ideal, but there
is no such thing as far as I know. Can the particles be given a charge from
a distance, and then moved out of the way with a magnetic field? Sort of
like a flying tokamak.


[Vo]:Zhang: short report about heat release with hydrogen and deuterium

2020-10-06 Thread Jed Rothwell
Zhang, H., Summary of abnormal heat release experiment of hydrogen flux
vessel. 2020, LENR-CANR.org: Personal Communication

https://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/ZhangHsummaryofa.pdf

Abstract

A container was designed based on the assumption that the abnormal
exothermic phenomenon of hydrogen (deuterium) metal is related to the
hydrogen flux inside the metal. The container consists of an inner
container and an outer container, and the inner container is filled with
deuterium or hydrogen. The outer container is evacuated, the inner
container is heated, and abnormal heat generation is observed. Both
hydrogen and deuterium gas produce excess heat power; deuterium produces
more heat, lasting longer. When the inner container is filled with hydrogen
a maximum of 5 watts of excess heat power is observed, lasting about 3
hours. When the inner container is filled with deuterium it produces higher
power than hydrogen, with maximum excess heat power up to 13 watts, also
lasting about 3 hours.


Re: [Vo]:Status of CMNS website

2020-09-29 Thread Jed Rothwell
Robin  wrote:

In reply to  H LV's message of Tue, 29 Sep 2020 13:52:04 -0400:
> Hi Jed,
> [snip]
> >> https://lenr-canr.org/wordpress/?page_id=1495
>
> The last entry for 2020 is actually from 2018.
>

I do not understand what you are saying. Which entry? The last one is #33,
which just came out. This year, not 2018.

Are you looking at the top table? Where it says:

J. Condensed Matter Nucl. Sci. index

Here are entire issues of J. Condensed Matter Nucl. Sci.


Re: [Vo]:Status of CMNS website

2020-09-28 Thread Jed Rothwell
H LV  wrote:

What is the status of the website for the Journal of Condensed Matter
> Nuclear Science?
> https://iscmns.org/CMNS/publications.htm
> There are no publications listed after 2018.
> Is there a new official site?
>

I do not know if this is official, but all issues are listed & available
here:

https://lenr-canr.org/wordpress/?page_id=1495


[Vo]:Steinetz paper sort of about cold fusion

2020-09-18 Thread Jed Rothwell
https://asiatimes.com/2020/09/nasa-lands-on-a-middle-path-to-nuclear-fusion/

NASA lands on a middle path to nuclear fusion

Lattice confinement fusion breakthrough is in the promising Goldilocks zone
between hot and cold fusion

References:


Novel nuclear reactions observed in bremsstrahlung-irradiated deuterated
metals

Bruce M. Steinetz et al.

https://journals.aps.org/prc/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevC.101.044610

Nuclear fusion reactions in deuterated metals

Vladimir Pines, Marianna Pines, Arnon Chait, Bruce M. Steinetz, Lawrence P.
Forsley, Robert C. Hendricks, Gustave C. Fralick, Theresa L. Benyo,
Bayarbadrakh Baramsai, Philip B. Ugorowski, Michael D. Becks, Richard E.
Martin, Nicholas Penney, and Carl E. Sandifer, II

https://journals.aps.org/prc/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevC.101.044609


[Vo]:Brief letter describing Mizuno replication

2020-09-18 Thread Jed Rothwell
Here is a brief letter describing a replication of the Mizuno's experiment:

https://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/RamaraoPgeneration.pdf

Abstract

Centre for Energy Research (CER) at Swami Vivekananda Yoga Anusandhana
Samsthana (S-VYASA) which is a deemed-to-be University at Bangalore, India
started its research on Low Energy Nuclear Reactions (LENR) in 2015. The
team at CER tried different designs of custom made reactors and has so far
carried out more than 200 experiments with various combinations of the
active materials like Nickel (Ni), Palladium (Pd) with Lithium Aluminium
Hydride (LAH), Lithium and Hydrogen (H2)/Deuterium (D2) gas at different
conditions. Extensive studies and work was also carried out on
instrumentation and data Acquisition to capture the phenomena.


[Vo]:William Happer still at it

2020-09-14 Thread Jed Rothwell
William Happer, one of the Bush admin scientists who led the attack on cold
fusion, is still fighting against science. Still at war with the facts! You
can look him up in the Google customer search box at LENR-CANR.org. He was
in the news again today. See:

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/13/us/politics/california-fires-trump-climate-change.html

"William Happer, a former senior White House adviser and a Princeton
physicist who had gained notoriety in the scientific community for
statements that carbon dioxide was beneficial to humanity, began an effort
last year to ensure that the next National Climate Assessment did not
include worst-case scenarios. Although Mr. Happer left the White House last
year, that effort is continuing, according to three people familiar with
the matter."

You can learn about him by entering "Happer" into the Google Custom search
box at the top of LENR-CANR.org. This turns up documents that say things
like:

". . . Hagelstein remembers Happer, then chairman of the Jasons, telling
him to choose between cold fusion and his membership in the group."

Such a charming person.


[Vo]:JCMNS Vol. 33 uploaded

2020-08-26 Thread Jed Rothwell
See:

Biberian, J.P., ed. *J. Condensed Matter Nucl. Sci.* Vol. 33. 2020.

https://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/BiberianJPjcondensedzf.pdf

This is the Proceedings of the ICCF 22 Conference, September 8–13, 2019,
Assisi, Italy


Re: [Vo]:New book from Steve Krivit

2020-08-19 Thread Jed Rothwell
It was new to me! Amazon.com did not bring it to my attention previously.

Maybe the Kindle version is new?

- Jed


[Vo]:New book from Steve Krivit

2020-08-19 Thread Jed Rothwell
See:

Fusion Fiasco, by Steve Krivit

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B01N2TDWIY

Blurb:

Steven B. Krivit's *Explorations in Nuclear Research* three-book
series (*Hacking
the Atom, Fusion Fiasco, Lost History*) describes the emergence of a new
field of science, one that bridges chemistry and physics. The books give
readers an understanding of low-energy nuclear reaction (LENR) research and
its history and provide a rare behind-the-scenes look at the players and
personalities involved. The books present the results of in-depth
historical research and draw on formerly inaccessible archives to describe
what occurred in the research that has been mistakenly called "cold fusion."


[Vo]:Review of the calorimetry of Fleischmann and Pons

2020-08-18 Thread Jed Rothwell
I uploaded the Japanese version of this paper

Rothwell, J., Review of the calorimetry of Fleischmann and Pons (Japanese
version). 2020, LENR-CANR.org.

https://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/RothwellJreviewoftha.pdf

I think Japanese readers will be interested in the discussion of the NHE
starting on p. 34. The NHE program cost millions of dollars. When it ended,
the management published a summary saying they did not observe excess heat.
Melvin Miles and Martin Fleischmann were incensed by this, because Miles'
experiment clearly did produce excess heat. The NHE analysis was mistaken.
In this paper I summarized the mistake. You can read much more about it in
the papers I referenced.

Martin Fleischmann had a dark view of the NHE. You can see that in his
letters:

https://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/Fleischmanlettersfroa.pdf

Do a search for "NHE" and you find 252 instances of it (but not all refer
to the organization).

He lashed out at them starting on p. 10 of this paper:

https://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/MilesMcalorimetrd.pdf


Re: [Vo]:Useful information on masks

2020-08-09 Thread Jed Rothwell
H LV  wrote:


> When you think about it, I don`t think masks have ever been designed
> explicitly to keep stuff in.
> As far as I know masks have traditionally been designed to keep stuff out.
> Keeping stuff in is a new concept.
>

I believe you are wrong about that. Surgical masks are worn to protect the
patients as much as the doctors.


[Vo]:Useful information on masks

2020-08-09 Thread Jed Rothwell
This is off-topic, but important.

It turns out that cheap, throw-away "surgical mask, 3-layer" type masks
work best. These are the ones you can buy anywhere nowadays. Office Depot
sells them cheap.

See this research article in Science:

https://advances.sciencemag.org/content/early/2020/08/07/sciadv.abd3083

Knitted and bandana types are not recommended.

>


[Vo]:Review of the calorimetry of Fleischmann and Pons

2020-08-04 Thread Jed Rothwell
Here is a paper I have been working on for some time. I have to do some
other stuff, so I will upload it now and if people make suggestions I will
improve it later on.  I am translating it into Japanese. That will take
another week or so.

Rothwell, J., Review of the calorimetry of Fleischmann and Pons. 2020,
LENR-CANR.org.

https://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/RothwellJreviewofth.pdf

Abstract

This is an introduction to the calorimetry in experiments by Fleischmann
and Pons. From 1989 to 1993, they published a series of papers describing
three methods of calorimetry: isoperibolic, phase change and a cooling
curve analysis. These experiments culminated in boil-off experiments in
which cells produced over 100 W of excess heat, and stayed hot for hours
without input power. In 1996, Pons reported another series of experiments
in which reactions up to 101 W were sustained continuously for up to 70
days with reflux calorimeters.

This introduction is for the general reader. It includes definitions of the
isoperibolic, phase change and other methods, a discussion of how
calibrations are performed, and some of the advanced features of
Fleischmann and Pons’ equipment and methods.

Some skeptics claim that their calorimetry was unreliable or controversial.
Some of the skeptics’ objections are reviewed.


[Vo]:Two new papers by Mike Staker

2020-07-22 Thread Jed Rothwell
Regarding the SAV phase.

Staker, M.R., *A model and simulation of lattice vibrations in a
superabundant vacancy phase of palladium–deuterium.* Modelling Simul.
Mater. Sci. Eng., 2020. *28*

https://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/StakerMRamodelands.pdf

Staker, M.R., *Estimating volume fractions of superabundant vacancy phases
and their potential roles in low energy nuclear reactions and high
conductivity in the palladium – isotopic hydrogen system*. Materials
Science & Engineering B, 2020.
*295*

https://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/StakerMRestimating.pdf


[Vo]:Book by S. Szpak

2020-07-12 Thread Jed Rothwell
Here is a book by Stanislaw Szpak and Frank Gordon:

Szpak, S. and F. Gordon, *Chemical Aspects of the Pd/nH-H2O System in Its
Nuclear Active State*. 2011: LENR-CANR.org

https://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/SzpakSchemicalas.pdf


Re: [Vo]:Robert Park died

2020-06-28 Thread Jed Rothwell
Dave Nagel wrote:


> Bob Park was a member of my PhD committee at the University of Maryland.
> He, Scott Chubb and I used to meet annually for lunch and a discussion of
> cold fusion.
>

Perhaps I am stating the obvious but . . . This means Park was briefed on
cold fusion at least once a year. He knew what was happening. Many leading
opponents of cold fusion know nothing about the subject. They have read
*Nature*, *Scientific American*, Wikipedia and other sources of
misinformation, so they think they know about it. I am not excusing them,
but we can see how they inadvertently got it wrong. Park had the facts.
Even if he did not believe the facts, he might have checked for himself,
read original sources, and asked questions. He did not.

I am not a mind reader so I cannot say whether he believed what he said. It
seems unlikely to me based on the content of his claims, but people often
believe unlikely things.


Re: [Vo]:Robert Park died

2020-06-26 Thread Jed Rothwell
Years ago, Dave Nagel sent me a photo showing himself, Robert Park and
Scott Chubb. They were eating lunch together. A few days ago he wrote to me:



Bob Park was a member of my PhD committee at the University of Maryland.
He, Scott Chubb and I used to meet annually for lunch and a discussion of
cold fusion.  This photo is from 2008.

I liked Bob personally, despite our professional disagreements.  May he
rest in peace.


(I would post the photo here, but it is too big.)


[Vo]:Robert Park died

2020-06-25 Thread Jed Rothwell
Robert Park died April 29, 2020, age 89.


Re: [Vo]:what ever happened with this?

2020-06-19 Thread Jed Rothwell
Terry Blanton  wrote:


> On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 1:13 PM Jed Rothwell 
> wrote:
>
> > Yup . . . So says Mr. Google. So said I!
> >
> >
> https://e-catworld.com/2020/01/11/us-congress-charges-national-science-foundation-to-evaluate-lenr-research-and-make-recommendations/
>
>
> You posted that in e-catworld and not here?  Shame on you, Jed.  :)
>

Wasn't me. Someone copied the message. (Which is fine with me.)



> How *are* things in the e-cat world?
>

No idea. I have looked in months.


Re: [Vo]:what ever happened with this?

2020-06-19 Thread Jed Rothwell
Terry Blanton  wrote:


> Hi, Mr. Xook:  I'm not Frank; but, you can look here:
>>
>> https://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg01635.html
>>
>
> For some reason, the hard links don't seem to work today; so, here it is
> on Jed's site:
>
> https://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/DOEreportofth.pdf
>
> Thanks for keeping the site up, Jed.
>

That is the 2004 report. There is a whole page devoted to that:

https://lenr-canr.org/wordpress/?page_id=455

Last year someone recommended to the Congress look at this again. I think
that is where the quote above came from:

*Low-energy nuclear reactions.* The House report encourages NSF to
“evaluate the various theories, experiments, and scientific literature
surrounding the field of LENR,”

Yup . . . So says Mr. Google. So said I!

https://e-catworld.com/2020/01/11/us-congress-charges-national-science-foundation-to-evaluate-lenr-research-and-make-recommendations/


https://www.aip.org/fyi/2020/final-fy20-appropriations-national-science-foundation
>
>


Re: [Vo]:Verification of Mizuno experiment

2020-05-18 Thread Jed Rothwell
bobcook39...@hotmail.com  wrote:


> “Figure 1. Principle of nuclear fusion. (Deuterium and tritium are shown
> undergoing fusion to produce energy, neutrons and helium.)”
>
>
>
> “In the present study, by using this new hydrogen energy from fusion, we
> hope to confirm a new power generation method that may replace conventional
> power generation methods, such as thermal power, hydropower, nuclear power,
> wind power, and solar power generation. The purpose is to obtain an
> input/output ratio of energy two times or more higher than input.”
>
>
>
> Was the report merely obfuscation and fake news from your perspective, in
> that, as you point out, Mizuno does not use tritium?
>

I do not understand what you are talking about. Of course he does not use
tritium. There is no mention of using tritium in this paper, or any of his
other papers, or any papers in the cold fusion literature as far I recall.
Many experiments produce tritium, but I have never heard of anyone starting
with it.

Figure 1 shows conventional plasma fusion, as I am sure you realize.

I don't understand what you are saying, and I don't understand why you are
saying it. Are you trying to pick a fight about an undergraduate paper in
Sapporo? It seems pretty good to me. If you don't like it, don't read it.

- Jed


Re: [Vo]:Verification of Mizuno experiment

2020-05-16 Thread Jed Rothwell
bobcook39...@hotmail.com  wrote:

I am very surprised that Mizuno uses tritium.
>

He does not.


Re: [Vo]:UV-C Mask Direct Sterilization

2020-05-15 Thread Jed Rothwell
Several hospitals have made room-sized UV facilities to sanitize N95 masks.
Example:

https://news.vumc.org/2020/04/09/vumc-groups-unite-to-sanitize-n95-masks-with-ultraviolet-light/


The masks are not supposed to be reused, but because of shortages they have
been.

Nurses and doctors are also covering the masks with washable cotton outer
masks, which they change between patients. Many people have volunteered to
sew the masks, including my wife, who has dragooned me into tracing
patterns and cutting threads.

https://www.sewingmasksforatlantahospitals.com/

- Jed


Re: [Vo]:UV-C Mask Direct Sterilization

2020-05-15 Thread Jed Rothwell
This gadget produces UV light to filter air coming into a face mask. Mizuno
invented something similar when he was working with glow discharge. He made
a mask with very high voltage glow discharge screen. The amperage is so low
it can run all day on a cell phone battery. It has slight blue glow in the
dark. He says the air smells a little of ozone. It kills all manner of
bacteria and viruses.

Terry Blanton  wrote:

>
> https://www.foxnews.com/health/oracle-lighting-patent-pending-device-uses-uv-light-to-neutralize-live-virus
>
>
>
> 
>  Virus-free.
> www.avast.com
> 
> <#m_5099302438350697873_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
>


[Vo]:Verification of Mizuno experiment

2020-05-14 Thread Jed Rothwell
Here is a short paper describing a verification of Mizuno's experiment at
the Hokkaido University of Science. This document includes an English
version and the original Japanese version.

https://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/IgarashiJdevelopmen.pdf


[Vo]:JCMNS 32 uploaded

2020-05-08 Thread Jed Rothwell
J. Condensed Matter Nucl. Sci., Vol. 32, May 2020 is here:

http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/BiberianJPjcondensedze.pdf

There are only three papers in this volume.


Re: [Vo]:Better than N95

2020-04-05 Thread Jed Rothwell
Terry Blanton  wrote:

You may have walked in the same space a beautiful woman just passed and
> experienced her nice perfume.  If she was shedding virus at that time you
> are likely infected . . .
>

What if she is plain-looking? Am I safe?


Re: [Vo]:Masks

2020-03-25 Thread Jed Rothwell
In Atlanta, a large group of people organized over the weekend. They are
sewing mask covers. Not the masks themselves, but covers needed to protect
hospital grade masks so that the masks can be re-used. Normally, they are
only used once, but hospitals are running out. All over the country,
researchers and doctors are finding ways to clean and reuse the masks. So,
they plan to cover the outside with cloth covers, and then sterilize the
masks. See:

https://www.ajc.com/news/mask-sewing-network-built-metro-atlanta-through-social-media/IkmkKifwcPVt7QhNdNQsIL/

Cloth masks made of gauze and cotton are washable. They are much better
than nothing, according to Japanese health officials. The Japanese
government is distributing one to every citizen.

My wife has been making them with a sewing machine. Unfortunately, she ran
out of elastic band. There is none left at Walmart. I went on Amazon and
found out that all elastic band is made in China. An inset photo from one
maker shows a woman wearing a mask. The vendor wrote this plaintive message:

"Attention please: We will send it 3-5 days after you complete your order.
But now is a special period, there will be a delay in logistics, and the
expected delivery time is 20-30 days. If you cannot receive this delivery
time, please do not place an order. Thanks for understanding. Pray for the
great American people to get through this crisis as soon as possible."

This seems emblematic of the whole situation.


Re: [Vo]:Chloroquine trials in New York

2020-03-24 Thread Jed Rothwell
Michael Foster  wrote:


> I'm happy to see that rare cooperation between Trump and Cuomo will see a
> large scale "trial" of chloroquine and Zithromax, already known to work as
> a treatment for covid19. I hope this will expose FDA/CDC as owned by the
> pharmaceutical business, as exemplified by the behavior of Fauci and Birx.
> Big Pharma wouldn't want anything as inexpensive as chloroquine to be an
> effective treatment.
>

This makes no sense. Big Parma makes millions of doses of these drugs. Big
Pharma has absolutely no say in which drugs are used, for what purposes.
This is decided by the FDA and individual doctors. What you say is
equivalent to saying, "Microsoft wouldn't want people to use Microsoft Word
to write letters to the editor." Microsoft has no control over what people
do with its software. Big pharma has no control over what doctors and and
patients do with their products.

In point of fact, one of the biggest pharmaceutical companies in the
world has provided millions of doses of these drugs to the state of New
York for free. So, obviously they are not trying to prevent the use of it!


[Vo]:Cuomo presentation on coronavirus

2020-03-23 Thread Jed Rothwell
Here is a SUPERB presentation by Gov. Cuomo of New York, on Sunday March
22. This is one of the best analyses of the situation I have seen. It is
long, but I suggest you see the whole thing. It is one of the best examples
of leadership since FDR.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dlZeKTlpcqU

Other presentations:

https://www.governor.ny.gov/news/video-audio-photos-rush-transcript-amid-ongoing-covid-19-pandemic-governor-cuomo-accepts


Re: [Vo]:Trial treatment starts today.

2020-03-23 Thread Jed Rothwell
New York begins trial treatments on Tuesday. QUOTE:

New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo said Sunday that drug trials to test coronavirus
treatments will begin in the state Tuesday, after President Trump on
Thursday said the Food and Drug Administration approved one of the drugs
for clinical trials, as New York becomes the epicenter for the pandemic in
the U.S.

   - During a Sunday press briefing, Cuomo said 750,000 doses of
   chloroquine, 70,000 doses of hydroxychloroquine and 10,000 doses of
   Zithromax were acquired by New York state for the trial.
   - Chloroquine (an anti-malaria drug) and hydroxychloroquine (used for
   lupus and arthritis) were approved by the FDA for clinical trials as
   possible coronavirus treatments, while Zithromax is a brand-name antibiotic.
   - "The president is optimistic about these drugs and we are all
   optimistic that it could work,” Cuomo said.
   - Dr. Anthony Fauci, head of the National Institute of Allergy and
   Infectious Diseases said Friday that the drug’s promise was “anecdotal,”
   adding, “It was not done in a controlled clinical trial. So you really
   can’t make any definitive statement about it.”


https://www.forbes.com/sites/lisettevoytko/2020/03/22/new-york-to-begin-clinical-trials-for-coronavirus-treatment-tuesday-cuomo-says/#2484d36b4203


Re: [Vo]:COVID19 Scenario Explorer

2020-03-23 Thread Jed Rothwell
Sean True  wrote:

You can set the duration of the simulation in a calendar control:
>

Ah, thanks. Those numbers are grayed out so I thought they were disabled.
You have to click on the lower number to extend into the future.

(I am using my awkward laptop, which is hard to navigate with.)

The actual data is on the left, in the dots. That is helpful. How often is
that updated?


Again let me say: this is a great job.


Re: [Vo]:COVID19 Scenario Explorer

2020-03-22 Thread Jed Rothwell
Charles  wrote:

> 'We are a research group at the Biozentrum, University of Basel,
> Switzerland . We are broadly
> interested in evolution, ecology, and population genetics with a focus on
> rapidly evolving pathogens such as HIV, influenza virus, or pathogenic
> bacteria.'
>
> https://neherlab.org/covid19/
>
This is a excellent modeling program. It takes into account many different
parameters. I poked around with it for a while. I don't yet understand how
to use it properly, but let me make a few basic observations:

Set this for "United States." On the top left, set the "epidemiology"
parameter to "Slow/North" and the projection for March 21 (yesterday) comes
out 19,624 cases, 260 deaths. The actual total for yesterday was 24,207,
302 deaths. So, the model is remarkably close to yesterday with that
setting.


This model assumes the control parameters will not change. That's
unrealistic! We are not a flock of birds with no control over the epidemic.
Of course the parameters will change as people are frightened and they
begin to follow orders and stay in their houses. How much they will change
I myself cannot predict. I hope epidemiologists can predict this, and
advise government officials.


Obviously, the parameters could have changed completely, enough to
extinguish the epidemic weeks ago in the U.S., if only our political
leaders had learned from S. Korea and Japan. And learned what not to do
from Italy. Alas, they did not, and now whatever happens, we will surely
pay a high price. How high? This model predicts 223,000 deaths by Sept. 1.
The epidemic continues after that, but . . . um . . .  I cannot figure out
how to extend this graph.


Re: [Vo]:model of COVID-19 spread

2020-03-21 Thread Jed Rothwell
Here is something similar. The title is odd, but it is well worth reading:

https://medium.com/@tomaspueyo/coronavirus-the-hammer-and-the-dance-be9337092b56

Here is an important appeal to Congress from doctors in New York:

https://thehill.com/opinion/healthcare/488585-a-plea-from-nyc-physicians-our-window-of-opportunity-is-closing-to-avoid


Re: [Vo]:Corona Virus

2020-03-13 Thread Jed Rothwell
0:40 How bad is Coronavirus
4:00 Is the virus an "old persons" disease
5:18 Incubation period
7:50 What can be done to prevent infection
13:45 Drug shortages
15:20 Sauna use effect on infections
18:00 Was Coronavirus man-made
22:00 American Wild Deer diseases and Prions
32:00 Is Corona seasonal
35:00 Corona could be 10 times worse than the flu
35:25 Corona will stay around for months
36:10 Coronavirus vs Spanish flu
38:30 How can we prepare our immune system
43:20 Do hand sanitizers and masks work
50:00 We stockpile weapons more than medical goods
54:30 Will people panic if they are told the truth
56:00 Vaccines
1:02:00 Why a virus would originate from China
1:11:30 What to do if you get the flu
1:15:45 Lime disease and ticks
1:23:00 Effects of fire suppression on ecosystem
1:30:00 Vaccine for Coronavirus


Re: [Vo]:A flu irony - less total deaths !!!

2020-03-12 Thread Jed Rothwell
Terry Blanton  wrote:

You can't really define mortality of a disease until you either
> a) have experience with the disease
> b) count the dead
> The mortality is the number of infected divided into the number of dead.
>

The Chinese now have enough data from recovered and dead patients to draw
some conclusions. The mortality rate varies are great deal depending on
age. It also depends on medical care. When there are enough hospital beds
and doctors, the rate is much lower.

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/coronavirus-death-rate/


Re: [Vo]:A flu irony - less total deaths !!!

2020-03-11 Thread Jed Rothwell
Terry Blanton  wrote:

Corona virus vaccines are difficult because the immune system attacks the
> RNA; but, it's the spike proteins which cause the infection by "unlocking"
> the cell wall.  If they were easy, we would have a common cold vaccine.
>

 A few years ago I read about efforts to develop a "universal" flu vaccine.
Ah, here's something about it from the NIH. See:

https://www.niaid.nih.gov/diseases-conditions/universal-influenza-vaccine-research


Re: [Vo]:A flu irony - less total deaths !!!

2020-03-11 Thread Jed Rothwell
Terry Blanton  wrote:


> If you want to track the data in near real time
> https://ncov2019.live/data
>
> the tables are sortable.
>

This site is also good:

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/

Note that it has detailed information for several countries, such as:

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/italy/

Watch out, because it does not update some countries including Italy until
midday EDT.

The numbers from Italy today are disastrous. In response, the Prime
Minister announced more stringent rules. NYT:

Pharmacies, grocery stores, banks and public transit will be allowed to
operate, but any other commercial enterprise that is not vital —
restaurants, bars, most stores, cafes, beauty salons — must close to limit
the contagion . . .

Italy had already imposed controls unlike anything seen in a modern
democracy, banning public gatherings and telling a nation of 60 million
people to halt travel except for work or emergencies.


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

2020-03-03 Thread Jed Rothwell
Video: "New York City doctor says he has to ‘plead to test people’ for
coronavirus"

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/03/02/coronavirus-new-york-city-doctor-has-to-plead-to-test-people.html


Lots of interesting technical comments in the video portion. This doctor
thinks there are thousands of undiagnosed cases in the U.S. He seems to be
an expert who knows what he is talking about. He think the S. Korean data
is the best indication of the actual mortality rate for a first world
country, and I suppose for China now that they have a handle on it. S.
Korea has done a lot of testing. Their numbers are: 28 deaths / 4335 cases
= 0.6% mortality. They do not list many critical cases:

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/

QUOTES from text portion:

“Before I came here this morning, I was in the emergency room seeing
patients,” he said on CNBC’s “Squawk Box.” “I still do not have a rapid
diagnostic test available to me.”

“I’m here to tell you, right now, at one of the busiest hospitals in the
country, I don’t have it at my fingertips,” he said. “I still have to make
my case, plead to test people. This is not good. We know that there are 88
cases in the United States. There are going to be hundreds by the middle of
the week. There’s going to be thousands by next week. And this is a testing
issue.”

The team at New York-Presbyterian Hospital is isolating suspected
coronavirus patients and taking proper precautions to prevent the spread,
McCarthy said, but “they’re hamstrung.” . . .

“They’re testing 10,000 a day in some countries, and we can’t get this off
the ground,” McCarthy said. “I’m a practitioner on the firing line, and I
don’t have the tools to properly care for patients today.” . . .


  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >