It's entropy, all curled up in those 7 extra dimensions of space. The
radiation at its surface can make it very energetic, alphas and betas, the
larger the particle the more energetic.
Entropic flux creates gravity, electricity and magnetism. It flows and it
orbits and 95% of the universe is
On Mon, Dec 31, 2012 at 7:14 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax
a...@lomaxdesign.comwrote:
This is a thoroughly embarrassing event in the history of science. It's a
huge story, in fact. I've thought of asking Taubes to look at it again.
I would not attempt to resuscitate Gary Taubes. He was a card
At 01:16 PM 12/29/2012, James Bowery wrote:
From the preamble to the DoE's 1989 cold fusion review.
Ordinarily, new scientific discoveries are claimed to be consistent
and reproducible; as a result, if the experiments are not
complicated, the discovery can usually be confirmed or disproved in
At 01:49 PM 12/29/2012, James Bowery wrote:
On Sat, Dec 29, 2012 at 12:29 PM, Mark Gibbs
mailto:mgi...@gibbs.commgi...@gibbs.com wrote:
Let's see if I'm understanding this correctly: The theory was that
nuclear reactions cannot occur in a system such as PF's. This
theory was falsified which
“Obviously, if it is not a nuclear reaction (there are other possibilities
besides fusion).”
It could be accelerated alpha radiation from a partial lowering of the
coulomb barrier.
Alpha radiation is just doubly ionized helium.
We can distinguish this helium production from fusion by that
From Mark,
And remember, this whole discussion is Peter's fault ...
Peter's fault? Whatever...
I was joking. Of course it wasn't his fault ...
this may not be the place for levity.
Vortex-l often displays levity. Some enjoy it. Some don't, particularly
those who may feel
From: Alain Sepeda alain.sep...@gmail.com
I I can be critic on LENR community, like on mainstream science
community, is that FG mania to focus on THEORY...
NOT HAVING A THEORY IS NOT A REASON TO IGNORE A FACT
Ditto and likewise.
As Einstein wrote : Experimentum summus judex
On Friday, December 28, 2012, Peter Gluck wrote:
but it raises the question if/when will enter LENR such lists?
When there is a testable theory or a demonstrably practical device.
So far, LENR is, to be perhaps somewhat poetic, no more than a
willow-the-wisp ...
[mg]
Dear Mark,
Testable is a polysemantic and somewhat ambiguous word- really testable
means it can be used for scaling up the process.
First class theory predicts and suggests
Second class theory prohibits
Third class theory explains.
LENR needs a 1st class theory and this goes MUCH beyond and
Mark Gibbs mgi...@gibbs.com wrote:
but it raises the question if/when will enter LENR such lists?
When there is a testable theory or a demonstrably practical device.
So far, LENR is, to be perhaps somewhat poetic, no more than a
willow-the-wisp ...
I am sorry to be abrasive, but this is
FURTHERMORE, the notion that cold fusion results are unconvincing or close
to the noise is also gross ignorance. People who say this know nothing
about experimental significance.
The tritium findings alone are definitive. After Storms, Bockris and Will
published in 1989 and 1990, all doubts about
On Sat, Dec 29, 2012 at 11:58 AM, Mark Gibbs mgi...@gibbs.com wrote:
Sure, there's lots of interesting experiments but is there a testable
theory?
Yes, there is a widely accepted testable theory. It has been tested and
falsified by experiment.
That's the way science works, Mark. Sorry.
On Sat, Dec 29, 2012 at 9:11 AM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
FURTHERMORE, the notion that cold fusion results are unconvincing or close
to the noise is also gross ignorance. People who say this know nothing
about experimental significance.
I never said the results were
James,
Which theory is that?
[mg]
On Sat, Dec 29, 2012 at 10:01 AM, James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Dec 29, 2012 at 11:58 AM, Mark Gibbs mgi...@gibbs.com wrote:
Sure, there's lots of interesting experiments but is there a testable
theory?
Yes, there is a widely accepted
From the preamble to the DoE's 1989 cold fusion review.
Ordinarily, new scientific discoveries are claimed to be consistent and
reproducible; as a result, if the experiments are not complicated, the
discovery can usually be confirmed or disproved in a few months. The claims
of cold fusion,
Mark Gibbs mgi...@gibbs.com wrote:
I am sorry to be abrasive, but this is ignorant nonsense.
Alas, you really aren't sorry. That's just a technique to try to avoid
being called out for incivility.
No, it is pro-forma, Japanese style. It is what you say before you are
forced to be uncivil.
Let's see if I'm understanding this correctly: The theory was that nuclear
reactions cannot occur in a system such as PF's. This theory was falsified
which means that nuclear reactions can (and did) occur.
Correct? If it is correct, then my original statement stands: There is no
theory yet that
I agree that it is not very good politic to convince.
however it is clear and true.
you should read the facts. i don't even understand how people can express
so much doubt, when not simple usual denial. just read the data, and remind
that consensus can be pathologic... history says so.
the
Mark Gibbs mgi...@gibbs.com wrote:
Let's see if I'm understanding this correctly: The theory was that nuclear
reactions cannot occur in a system such as PF's. This theory was falsified
which means that nuclear reactions can (and did) occur.
That is not a theory. It is an assertion. nuclear
I I can be critic on LENR community, like on mainstream science community,
is that FG mania to focus on THEORY...
NOT HAVING A THEORY IS NOT A REASON TO IGNORE A FACT
you learn that when you are a kid interested in science...
Me too I want to be abrasive because it seems that most science
On Sat, Dec 29, 2012 at 12:29 PM, Mark Gibbs mgi...@gibbs.com wrote:
Let's see if I'm understanding this correctly: The theory was that nuclear
reactions cannot occur in a system such as PF's. This theory was falsified
which means that nuclear reactions can (and did) occur.
Correct? If it is
On Sat, Dec 29, 2012 at 10:24 AM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.comwrote:
Mark Gibbs mgi...@gibbs.com wrote:
I am sorry to be abrasive, but this is ignorant nonsense.
Alas, you really aren't sorry. That's just a technique to try to avoid
being called out for incivility.
No, it is
James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote:
Close. It is the most widely-accepted *interpretation* of currently
accepted physical theory that was falsified. The theory itself is subject
to many interpretations, otherwise known as *conjectures* in more
rigorous fields such as mathematics.
On Sat, Dec 29, 2012 at 12:57 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.comwrote:
James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote:
Close. It is the most widely-accepted *interpretation* of currently
accepted physical theory that was falsified. The theory itself is subject
to many interpretations,
Mark Gibbs mgi...@gibbs.com wrote:
No, it is pro-forma, Japanese style. It is what you say before you are
forced to be uncivil.
One is never forced to be uncivil.
I cannot describe the facts of the matter without showing that your
assertions are ignorant nonsense. Your statements violate
On Sat, Dec 29, 2012 at 11:31 AM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.comwrote:
Mark Gibbs mgi...@gibbs.com wrote:
No, it is pro-forma, Japanese style. It is what you say before you are
forced to be uncivil.
One is never forced to be uncivil.
I cannot describe the facts of the matter
Mark Gibbs mgi...@gibbs.com wrote:
So, your considered and thoughtful way to address what you see as someone's
misunderstandings and to educate them is to be insulting and to attack the
man while you address the argument?
Look, I am sorry, but your statements violate the scientific method at
Ed,
On Sat, Dec 29, 2012 at 10:58 AM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.comwrote:
Mark, I don't know if you read my e-mail or not, but I do not post to
vortex, so this is my way of communicating.
Jed, is right, the effect has been proven beyond doubt. You are correct
in stating that the
On Sat, Dec 29, 2012 at 1:14 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
Mark Gibbs mgi...@gibbs.com wrote:
So, your considered and thoughtful way to address what you see as
someone's misunderstandings and to educate them is to be insulting and to
attack the man while you address the
The comparison to penicillin is instructive. Like most discoveries, this
was developed and used extensively long before anyone understood how it
worked in theory. Long before they could have understood it.
Penicillin was developed in the 1940s, in a crash project to treat WWII
casualties. Doctors
That's not correct. There is a theory that considers cold fusion as a
variation of conventional hot fusion. This is Takahashi's TSC theory.
TSC is a tetrahedron of hydrogens bound by coherent electrons, which also
happen to be in a tetrahedral form, overlapping the protons. As you know, 2
-- Forwarded message --
From: Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com
Date: Sat, Dec 29, 2012 at 2:33 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:(OT) epidemic and endemic
To: Mark Gibbs mgi...@gibbs.com
Cc: Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com
On Dec 29, 2012, at 3:04 PM, Mark Gibbs wrote:
Ed,
On Sat
Mark Gibbs mgi...@gibbs.com wrote:
Ye gods, man. Calm down.
I am calm. If you think I am exited you are projecting. This cognitive
dissonance on your side.
I am calm because I have been writing this sort of thing for decades; I can
do it in my sleep. Also because I used to teach. I am quite
From Mark Gibbs
Look, I am sorry,
No, you're not. You can't get over your emotionality.
... I cannot think of a way to say that politely.
Oh, I'm sure you could if you tried. But you don't want to.
Rothwell is what Rothwell does. I would suggest you get over it,
Mark Gibbs mgi...@gibbs.com wrote:
So what?! We have had a number of companies and individuals making
significant claims about productizing something that they contend is
CF/LENR.
Rossi is the only one I can think of. I suggest you ignore him. He has not
published any scientific data. The
On Sat, Dec 29, 2012 at 2:56 PM, OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson
orionwo...@charter.net wrote:
From Mark Gibbs
And remember, this whole discussion is Peter's fault ...
Peter's fault? Whatever...
I was joking. Of course it wasn't his fault ... this may not be the place
for levity.
I am of the opinion that Anderson localization is among the many Quantum
mechanical mechanisms that are central to and underlie the some lines of
LENR technology.
These lines involve hairy nickel nano-particles and cracks in metal
lattices to be more specific.
American physicist Philip W.
Sent from my iPhone
On Dec 29, 2012, at 16:42, Mark Gibbs mgi...@gibbs.com wrote:
I was joking. Of course it wasn't his fault ... this may not be the place
for levity.
Levity is difficult to pick up on during a fine-grained discussion of details,
unfortunately.
About the sensationalizers
At 05:07 PM 12/29/2012, Mark Gibbs wrote:
On Sat, Dec 29, 2012 at 1:14 PM, Jed Rothwell
mailto:jedrothw...@gmail.comjedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
Mark Gibbs mailto:mgi...@gibbs.commgi...@gibbs.com wrote:
So, your considered and thoughtful way to address what you see as
someone's
At 04:14 PM 12/29/2012, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Mark Gibbs mailto:mgi...@gibbs.commgi...@gibbs.com wrote:
So, your considered and thoughtful way to address what you see as
someone's misunderstandings and to educate them is to be insulting
and to attack the man while you address the argument?
Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.com wrote:
About the sensationalizers and entrepreneurs who make claims, beyond Rossi
and Defkalion there is Brillouin, and further afield, there are Lattice
Energy, the Rohner brothers and Nanospire. We have a lot of fun analyzing
their claims in great detail
At 05:04 PM 12/29/2012, Mark Gibbs wrote:
I admit that there appears to be evidence of something remarkable. I
just want to find out what's real and what's fake.
Great, Mark. How do you want to approach this, to find out?
We can tell you that the Fleischmann Pons Heat Effect is the result
of
At 05:28 PM 12/29/2012, Daniel Rocha wrote:
That's not correct. There is a theory that considers cold fusion as
a variation of conventional hot fusion. This is Takahashi's TSC theory.
Eek. No. TSC theory isn't a variation of hot fusion. But maybe you
could define the words to make it so.
Well, take a look at this paper, which was presented this month in JCF13
earlier this month:
http://vixra.org/abs/1209.0057
Not after the fusion, but well, some ideas of what might happen during
fusion.
2012/12/30 Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com
He's only analyzed the symmetrical
It seems, OT-ing has become both epidemic and
endemic for Vortex. This is caused probably by
a relatively dead/slack season in/for core LENR.
This is also relatively OT
Greatest Inventions: 2012 and 1913 Editions
45 matches
Mail list logo
