Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves

[Alain Sepeda]

Benabou have a vision which is not far.
for him it is not desire but fear that push such crowd-suicide name
groupthink.

The idea is that in a herd, you are killed if you disagree, and you cannot
escape if you see the error.
Your herd also may survive long if there is not too much dissenters to
allow immediate sanctions for the error.

so your interest is
- not dissent or you are killed
- kill any dissenter

not to worry you have
- to behave as if you know that you are in delayed group suicide, and
battle to keep the pack strong until  an end you cannot stop, but have to
delay.
- to sincerely think you are right and all is fine, and that you are on the
camp of Good.

the solution is to rationalize, to ignore dissenting data, to bias all you
competence in logic, not to see the problem, to bias all your ethic to
justify you awful behavior...

See how they violate basic first order logic when talking of unreliable but
numerous replication.
See how they violate academic ethic.

you cannot be so incompetent. It is superior intelligence, not stupidity.
just selfish.




2013/12/20 James Bowery 

> I offered an explanation of mass psychology and its artificial selective
> pressures that also explains a lot of the irrationality among the
> pseudo-skeptics.  Group selection is destructive to individual integrity.
>  Eventually they're addicted to feeling power in numbers.  Knowing the CF
> crowd is a minority, they get a dopamine rush by offering the kind of
> rhetorical devices that are basically the equivalent of human eusocial
> pheromone signalling to others of like hive-mind.
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 11:46 PM, Eric Walker wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 11:26 AM, James Bowery wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Indeed, it would be sinful for him to look through that telescope.
>>>
>>
>> Seems hunting cold fusioners has become a sport of some kind.  Perhaps
>> there are anecdotes going around, and young, inexperienced physics students
>> want to be able to relive the experience or cut their teeth in "science
>> apologetics."  One imagines someone with a lot of kit, jumping down into a
>> pit, and then bagging as many of the creatures as he can.  Joshua Cude was
>> much better at it.  I recall the day he stood in triumph on his mound of
>> slayed cold fusioners before he was sent away.
>>
>> Note to future science apologists:  think through your arguments.  Simply
>> replying quickly with the first thing that comes to your mind is not
>> impressive to anyone, even your peers.
>>
>> Eric
>>
>>
>

Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves

[Axil Axil]

The focus fusion guy, Eric Lerner, can't get his cosmology theory published
because it contradicts the big bang theory.

I thought "welcome to the science outsiders club, Eric"


On Fri, Dec 20, 2013 at 9:37 AM, James Bowery  wrote:

> I offered an explanation of mass psychology and its artificial selective
> pressures that also explains a lot of the irrationality among the
> pseudo-skeptics.  Group selection is destructive to individual integrity.
>  Eventually they're addicted to feeling power in numbers.  Knowing the CF
> crowd is a minority, they get a dopamine rush by offering the kind of
> rhetorical devices that are basically the equivalent of human eusocial
> pheromone signalling to others of like hive-mind.
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 11:46 PM, Eric Walker wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 11:26 AM, James Bowery wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Indeed, it would be sinful for him to look through that telescope.
>>>
>>
>> Seems hunting cold fusioners has become a sport of some kind.  Perhaps
>> there are anecdotes going around, and young, inexperienced physics students
>> want to be able to relive the experience or cut their teeth in "science
>> apologetics."  One imagines someone with a lot of kit, jumping down into a
>> pit, and then bagging as many of the creatures as he can.  Joshua Cude was
>> much better at it.  I recall the day he stood in triumph on his mound of
>> slayed cold fusioners before he was sent away.
>>
>> Note to future science apologists:  think through your arguments.  Simply
>> replying quickly with the first thing that comes to your mind is not
>> impressive to anyone, even your peers.
>>
>> Eric
>>
>>
>

Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves

[James Bowery]

I offered an explanation of mass psychology and its artificial selective
pressures that also explains a lot of the irrationality among the
pseudo-skeptics.  Group selection is destructive to individual integrity.
 Eventually they're addicted to feeling power in numbers.  Knowing the CF
crowd is a minority, they get a dopamine rush by offering the kind of
rhetorical devices that are basically the equivalent of human eusocial
pheromone signalling to others of like hive-mind.


On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 11:46 PM, Eric Walker  wrote:

> On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 11:26 AM, James Bowery  wrote:
>
>
>> Indeed, it would be sinful for him to look through that telescope.
>>
>
> Seems hunting cold fusioners has become a sport of some kind.  Perhaps
> there are anecdotes going around, and young, inexperienced physics students
> want to be able to relive the experience or cut their teeth in "science
> apologetics."  One imagines someone with a lot of kit, jumping down into a
> pit, and then bagging as many of the creatures as he can.  Joshua Cude was
> much better at it.  I recall the day he stood in triumph on his mound of
> slayed cold fusioners before he was sent away.
>
> Note to future science apologists:  think through your arguments.  Simply
> replying quickly with the first thing that comes to your mind is not
> impressive to anyone, even your peers.
>
> Eric
>
>

Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves

[Eric Walker]

On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 11:26 AM, James Bowery  wrote:


> Indeed, it would be sinful for him to look through that telescope.
>

Seems hunting cold fusioners has become a sport of some kind.  Perhaps
there are anecdotes going around, and young, inexperienced physics students
want to be able to relive the experience or cut their teeth in "science
apologetics."  One imagines someone with a lot of kit, jumping down into a
pit, and then bagging as many of the creatures as he can.  Joshua Cude was
much better at it.  I recall the day he stood in triumph on his mound of
slayed cold fusioners before he was sent away.

Note to future science apologists:  think through your arguments.  Simply
replying quickly with the first thing that comes to your mind is not
impressive to anyone, even your peers.

Eric

Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves

[Axil Axil]

 One atomic unit of magnetic field is defined for a Bohr magneton in a B
field which has the energy of 13.6 eV.

Thus 1 a.u. of magnetic field = *2.35x10^^**5 *Tesla


On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 1:15 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:

> The magnetic field is atomic level. The next step in the research that the
> Ni/H reactor developers need to do is measure the magnetic fields that they
> are developing in their reactions. This can be done using sub-micron hall
> effect probes.
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 1:10 PM, John Franks  wrote:
>
>> What's the magnitutde magnetic field and how do heavy hadrons display
>> these collective properties like light leptons?
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 6:05 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:
>>
>>> FQHE reduces the inherent charge of fermions as a function of increasing
>>> magnetic field.
>>>
>>> The nucleus is a fermion, the protons and neutrons are fermions and so
>>> are quarks.
>>>
>>> Why should a magnetic field make a distinction in the way it
>>> reduces charge is the various types of fermions? I won't.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 12:59 PM, John Franks  wrote:
>>>
 "Is like or maybe is"

 How so? Once again, QHE or FQHE is to do with cooperative properties of
 light leptons. So how does this carry over to heavy hadrons and what does
 that have to do with CF?


 On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 5:53 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:

> Cold fusion is like(or maybe is) the Factional Quantum Hall
> Effect(FQHE). Science did not believe that something like the FQHE was
> possible until it was shown experimentally. Cold fusion is the FQHE moved
> over to the fermions of the fermions of the atomic nucleus.
>
>
>>
>> If you are suggesting BEC, well electrons are leptons and light, how
>> can you get heavy hadrons into one coherent state at room temperature? If
>> this is the case, has CF been observed to occur spontaneously in liquid 
>> H2?
>>
>

>>>
>>
>

Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves

[Axil Axil]

Why can't you carefully explain in a simplified way what mistakes that we
are making. Are we beyond all hopes of redemption?

"The magnitude of it..." just is not enough for us to understand the error
of our ways. Please before you go, just explain this phrase to me.


On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 2:18 PM, John Franks  wrote:

> The magnitude of it...
>
> I'm going as the level of debate is very very amateur here.
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 6:29 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:
>
>> What is your point? Spin of a fermion is quantized.
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 1:26 PM, John Franks  wrote:
>>
>>> Does 'g' mean anything to you? What is the magnetic moment of an
>>> electron?
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 6:15 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:
>>>
 The magnetic field is atomic level. The next step in the research that
 the Ni/H reactor developers need to do is measure the magnetic fields that
 they are developing in their reactions. This can be done using sub-micron
 hall effect probes.


 On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 1:10 PM, John Franks  wrote:

> What's the magnitutde magnetic field and how do heavy hadrons display
> these collective properties like light leptons?
>
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 6:05 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:
>
>> FQHE reduces the inherent charge of fermions as a function of
>> increasing magnetic field.
>>
>> The nucleus is a fermion, the protons and neutrons are fermions and
>> so are quarks.
>>
>> Why should a magnetic field make a distinction in the way it
>> reduces charge is the various types of fermions? I won't.
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 12:59 PM, John Franks wrote:
>>
>>> "Is like or maybe is"
>>>
>>> How so? Once again, QHE or FQHE is to do with cooperative properties
>>> of light leptons. So how does this carry over to heavy hadrons and what
>>> does that have to do with CF?
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 5:53 PM, Axil Axil wrote:
>>>
 Cold fusion is like(or maybe is) the Factional Quantum Hall
 Effect(FQHE). Science did not believe that something like the FQHE was
 possible until it was shown experimentally. Cold fusion is the FQHE 
 moved
 over to the fermions of the fermions of the atomic nucleus.


>
> If you are suggesting BEC, well electrons are leptons and light,
> how can you get heavy hadrons into one coherent state at room 
> temperature?
> If this is the case, has CF been observed to occur spontaneously in 
> liquid
> H2?
>

>>>
>>
>

>>>
>>
>

Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves

[James Bowery]

Of course he can flee the empirical imperative!

Indeed, it would be sinful for him to look through that telescope.

(Yes, Jed, I know that's apocryphal but think of it as a movie everyone saw
that provides a mythic vocabulary for narrative.)


On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 1:19 PM,  wrote:

> White dwarfs have strong magnetic fields from BEC and supra conducting.
>
> Part of the WD may also have periodic crystal structure. The main deferens
> is the neutral atomic hydrogen in metal hydrides.
>
> This may point toward theories involving electrons as in Storms theory.
>
> Maybe you are right Mr Franks, but no one have come with a good
> explanation how multiple methods of calorimetrical could have failed so
> much.
>
> If you want to debunk CF you must do this thing. You can not flee the
> empirical imperative.
>
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, 19 Dec 2013 13:49:25 -0500, "Foks0904 ." 
> wrote:
>
>  David,
>  You're wasting your breath. Look back at other threads this guy has
> posted in lately. Franks already said he was leaving this forum twice, but
> still won't leave. Until a mod decides to ban him for his B.S. we're all
> better off ignoring him.
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 1:43 PM, David Roberson wrote:
>
>> Read the experimental results and you will understand.  At the moment
>> you are just parroting the usual physics rules that are not complete.  Why
>> not read first, then you can state no reliable experiments and someone
>> might listen.  You need to do some homework first and then start
>> contributing.
>>
>> Do you wish to be one of the many that did not accept just about every
>> phenomena known to physics until someone else held their hand?  We can list
>> many if you are not aware of them.  Come up to the plate and become one of
>> the team players unless you would prefer to complain and not contribute.
>> We need all the help we can obtain and you seem to be somewhat
>> knowledgeable.
>>
>> Dave
>>   -Original Message-
>> From: John Franks 
>> To: vortex-l 
>> Sent: Thu, Dec 19, 2013 1:07 pm
>> Subject: Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves
>>
>>  How? No data, no COP and reliable experiments. No rationale.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 6:03 PM, David Roberson wrote:
>>
>>> Axil is a fairly knowledgeable guy, but he can not single handedly
>>> develop all the important laws of physics concerning LENR.  Perhaps you
>>> might wish to contribute?
>>>
>>> Dave
>>
>>

Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves

[torulf.greek]

White dwarfs have strong magnetic fields from BEC and supra
conducting. 

Part of the WD may also have periodic crystal structure.
The main deferens is the neutral atomic hydrogen in metal hydrides.


This may point toward theories involving electrons as in Storms
theory. 

Maybe you are right Mr Franks, but no one have come with a
good explanation how multiple methods of calorimetrical could have
failed so much. 

If you want to debunk CF you must do this thing. You
can not flee the empirical imperative. 

On Thu, 19 Dec 2013 13:49:25
-0500, "Foks0904 ."  wrote:  

David, 

You're wasting your breath. Look
back at other threads this guy has posted in lately. Franks already said
he was leaving this forum twice, but still won't leave. Until a mod
decides to ban him for his B.S. we're all better off ignoring him.  

On
Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 1:43 PM, David Roberson  wrote:
 Read the
experimental results and you will understand. At the moment you are just
parroting the usual physics rules that are not complete. Why not read
first, then you can state no reliable experiments and someone might
listen. You need to do some homework first and then start
contributing.

 Do you wish to be one of the many that did not accept
just about every phenomena known to physics until someone else held
their hand? We can list many if you are not aware of them. Come up to
the plate and become one of the team players unless you would prefer to
complain and not contribute. We need all the help we can obtain and you
seem to be somewhat knowledgeable.

 Dave

-Original Message-

From: John Franks 
 To: vortex-l 
 Sent: Thu, Dec 19, 2013 1:07 pm

Subject: Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves

How? No data, no COP and reliable
experiments. No rationale.

On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 6:03 PM, David
Roberson  wrote:
 Axil is a fairly knowledgeable guy, but he can not
single handedly develop all the important laws of physics concerning
LENR. Perhaps you might wish to contribute?

 Dave


Links:
--
[1] mailto:dlrober...@aol.com
[2]
mailto:jf27...@gmail.com
[3] mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com
[4]
mailto:dlrober...@aol.com

Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves

[Jed Rothwell]

Axil Axil  wrote:

COP is an engineering question, not a science question. Control of the LENR
> reaction requires a limitation on COP. An infinite COP means that the
> reactor melts down.
>

I would define an infinite COP as a reaction with no input power, and some
level of output power. An example would be a burning match. A reactor melt
down would be caused by a reaction with no limiting factor controlling
speed. An example would be an explosive.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves

[John Franks]

The magnitude of it...

I'm going as the level of debate is very very amateur here.

On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 6:29 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:

> What is your point? Spin of a fermion is quantized.
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 1:26 PM, John Franks  wrote:
>
>> Does 'g' mean anything to you? What is the magnetic moment of an electron?
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 6:15 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:
>>
>>> The magnetic field is atomic level. The next step in the research that
>>> the Ni/H reactor developers need to do is measure the magnetic fields that
>>> they are developing in their reactions. This can be done using sub-micron
>>> hall effect probes.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 1:10 PM, John Franks  wrote:
>>>
 What's the magnitutde magnetic field and how do heavy hadrons display
 these collective properties like light leptons?



 On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 6:05 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:

> FQHE reduces the inherent charge of fermions as a function of
> increasing magnetic field.
>
> The nucleus is a fermion, the protons and neutrons are fermions and so
> are quarks.
>
> Why should a magnetic field make a distinction in the way it
> reduces charge is the various types of fermions? I won't.
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 12:59 PM, John Franks wrote:
>
>> "Is like or maybe is"
>>
>> How so? Once again, QHE or FQHE is to do with cooperative properties
>> of light leptons. So how does this carry over to heavy hadrons and what
>> does that have to do with CF?
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 5:53 PM, Axil Axil wrote:
>>
>>> Cold fusion is like(or maybe is) the Factional Quantum Hall
>>> Effect(FQHE). Science did not believe that something like the FQHE was
>>> possible until it was shown experimentally. Cold fusion is the FQHE 
>>> moved
>>> over to the fermions of the fermions of the atomic nucleus.
>>>
>>>

 If you are suggesting BEC, well electrons are leptons and light,
 how can you get heavy hadrons into one coherent state at room 
 temperature?
 If this is the case, has CF been observed to occur spontaneously in 
 liquid
 H2?

>>>
>>
>

>>>
>>
>

Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves

[Foks0904 .]

David,

You're wasting your breath. Look back at other threads this guy has
posted in lately. Franks already said he was leaving this forum twice, but
still won't leave. Until a mod decides to ban him for his B.S. we're all
better off ignoring him.


On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 1:43 PM, David Roberson  wrote:

> Read the experimental results and you will understand.  At the moment you
> are just parroting the usual physics rules that are not complete.  Why not
> read first, then you can state no reliable experiments and someone might
> listen.  You need to do some homework first and then start contributing.
>
> Do you wish to be one of the many that did not accept just about every
> phenomena known to physics until someone else held their hand?  We can list
> many if you are not aware of them.  Come up to the plate and become one of
> the team players unless you would prefer to complain and not contribute.
> We need all the help we can obtain and you seem to be somewhat
> knowledgeable.
>
> Dave
>
>
>
>  -Original Message-
> From: John Franks 
> To: vortex-l 
> Sent: Thu, Dec 19, 2013 1:07 pm
> Subject: Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves
>
>  How? No data, no COP and reliable experiments. No rationale.
>
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 6:03 PM, David Roberson wrote:
>
>> Axil is a fairly knowledgeable guy, but he can not single handedly
>> develop all the important laws of physics concerning LENR.  Perhaps you
>> might wish to contribute?
>>
>> Dave
>
>

Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves

[David Roberson]

Read the experimental results and you will understand.  At the moment you are 
just parroting the usual physics rules that are not complete.  Why not read 
first, then you can state no reliable experiments and someone might listen.  
You need to do some homework first and then start contributing.

Do you wish to be one of the many that did not accept just about every 
phenomena known to physics until someone else held their hand?  We can list 
many if you are not aware of them.  Come up to the plate and become one of the 
team players unless you would prefer to complain and not contribute.  We need 
all the help we can obtain and you seem to be somewhat knowledgeable.

Dave

 

 

 

-Original Message-
From: John Franks 
To: vortex-l 
Sent: Thu, Dec 19, 2013 1:07 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves


How? No data, no COP and reliable experiments. No rationale.





On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 6:03 PM, David Roberson  wrote:

Axil is a fairly knowledgeable guy, but he can not single handedly develop all 
the important laws of physics concerning LENR.  Perhaps you might wish to 
contribute?

Dave

Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves

[Axil Axil]

What is your point? Spin of a fermion is quantized.


On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 1:26 PM, John Franks  wrote:

> Does 'g' mean anything to you? What is the magnetic moment of an electron?
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 6:15 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:
>
>> The magnetic field is atomic level. The next step in the research that
>> the Ni/H reactor developers need to do is measure the magnetic fields that
>> they are developing in their reactions. This can be done using sub-micron
>> hall effect probes.
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 1:10 PM, John Franks  wrote:
>>
>>> What's the magnitutde magnetic field and how do heavy hadrons display
>>> these collective properties like light leptons?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 6:05 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:
>>>
 FQHE reduces the inherent charge of fermions as a function of
 increasing magnetic field.

 The nucleus is a fermion, the protons and neutrons are fermions and so
 are quarks.

 Why should a magnetic field make a distinction in the way it
 reduces charge is the various types of fermions? I won't.


 On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 12:59 PM, John Franks wrote:

> "Is like or maybe is"
>
> How so? Once again, QHE or FQHE is to do with cooperative properties
> of light leptons. So how does this carry over to heavy hadrons and what
> does that have to do with CF?
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 5:53 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:
>
>> Cold fusion is like(or maybe is) the Factional Quantum Hall
>> Effect(FQHE). Science did not believe that something like the FQHE was
>> possible until it was shown experimentally. Cold fusion is the FQHE moved
>> over to the fermions of the fermions of the atomic nucleus.
>>
>>
>>>
>>> If you are suggesting BEC, well electrons are leptons and light, how
>>> can you get heavy hadrons into one coherent state at room temperature? 
>>> If
>>> this is the case, has CF been observed to occur spontaneously in liquid 
>>> H2?
>>>
>>
>

>>>
>>
>

Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves

[John Franks]

Does 'g' mean anything to you? What is the magnetic moment of an electron?


On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 6:15 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:

> The magnetic field is atomic level. The next step in the research that the
> Ni/H reactor developers need to do is measure the magnetic fields that they
> are developing in their reactions. This can be done using sub-micron hall
> effect probes.
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 1:10 PM, John Franks  wrote:
>
>> What's the magnitutde magnetic field and how do heavy hadrons display
>> these collective properties like light leptons?
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 6:05 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:
>>
>>> FQHE reduces the inherent charge of fermions as a function of increasing
>>> magnetic field.
>>>
>>> The nucleus is a fermion, the protons and neutrons are fermions and so
>>> are quarks.
>>>
>>> Why should a magnetic field make a distinction in the way it
>>> reduces charge is the various types of fermions? I won't.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 12:59 PM, John Franks  wrote:
>>>
 "Is like or maybe is"

 How so? Once again, QHE or FQHE is to do with cooperative properties of
 light leptons. So how does this carry over to heavy hadrons and what does
 that have to do with CF?


 On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 5:53 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:

> Cold fusion is like(or maybe is) the Factional Quantum Hall
> Effect(FQHE). Science did not believe that something like the FQHE was
> possible until it was shown experimentally. Cold fusion is the FQHE moved
> over to the fermions of the fermions of the atomic nucleus.
>
>
>>
>> If you are suggesting BEC, well electrons are leptons and light, how
>> can you get heavy hadrons into one coherent state at room temperature? If
>> this is the case, has CF been observed to occur spontaneously in liquid 
>> H2?
>>
>

>>>
>>
>

Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves

[Daniel Rocha]

My psychiatrist told me I can't stop lying, so I am now on traquilizers. I
won't answer anymooor.. z.


2013/12/19 John Franks 

> You need a different kind of help...
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 6:21 PM, Daniel Rocha wrote:
>
>> See, why you don't deserve. You are a pseudo skeptical. You won't help in
>> the research I am involved.
>>
>>
>> 2013/12/19 John Franks 
>>
>>> Is this laying on of hands stuff ever going to get you in Nature?
>>>
>>> What the hell is a femto-atto pinch?
>>>
>>> A Vimto-apple punch could be quite a nice concoction, mmmh, must try it.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 6:09 PM, Daniel Rocha wrote:
>>>
 The current does not need to flow in a mateial and it does not. It is a
 femto-atto pinch. I cannot say more.

> --
>> Daniel Rocha - RJ
>> danieldi...@gmail.com
>>
>

>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Daniel Rocha - RJ
>> danieldi...@gmail.com
>>
>
>


-- 
Daniel Rocha - RJ
danieldi...@gmail.com

Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves

[John Franks]

You need a different kind of help...


On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 6:21 PM, Daniel Rocha  wrote:

> See, why you don't deserve. You are a pseudo skeptical. You won't help in
> the research I am involved.
>
>
> 2013/12/19 John Franks 
>
>> Is this laying on of hands stuff ever going to get you in Nature?
>>
>> What the hell is a femto-atto pinch?
>>
>> A Vimto-apple punch could be quite a nice concoction, mmmh, must try it.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 6:09 PM, Daniel Rocha wrote:
>>
>>> The current does not need to flow in a mateial and it does not. It is a
>>> femto-atto pinch. I cannot say more.
>>>
 --
> Daniel Rocha - RJ
> danieldi...@gmail.com
>

>>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Daniel Rocha - RJ
> danieldi...@gmail.com
>

Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves

[Daniel Rocha]

See, why you don't deserve. You are a pseudo skeptical. You won't help in
the research I am involved.


2013/12/19 John Franks 

> Is this laying on of hands stuff ever going to get you in Nature?
>
> What the hell is a femto-atto pinch?
>
> A Vimto-apple punch could be quite a nice concoction, mmmh, must try it.
>
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 6:09 PM, Daniel Rocha wrote:
>
>> The current does not need to flow in a mateial and it does not. It is a
>> femto-atto pinch. I cannot say more.
>>
>>> --
 Daniel Rocha - RJ
 danieldi...@gmail.com

>>>
>>
>


-- 
Daniel Rocha - RJ
danieldi...@gmail.com

Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves

[John Franks]

Is this your great contribution to science?


On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 6:15 PM, Daniel Rocha  wrote:

> None of your business.
>
>
> 2013/12/19 John Franks 
>
>> You wot? You have a CF cell or whatever, you set it up and measure how
>> much energy was required to get it going. Now, how much energy was produced
>> over what you put in?
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 6:08 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:
>>
>>> COP is an engineering question, not a science question. Control of the
>>> LENR reaction requires a limitation on COP. An infinite COP means that the
>>> reactor melts down.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 1:05 PM, John Franks  wrote:
>>>
 Holy holy holy,
 Lord LENR Almighty

 More holes than a colander.

 Maybe the Holy Spirit or just liquor can explain that special bit in CF
 "theories".

 Did anyone answer the COP question?

>>>
>
>
> --
> Daniel Rocha - RJ
> danieldi...@gmail.com
>

Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves

[John Franks]

Is this laying on of hands stuff ever going to get you in Nature?

What the hell is a femto-atto pinch?

A Vimto-apple punch could be quite a nice concoction, mmmh, must try it.


On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 6:09 PM, Daniel Rocha  wrote:

> The current does not need to flow in a mateial and it does not. It is a
> femto-atto pinch. I cannot say more.
>
>> --
>>> Daniel Rocha - RJ
>>> danieldi...@gmail.com
>>>
>>
>

Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves

[John Franks]

How? No data, no COP and reliable experiments. No rationale.



On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 6:03 PM, David Roberson  wrote:

> Axil is a fairly knowledgeable guy, but he can not single handedly
> develop all the important laws of physics concerning LENR.  Perhaps you
> might wish to contribute?
>
> Dave

Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves

[Daniel Rocha]

None of your business.


2013/12/19 John Franks 

> You wot? You have a CF cell or whatever, you set it up and measure how
> much energy was required to get it going. Now, how much energy was produced
> over what you put in?
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 6:08 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:
>
>> COP is an engineering question, not a science question. Control of the
>> LENR reaction requires a limitation on COP. An infinite COP means that the
>> reactor melts down.
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 1:05 PM, John Franks  wrote:
>>
>>> Holy holy holy,
>>> Lord LENR Almighty
>>>
>>> More holes than a colander.
>>>
>>> Maybe the Holy Spirit or just liquor can explain that special bit in CF
>>> "theories".
>>>
>>> Did anyone answer the COP question?
>>>
>>


-- 
Daniel Rocha - RJ
danieldi...@gmail.com

Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves

[Axil Axil]

The magnetic field is atomic level. The next step in the research that the
Ni/H reactor developers need to do is measure the magnetic fields that they
are developing in their reactions. This can be done using sub-micron hall
effect probes.


On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 1:10 PM, John Franks  wrote:

> What's the magnitutde magnetic field and how do heavy hadrons display
> these collective properties like light leptons?
>
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 6:05 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:
>
>> FQHE reduces the inherent charge of fermions as a function of increasing
>> magnetic field.
>>
>> The nucleus is a fermion, the protons and neutrons are fermions and so
>> are quarks.
>>
>> Why should a magnetic field make a distinction in the way it
>> reduces charge is the various types of fermions? I won't.
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 12:59 PM, John Franks  wrote:
>>
>>> "Is like or maybe is"
>>>
>>> How so? Once again, QHE or FQHE is to do with cooperative properties of
>>> light leptons. So how does this carry over to heavy hadrons and what does
>>> that have to do with CF?
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 5:53 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:
>>>
 Cold fusion is like(or maybe is) the Factional Quantum Hall
 Effect(FQHE). Science did not believe that something like the FQHE was
 possible until it was shown experimentally. Cold fusion is the FQHE moved
 over to the fermions of the fermions of the atomic nucleus.


>
> If you are suggesting BEC, well electrons are leptons and light, how
> can you get heavy hadrons into one coherent state at room temperature? If
> this is the case, has CF been observed to occur spontaneously in liquid 
> H2?
>

>>>
>>
>

Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves

[John Franks]

You wot? You have a CF cell or whatever, you set it up and measure how much
energy was required to get it going. Now, how much energy was produced over
what you put in?


On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 6:08 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:

> COP is an engineering question, not a science question. Control of the
> LENR reaction requires a limitation on COP. An infinite COP means that the
> reactor melts down.
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 1:05 PM, John Franks  wrote:
>
>> Holy holy holy,
>> Lord LENR Almighty
>>
>> More holes than a colander.
>>
>> Maybe the Holy Spirit or just liquor can explain that special bit in CF
>> "theories".
>>
>> Did anyone answer the COP question?
>>
>

Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves

[John Franks]

What's the magnitutde magnetic field and how do heavy hadrons display these
collective properties like light leptons?


On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 6:05 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:

> FQHE reduces the inherent charge of fermions as a function of increasing
> magnetic field.
>
> The nucleus is a fermion, the protons and neutrons are fermions and so are
> quarks.
>
> Why should a magnetic field make a distinction in the way it
> reduces charge is the various types of fermions? I won't.
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 12:59 PM, John Franks  wrote:
>
>> "Is like or maybe is"
>>
>> How so? Once again, QHE or FQHE is to do with cooperative properties of
>> light leptons. So how does this carry over to heavy hadrons and what does
>> that have to do with CF?
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 5:53 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:
>>
>>> Cold fusion is like(or maybe is) the Factional Quantum Hall
>>> Effect(FQHE). Science did not believe that something like the FQHE was
>>> possible until it was shown experimentally. Cold fusion is the FQHE moved
>>> over to the fermions of the fermions of the atomic nucleus.
>>>
>>>

 If you are suggesting BEC, well electrons are leptons and light, how
 can you get heavy hadrons into one coherent state at room temperature? If
 this is the case, has CF been observed to occur spontaneously in liquid H2?

>>>
>>
>

Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves

[Axil Axil]

COP is an engineering question, not a science question. Control of the LENR
reaction requires a limitation on COP. An infinite COP means that the
reactor melts down.


On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 1:05 PM, John Franks  wrote:

> Holy holy holy,
> Lord LENR Almighty
>
> More holes than a colander.
>
> Maybe the Holy Spirit or just liquor can explain that special bit in CF
> "theories".
>
> Did anyone answer the COP question?
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 6:00 PM, David Roberson wrote:
>
>> So?  You pointed out a good link as requested.  Why the sarcasm?  Do you
>> believe that everyone is supposed to answer your questions without
>> expecting equal treatment?  Please continue to supply pertinent data to the
>> group instead of being so negative.
>>
>> Who knows, you might become convinced that LENR is real provided you take
>> the time to read the experimental reports.  It is not easy to start at
>> ground zero as in your case as well as everyone else's.  It takes work to
>> get there.
>>
>> Dave
>>
>>
>>
>>  -Original Message-
>> From: John Franks 
>> To: vortex-l 
>> Sent: Thu, Dec 19, 2013 12:54 pm
>> Subject: Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves
>>
>>  Oh please:
>>
>>  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_dwarf#Magnetic_field
>>
>>
>>  On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 5:50 PM, David Roberson wrote:
>>
>>> Have you seen data that supports you belief that the magnetic field is
>>> intense?  I would assume that the radiation from the star would demonstrate
>>> this effect.
>>>
>>> Unless this has been proven, your assumption may not be accurate.  The
>>> extreme conductivity of the material would tend to lock magnetic fields
>>> into place if I recall.
>>>
>>> Dave
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>  -Original Message-
>>> From: John Franks 
>>> To: vortex-l 
>>>  Sent: Thu, Dec 19, 2013 12:46 pm
>>> Subject: Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves
>>>
>>>   The magnetic field in white dwarves is very high. It will have
>>> similar angular momentum to the parent star yet it has been compressed down
>>> to an earth-sized radius. Concomitantly the magnetic field will be
>>> massive.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 5:37 PM, Daniel Rocha wrote:
>>>
>>>>  There is no chemical process involved in CF. White dwarves are
>>>> compressed by degenerate matter by gravity, and not strong magnetic fields.
>>>> If they were, they would do cold fusion.
>>>>
>>>>  --
>>>> Daniel Rocha - RJ
>>>> danieldi...@gmail.com
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>

Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves

[Daniel Rocha]

The current does not need to flow in a mateial and it does not. It is a
femto-atto pinch. I cannot say more.


>>
>>
>> --
>> Daniel Rocha - RJ
>> danieldi...@gmail.com
>>
>
>


-- 
Daniel Rocha - RJ
danieldi...@gmail.com

Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves

[John Franks]

Holy holy holy,
Lord LENR Almighty

More holes than a colander.

Maybe the Holy Spirit or just liquor can explain that special bit in CF
"theories".

Did anyone answer the COP question?


On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 6:00 PM, David Roberson  wrote:

> So?  You pointed out a good link as requested.  Why the sarcasm?  Do you
> believe that everyone is supposed to answer your questions without
> expecting equal treatment?  Please continue to supply pertinent data to the
> group instead of being so negative.
>
> Who knows, you might become convinced that LENR is real provided you take
> the time to read the experimental reports.  It is not easy to start at
> ground zero as in your case as well as everyone else's.  It takes work to
> get there.
>
> Dave
>
>
>
>  -Original Message-
> From: John Franks 
> To: vortex-l 
> Sent: Thu, Dec 19, 2013 12:54 pm
> Subject: Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves
>
>  Oh please:
>
>  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_dwarf#Magnetic_field
>
>
>  On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 5:50 PM, David Roberson wrote:
>
>> Have you seen data that supports you belief that the magnetic field is
>> intense?  I would assume that the radiation from the star would demonstrate
>> this effect.
>>
>> Unless this has been proven, your assumption may not be accurate.  The
>> extreme conductivity of the material would tend to lock magnetic fields
>> into place if I recall.
>>
>> Dave
>>
>>
>>
>>  -Original Message-
>> From: John Franks 
>> To: vortex-l 
>>  Sent: Thu, Dec 19, 2013 12:46 pm
>> Subject: Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves
>>
>>   The magnetic field in white dwarves is very high. It will have similar
>> angular momentum to the parent star yet it has been compressed down to an
>> earth-sized radius. Concomitantly the magnetic field will be massive.
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 5:37 PM, Daniel Rocha wrote:
>>
>>>  There is no chemical process involved in CF. White dwarves are
>>> compressed by degenerate matter by gravity, and not strong magnetic fields.
>>> If they were, they would do cold fusion.
>>>
>>>  --
>>> Daniel Rocha - RJ
>>> danieldi...@gmail.com
>>>
>>
>>
>

Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves

[David Roberson]

Axil is a fairly knowledgeable guy, but he can not single handedly develop all 
the important laws of physics concerning LENR.  Perhaps you might wish to 
contribute?

Dave

 

 

 

-Original Message-
From: John Franks 
To: vortex-l 
Sent: Thu, Dec 19, 2013 12:59 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves


"Is like or maybe is"


How so? Once again, QHE or FQHE is to do with cooperative properties of light 
leptons. So how does this carry over to heavy hadrons and what does that have 
to do with CF?



On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 5:53 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:

Cold fusion is like(or maybe is) the Factional Quantum Hall Effect(FQHE). 
Science did not believe that something like the FQHE was possible until it was 
shown experimentally. Cold fusion is the FQHE moved over to the fermions of the 
fermions of the atomic nucleus.








If you are suggesting BEC, well electrons are leptons and light, how can you 
get heavy hadrons into one coherent state at room temperature? If this is the 
case, has CF been observed to occur spontaneously in liquid H2?

Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves

[Axil Axil]

FQHE reduces the inherent charge of fermions as a function of increasing
magnetic field.

The nucleus is a fermion, the protons and neutrons are fermions and so are
quarks.

Why should a magnetic field make a distinction in the way it reduces charge
is the various types of fermions? I won't.


On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 12:59 PM, John Franks  wrote:

> "Is like or maybe is"
>
> How so? Once again, QHE or FQHE is to do with cooperative properties of
> light leptons. So how does this carry over to heavy hadrons and what does
> that have to do with CF?
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 5:53 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:
>
>> Cold fusion is like(or maybe is) the Factional Quantum Hall Effect(FQHE).
>> Science did not believe that something like the FQHE was possible until it
>> was shown experimentally. Cold fusion is the FQHE moved over to the
>> fermions of the fermions of the atomic nucleus.
>>
>>
>>>
>>> If you are suggesting BEC, well electrons are leptons and light, how can
>>> you get heavy hadrons into one coherent state at room temperature? If this
>>> is the case, has CF been observed to occur spontaneously in liquid H2?
>>>
>>
>

Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves

[David Roberson]

So?  You pointed out a good link as requested.  Why the sarcasm?  Do you 
believe that everyone is supposed to answer your questions without expecting 
equal treatment?  Please continue to supply pertinent data to the group instead 
of being so negative.

Who knows, you might become convinced that LENR is real provided you take the 
time to read the experimental reports.  It is not easy to start at ground zero 
as in your case as well as everyone else's.  It takes work to get there.

Dave

 

 

 

-Original Message-
From: John Franks 
To: vortex-l 
Sent: Thu, Dec 19, 2013 12:54 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves


Oh please:


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_dwarf#Magnetic_field




On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 5:50 PM, David Roberson  wrote:

Have you seen data that supports you belief that the magnetic field is intense? 
 I would assume that the radiation from the star would demonstrate this effect.

Unless this has been proven, your assumption may not be accurate.  The extreme 
conductivity of the material would tend to lock magnetic fields into place if I 
recall.

Dave

 

 

 


-Original Message-
From: John Franks 
To: vortex-l 

Sent: Thu, Dec 19, 2013 12:46 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves




The magnetic field in white dwarves is very high. It will have similar angular 
momentum to the parent star yet it has been compressed down to an earth-sized 
radius. Concomitantly the magnetic field will be massive. 



On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 5:37 PM, Daniel Rocha  wrote:


There is no chemical process involved in CF. White dwarves are compressed by 
degenerate matter by gravity, and not strong magnetic fields. If they were, 
they would do cold fusion.



-- 
Daniel Rocha - RJ
danieldi...@gmail.com

Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves

[John Franks]

"Is like or maybe is"

How so? Once again, QHE or FQHE is to do with cooperative properties of
light leptons. So how does this carry over to heavy hadrons and what does
that have to do with CF?


On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 5:53 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:

> Cold fusion is like(or maybe is) the Factional Quantum Hall Effect(FQHE).
> Science did not believe that something like the FQHE was possible until it
> was shown experimentally. Cold fusion is the FQHE moved over to the
> fermions of the fermions of the atomic nucleus.
>
>
>>
>> If you are suggesting BEC, well electrons are leptons and light, how can
>> you get heavy hadrons into one coherent state at room temperature? If this
>> is the case, has CF been observed to occur spontaneously in liquid H2?
>>
>

Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves

[John Franks]

Oh please:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_dwarf#Magnetic_field


On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 5:50 PM, David Roberson  wrote:

> Have you seen data that supports you belief that the magnetic field is
> intense?  I would assume that the radiation from the star would demonstrate
> this effect.
>
> Unless this has been proven, your assumption may not be accurate.  The
> extreme conductivity of the material would tend to lock magnetic fields
> into place if I recall.
>
> Dave
>
>
>
>  -Original Message-
> From: John Franks 
> To: vortex-l 
> Sent: Thu, Dec 19, 2013 12:46 pm
> Subject: Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves
>
>  The magnetic field in white dwarves is very high. It will have similar
> angular momentum to the parent star yet it has been compressed down to an
> earth-sized radius. Concomitantly the magnetic field will be massive.
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 5:37 PM, Daniel Rocha wrote:
>
>>  There is no chemical process involved in CF. White dwarves are
>> compressed by degenerate matter by gravity, and not strong magnetic fields.
>> If they were, they would do cold fusion.
>>
>>  --
>> Daniel Rocha - RJ
>> danieldi...@gmail.com
>>
>
>

Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves

[Axil Axil]

Cold fusion is like(or maybe is) the Factional Quantum Hall Effect(FQHE).
Science did not believe that something like the FQHE was possible until it
was shown experimentally. Cold fusion is the FQHE moved over to the
fermions of the fermions of the atomic nucleus.


On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 12:42 PM, John Franks  wrote:

> So do you encourage people working on Bessler's Wheel, Steorn, SMOT
> devices when they keep banging up against known theory (and hence
> experimental observations) that in a conservative field, what you gain
> going down, you give going up?
>
> WHAT IS THE NEW ANGLE THAR EVERYONE IS MISSING?
>
> So the belief is that it has nothing to do with temperature, pressure,
> proximity but something to do with the lattice. Please expand on this.
>
> If you are suggesting BEC, well electrons are leptons and light, how can
> you get heavy hadrons into one coherent state at room temperature? If this
> is the case, has CF been observed to occur spontaneously in liquid H2?
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 5:30 PM, Alain Sepeda wrote:
>
>> Jed, you hit the hard point that I found in an article (a recent message).
>>
>> Your position is evident for someone with good scientific culture and
>> good practical sense, but not "brainwashed" by academic training of Popper
>> science philosophy .
>>
>>
>>
>> 2013/12/19 Jed Rothwell 
>>
>>> John Franks  wrote:
>>>
>>>
 Everyone will tell you, until you sort out the mechanism (not nuts and
 bolts) but how this would be possible in a conservative field, there is
 little point in experimenting.

>>>
>>> You have that backward. Cold fusion was discovered by experiment. We
>>> know it is real because it has been widely replicated, often at high signal
>>> to noise ratios. There is no theory to explain it.
>>>
>>> You seem to believe that science must begin with theory and then proceed
>>> to experiment. That does happen from time to time, but more often it begins
>>> with a discovery which only later is explained by theory.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>

Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves

[David Roberson]

Have you seen data that supports you belief that the magnetic field is intense? 
 I would assume that the radiation from the star would demonstrate this effect.

Unless this has been proven, your assumption may not be accurate.  The extreme 
conductivity of the material would tend to lock magnetic fields into place if I 
recall.

Dave

 

 

 

-Original Message-
From: John Franks 
To: vortex-l 
Sent: Thu, Dec 19, 2013 12:46 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves


The magnetic field in white dwarves is very high. It will have similar angular 
momentum to the parent star yet it has been compressed down to an earth-sized 
radius. Concomitantly the magnetic field will be massive. 



On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 5:37 PM, Daniel Rocha  wrote:


There is no chemical process involved in CF. White dwarves are compressed by 
degenerate matter by gravity, and not strong magnetic fields. If they were, 
they would do cold fusion.



-- 
Daniel Rocha - RJ
danieldi...@gmail.com

Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves

[John Franks]

And how is this relevant to CF when the best super-conducting
electromagnets are about 100T
http://www.lanl.gov/science-innovation/science-features/world-record-set-magnetic-field.php

What current or spin currents would need to flow in a real material given
that iron has a maximum moment of about 2T and all our permanent magnetic
materials are based around this figure?


On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 5:47 PM, Daniel Rocha  wrote:

> But not high enough. Not in the Teratesla range.
>
>
> 2013/12/19 John Franks 
>
>> The magnetic field in white dwarves is very high. It will have similar
>> angular momentum to the parent star yet it has been compressed down to an
>> earth-sized radius. Concomitantly the magnetic field will be massive.
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 5:37 PM, Daniel Rocha wrote:
>>
>>> There is no chemical process involved in CF. White dwarves are
>>> compressed by degenerate matter by gravity, and not strong magnetic fields.
>>> If they were, they would do cold fusion.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Daniel Rocha - RJ
>>> danieldi...@gmail.com
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Daniel Rocha - RJ
> danieldi...@gmail.com
>

Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves

[Daniel Rocha]

But not high enough. Not in the Teratesla range.


2013/12/19 John Franks 

> The magnetic field in white dwarves is very high. It will have similar
> angular momentum to the parent star yet it has been compressed down to an
> earth-sized radius. Concomitantly the magnetic field will be massive.
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 5:37 PM, Daniel Rocha wrote:
>
>> There is no chemical process involved in CF. White dwarves are compressed
>> by degenerate matter by gravity, and not strong magnetic fields. If they
>> were, they would do cold fusion.
>>
>> --
>> Daniel Rocha - RJ
>> danieldi...@gmail.com
>>
>
>


-- 
Daniel Rocha - RJ
danieldi...@gmail.com

Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves

[John Franks]

The magnetic field in white dwarves is very high. It will have similar
angular momentum to the parent star yet it has been compressed down to an
earth-sized radius. Concomitantly the magnetic field will be massive.


On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 5:37 PM, Daniel Rocha  wrote:

> There is no chemical process involved in CF. White dwarves are compressed
> by degenerate matter by gravity, and not strong magnetic fields. If they
> were, they would do cold fusion.
>
> --
> Daniel Rocha - RJ
> danieldi...@gmail.com
>

Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves

[John Franks]

So do you encourage people working on Bessler's Wheel, Steorn, SMOT devices
when they keep banging up against known theory (and hence experimental
observations) that in a conservative field, what you gain going down, you
give going up?

WHAT IS THE NEW ANGLE THAR EVERYONE IS MISSING?

So the belief is that it has nothing to do with temperature, pressure,
proximity but something to do with the lattice. Please expand on this.

If you are suggesting BEC, well electrons are leptons and light, how can
you get heavy hadrons into one coherent state at room temperature? If this
is the case, has CF been observed to occur spontaneously in liquid H2?


On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 5:30 PM, Alain Sepeda wrote:

> Jed, you hit the hard point that I found in an article (a recent message).
>
> Your position is evident for someone with good scientific culture and good
> practical sense, but not "brainwashed" by academic training of Popper
> science philosophy .
>
>
>
> 2013/12/19 Jed Rothwell 
>
>> John Franks  wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Everyone will tell you, until you sort out the mechanism (not nuts and
>>> bolts) but how this would be possible in a conservative field, there is
>>> little point in experimenting.
>>>
>>
>> You have that backward. Cold fusion was discovered by experiment. We know
>> it is real because it has been widely replicated, often at high signal to
>> noise ratios. There is no theory to explain it.
>>
>> You seem to believe that science must begin with theory and then proceed
>> to experiment. That does happen from time to time, but more often it begins
>> with a discovery which only later is explained by theory.
>>
>>
>>
>

Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves

[David Roberson]

This is just another clue to the puzzle.  One day it will all make sense and I 
assume that Mr. Franks will regret that he has acted so closed minded about the 
issue.  Hopefully, he will realize how much he has to learn about physics.  No 
one has all the answers and perhaps he might actually be capable of asking 
questions that are revealing.

The white dwarf consideration has validity since it does represent a case that 
seems strange at first glance.  But, the real process might be coming from the 
low temperature side of the scale instead of the more usual hot end.  The 
theories relating to BEC contribution to cold fusion would tend to work better 
in that domain.

Of course we all have seen evidence that absolute zero conditions are not 
generating cold fusion, so is it reasonable to ask about extremely high 
temperature effects upon hot fusion?  I have a strong suspicion that hot fusion 
would likewise be extinguished at the extremes of high temperature.  Of course 
this is true in particle accelerators and I suspect that these types of 
interactions become strongly endothermic as new particles are constructed out 
of the input energy of the devices.

Apparently, to get exothermic nuclear reactions requires a special band of 
reactant energy.  Why LENR works at the low end remains a question that will 
hopefully be answered soon.

Mr. Franks, it would appear that you might find great fame if you work toward 
finding a solution to the questions surrounding LENR instead of merely 
complaining about the current level of progress.  Surely, you must realize that 
far more remains unknown in the field of physics than has been uncovered so 
far.  Do you believe that everything is known as of this time?  I would like to 
hear your answer to this reasonable question.

Dave

 

 

 

-Original Message-
From: H Veeder 
To: vortex-l 
Sent: Thu, Dec 19, 2013 12:18 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves







On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 9:26 AM, John Franks  wrote:

The only thing a metal lattice has is periodicity, it certainly wouldn't have 
the density of a white dwarf. So, this leads to the question, what has 
periodicity got to do with cold fusion?










good question


Harry 

Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves

[Daniel Rocha]

There is no chemical process involved in CF. White dwarves are compressed
by degenerate matter by gravity, and not strong magnetic fields. If they
were, they would do cold fusion.

-- 
Daniel Rocha - RJ
danieldi...@gmail.com

Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves

[John Franks]

But what have chemical processes in the range of a few eV got to do with
nuclear processes in the range of MeV and cold fusion?

On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 5:14 PM,  wrote:

> The hydrogen in metal hydrides is *atomic hydrogen* (nascent hydrogen). In 
> electron degenerate mater there are free protons.
>
> Your critique maybe constructive because it sorts outs some theories but not 
> all theories about cold fusion.
>
> On Thu, 19 Dec 2013 10:29:01 +, John Franks  wrote:
>
> Further furthermore if 90% of main sequence stars end up as white dwarves
> when they have fini
> shed
> hot fusion, according to their limits, why don't they go on burning in a CF
> manner so that the sky is full of UV,Xray or even gamma ray dwarves? As the
> temperature built up again thermal runaway would occur as radiation would
> be limited by the small size and SB law so that hot fusion would occur
> again and a supernova would result. In that case all main sequence stars
> would end up as neutron stars or black holes and the sky would be littered
> with them.
>
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 10:03 AM, John Franks  wrote:
>
>> Furthermore,
>> The density of white dwarves is some 10^6g/cm^3 compared to water at
>> 1g/cm^3. This would mean that the inter-nuclei spacing was 1/100 of water.
>>  Now Muon catalyzed fusion
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muon-catalyzed_fusion which we know works
>> brings the nuclei 1/207 of the distance with electrons. It happens at an
>> appreciable rate.
>>  since white dwarves are not more luminous than a black body radiating
>> away with the Stefan Boltzmann law, we can conclude that there are no
>> nuclear reactions AND that is the limit of what can be done with ordinary
>> matter.
>>  In short, if you can't even get in the ball park of white dwarf matter
>> in the lab, what chance in hell have you of even approaching muon catalysed
>> reaction rates?
>>
>  If CF is real, why doesn't it occur in white dwarves with their high
> temperature and pressure electron degenerate matter? After all, that is the
> belief system of CF in cramming these lattices with hydrogen.
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_dwarf
>  "The material in a white dwarf no longer undergoes fusion reactions, so
> the star has no source of energy, nor is it supported by the heat generated
> by fusion against gravitational collapse."
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electron-degenerate_matter#Degenerate_gases
>  "Under high densities the matter becomes a degenerate gas when the
> electrons are all stripped from their parent atoms. In the core of a star,
> once hydrogen burning in nuclear 
> fusion reactions
> stops, it becomes a collection of positively charged 
> ions,
> largely helium and carbon nuclei, floating in a sea of electrons, which
> have been stripped from the nuclei. Degenerate gas is an almost perfect
> conductor of heat and does not obey the ordinary gas laws. White 
> dwarfs are
> luminous not because they are generating any energy but rather because they
> have trapped a large amount of heat."
>
>

Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves

[Alain Sepeda]

Jed, you hit the hard point that I found in an article (a recent message).

Your position is evident for someone with good scientific culture and good
practical sense, but not "brainwashed" by academic training of Popper
science philosophy .

It is evident if you are not popper-distorted that to prove the reality of
a phenomenon, you just have to confirm the result of few experiments.
Negative results are just failures, like is the crash of an early plane.

However when you think that Popper rules the truth, and you forget logic,
then you take any negative results as refutation of a theory...
But cold fusion is not a theory, it is an anomaly.
If you interpret Popper with a good logic, you see that Cold fusion is the
famous "refutation" of a theory... one confirmed result is enough to refute
the mainstream theory...

only bad reasoning, non-logic heuristics and habits influenced by Popper,
may make very intelligent people able to stupidly say that one experience
that fail to show a phenomenon is an evidence that all the others that show
it are artifact, and not an obvious failure to fulfill unknown requirements.

a typical fallacy influenced by non logic reasoning as neural network does


they mismatch the positively  "negative-result" where a theory fails with
the "failure" of cold fusion experiments which is of opposite kind.


quickly answer to those 3 question, in less than 1 second:
what is the color of blank paper ?
what is the color of a golf ball ?
what does cows drink ?

and you will see the result of a neural reasoning.



2013/12/19 Jed Rothwell 

> John Franks  wrote:
>
>
>> Everyone will tell you, until you sort out the mechanism (not nuts and
>> bolts) but how this would be possible in a conservative field, there is
>> little point in experimenting.
>>
>
> You have that backward. Cold fusion was discovered by experiment. We know
> it is real because it has been widely replicated, often at high signal to
> noise ratios. There is no theory to explain it.
>
> You seem to believe that science must begin with theory and then proceed
> to experiment. That does happen from time to time, but more often it begins
> with a discovery which only later is explained by theory.
>
> Even if you can show that theory predicts cold fusion cannot exist, that
> only proves the theory is wrong. It is fundamental to the scientific method
> that when theory and experiment conflict, experiment always wins.
>
> It may be that you are not familiar with the experimental evidence, such
> as heat beyond the limits of chemistry, the fact that no chemical fuel
> exists in the cells and no chemical changes are found, and the tritium and
> helium. I suggest you learn about these things before commenting on this
> research.
>
> I suggest you tone it down, and do your homework.
>
> - Jed
>
>

Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves

[John Franks]

Too vague. Ask why this should be so.

What COP (Energy Output / Energy Input) do you claim?


On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 5:07 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:

> Cold fusion occurs in a unique mixture of matter and gas in a particular
> topology and within a tight temperature range. Meeting these tight
> parameters is not found often in nature, but it can happen.
>
> It is amazing that a very few and inspired experimenters have meet these
> parameters, optimized them, and got this wonderful process to bend to their
> will.
>
>
>
>

Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves

[H Veeder]

On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 9:26 AM, John Franks  wrote:

> The only thing a metal lattice has is periodicity, it certainly wouldn't
> have the density of a white dwarf. So, this leads to the question, what has
> periodicity got to do with cold fusion?
>
>
>
>
good question

Harry

Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves

[torulf.greek]

The hydrogen in metal hydrides is ATOMIC HYDROGEN (nascent hydrogen).
In electron degenerate mater there are free protons. 

Your critique
maybe constructive because it sorts outs some theories but not all
theories about cold fusion.

On Thu, 19 Dec 2013 10:29:01 +, John
Franks  wrote:  
Further furthermore if 90% of main sequence stars end
up as white dwarves when they have fini  [1]shed hot fusion, according
to their limits, why don't they go on burning in a CF manner so that the
sky is full of UV,Xray or even gamma ray dwarves? As the temperature
built up again thermal runaway would occur as radiation would be limited
by the small size and SB law so that hot fusion would occur again and a
supernova would result. In that case all main sequence stars would end
up as neutron stars or black holes and the sky would be littered with
them.

On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 10:03 AM, John Franks 
wrote:

Furthermore, 

The density of white dwarves is some 10^6g/cm^3
compared to water at 1g/cm^3. This would mean that the inter-nuclei
spacing was 1/100 of water. 

Now Muon catalyzed fusion
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muon-catalyzed_fusion [3] which we know
works brings the nuclei 1/207 of the distance with electrons. It happens
at an appreciable rate. 

since white dwarves are not more luminous than
a black body radiating away with the Stefan Boltzmann law, we can
conclude that there are no nuclear reactions AND that is the limit of
what can be done with ordinary matter.  

In short, if you can't even
get in the ball park of white dwarf matter in the lab, what chance in
hell have you of even approaching muon catalysed reaction rates? 

If CF is real, why doesn't it occur in white dwarves with their high
temperature and pressure electron degenerate matter? After all, that is
the belief system of CF in cramming these lattices with hydrogen.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_dwarf [4] 

"The material in a
white dwarf no longer undergoes fusion reactions, so the star has no
source of energy, nor is it supported by the heat generated by fusion
against gravitational collapse."


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electron-degenerate_matter#Degenerate_gases
[5]

"Under high densities the matter becomes a degenerate gas when the
electrons are all stripped from their parent atoms. In the core of a
star, once hydrogen burning in nuclear fusion [6] reactions stops, it
becomes a collection of positively charged ions [7], largely helium and
carbon nuclei, floating in a sea of electrons, which have been stripped
from the nuclei. Degenerate gas is an almost perfect conductor of heat
and does not obey the ordinary gas laws. White dwarfs [8] are luminous
not because they are generating any energy but rather because they have
trapped a large amount of heat."   

Links:
--
[1]
https://www.bredbandsbolaget.se/webmail/?_task=mail&_action=list
[2]
mailto:jf27...@gmail.com
[3]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muon-catalyzed_fusion
[4]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_dwarf
[5]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electron-degenerate_matter#Degenerate_gases
[6]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_fusion
[7]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ion
[8]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_dwarfs

Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves

[Axil Axil]

Cold fusion occurs in a unique mixture of matter and gas in a particular
topology and within a tight temperature range. Meeting these tight
parameters is not found often in nature, but it can happen.

It is amazing that a very few and inspired experimenters have meet these
parameters, optimized them, and got this wonderful process to bend to their
will.


On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 10:49 AM, Foks0904 .  wrote:

> Let me restate, because you consistently avoid my questions, likely
> because you are unable to provide a sane answer:
>
> Why are you still on this list? We thought you "got on your coat", *twice*
> in one day, and found a hole to crawl into. Why are you still wasting
> everyone's time with your antagonism? Are you mentally dependent on
> catharsis and trolling?
>
> On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 10:26 AM, John Franks  wrote:
>
>> You're mistaking not believing in MAGICAL THINKING to being a
>> pathological skeptic.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 3:24 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Pathological skeptics often fail to realize that. They confuse their own
>>> opinion with reality.
>>>
>>> - Jed
>>>
>>
>>
>

Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves

[Foks0904 .]

Let me restate, because you consistently avoid my questions, likely because
you are unable to provide a sane answer:

Why are you still on this list? We thought you "got on your coat", *twice*
in one day, and found a hole to crawl into. Why are you still wasting
everyone's time with your antagonism? Are you mentally dependent on
catharsis and trolling?

On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 10:26 AM, John Franks  wrote:

> You're mistaking not believing in MAGICAL THINKING to being a pathological
> skeptic.
>
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 3:24 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
>
>>
>> Pathological skeptics often fail to realize that. They confuse their own
>> opinion with reality.
>>
>> - Jed
>>
>
>

Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves

[John Franks]

You're mistaking not believing in MAGICAL THINKING to being a pathological
skeptic.


On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 3:24 PM, Jed Rothwell  wrote:

>
> Pathological skeptics often fail to realize that. They confuse their own
> opinion with reality.
>
> - Jed
>

Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves

[Jed Rothwell]

I meant to say:

Saying so does not make it true.


Pathological skeptics often fail to realize that. They confuse their own
opinion with reality.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves

[John Franks]

How so? So you think there wouldn't be thermal runaway in a white dwarf if
CF was occurring, how so?


On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 3:14 PM, Eric Walker  wrote:

>
> > On Dec 19, 2013, at 1:45, John Franks  wrote:
> >
> > If CF is real, why doesn't it occur in white dwarves with their high
> temperature and pressure electron degenerate matter?
>
> This is an interesting thought experiment.  But it begs three questions:
>
> ...
>


> * Is cold fusion *not* occurring on white dwarves?  You made an initial
> pass at a prima facie case that it is not, but the arguments for and
> against are quite speculative at this point (e.g., re blackbody radiation).
>
> Eric
>

Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves

[James Bowery]

Yes R. A. ORIANI, JOHN C. NELSON, SUNG-KYU LEE, and J. H. BROADHURST
 University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota are just like Bessler's
Wheel crowd:

Conducting a replication of a device's extraordinary effect which they
attempted (unlike Nathan Lewis et al) AFTER the publication of the full
paper describing the experimental protocol to be replicated, and then
submitting a paper on that replication to "Nature" for peer review.

The peer reviewers had comments on needed corrections.  That right there
proves Oriani et al are kooks to anyone in their right mind.  No reputable
scientist has any second drafts submitted to a journal as prestigious as
"Nature" in response to peer review and expects that revised draft to be
published.

Oh, but Oriani et al were clearly not reputable because they went ahead and
provided the corrections, submitted to "Nature" the draft for peer review
and the peer reviewers, not realizing they were being "had" by obviously
invalid publishing protocol, reviewed the revised draft!!

Outrageous.

What's even more outrageous is that they not only reviewed it -- they
passed it on to the editors of "Nature" to publish!

We can all be grateful to the editors of "Nature" for telling it like it is
in their rejection letter to Oriani -- that this experimental outcome
doesn't fit with theory so -- circular file time.

If only we could inculcate more would-be scientists with this kind of
ruthless rigor!


On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 8:53 AM, John Franks  wrote:

> You're just like the Bessler's Wheel crowd. You're convinced that some new
> arrangement of the weights and arm length will make the wheel turn around
> in perpetuity.
>
> Everyone will tell you, until you sort out the mechanism (not nuts and
> bolts) but how this would be possible in a conservative field, there is
> little point in experimenting.
>
> Another way... it's like this, we know wheels are round, so there is
> little point in experimenting in the shape of wheels (on a flat surface
> that is) convincing yourself that some magical arrangement is going to be
> more efficient than a flat wheel.
>
> If you are going to do research, you have to say your logical point of
> departure. It is not enough to have hope or belief, you have to say where
> in the theory base everyone is getting it wrong. Theory is a summary of
> experiments, all the billions of person hours that have been put in. Like
> Bessler's Wheel, CF is trying to do the impossible because it cannot say
> how it could possibly work in the first instance. Coupled with
> observational data (how white dwarves are cooling, not heating), just what
> do you have as a starting point?
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 2:46 PM, James Bowery  wrote:
>
>> As Norman 
>> Ramseypointed out 
>> in his preamble to the DoE's original review of cold fusion:
>> "However, even a *single* short but valid cold fusion period would be
>> revolutionary."
>>
>> Dr. Franks will be gratified to learn that this kook died recently --
>> still believing that scientific funding priorities could be altered by a
>> "single" experimental outcome.  A "single" experimental outcome is not
>> reliable replication comprising the "extraordinary proof" required of
>> "extraordinary claims" and surely a "revolutionary" claim qualifies as
>> "extraordinary".
>>
>> Now, for the rest of us to die off so the pious can get back to placing
>> argumentation over experimentation the way it was before that pesky thing
>> called the Enlightenment came along and caused such a ruckus -- and the way
>> Dr. Franks is here.
>>
>

Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves

[Jed Rothwell]

John Franks  wrote:

You shining light. That's just how the Bessler's wheel crowd think.
>

No, it isn't. They do not thousands of replicated experiments published in
mainstream, peer-reviewed journals. They cannot point to experiments at
places like China Lake or Los Alamos. This does not begin to resemble
Bessler's wheel. Saying it does will make that true.

As for you, you just earned a place in my auto-delete file. Sayonara.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves

[Eric Walker]

> On Dec 19, 2013, at 1:45, John Franks  wrote:
> 
> If CF is real, why doesn't it occur in white dwarves with their high 
> temperature and pressure electron degenerate matter?

This is an interesting thought experiment.  But it begs three questions:

* Does the effective pressure created by the lattice spacing in the host metal 
force the hydrogen into fusing? I think this hypothesis was abandoned a long 
time ago by most people.

* Does electron degenerate matter share the critical parameters that are in the 
environments in which excess heat is observed? My initial assumption is that it 
would not, but this is all speculative.

* Is cold fusion *not* occurring on white dwarves?  You made an initial pass at 
a prima facie case that it is not, but the arguments for and against are quite 
speculative at this point (e.g., re blackbody radiation).

Eric

Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves

[John Franks]

Oh boo hoo.


On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 3:12 PM, Jed Rothwell  wrote:
>
>
> If you keep posting these rude, ignorant comments, I and many others will
> add your name to our kill file, and no one will see your comments or pay
> any attention to you.
>
> - Jed
>
>

Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves

[Jed Rothwell]

John Franks  wrote:

What's the COP? Why don't they just commercialise it?
>

You need to read about this research in detail. You will see the reasons
they do not commercialize it. They are obvious.

If you keep posting these rude, ignorant comments, I and many others will
add your name to our kill file, and no one will see your comments or pay
any attention to you.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves

[John Franks]

What rot you speak. Tell me Energy Out / Energy In.

Ecat got your tongue?


On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 3:09 PM, Jed Rothwell  wrote:

> John Franks  wrote:
>
>
>> What is your C.O.P? 100 Watts (in the 1990s) tending to zero Watts today.
>>
>
> A COP is a ratio, not a power level. The COP for many cold fusion
> reactions is infinity.
>
> - Jed
>
>

Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves

[John Franks]

You shining light. That's just how the Bessler's wheel crowd think. It's
just needs someone to come out with modified Newtonian gravity and of
course, teflon wheel bearings.


On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 3:08 PM, Jed Rothwell  wrote:

> John Franks  wrote:
>
>
>> Everyone will tell you, until you sort out the mechanism (not nuts and
>> bolts) but how this would be possible in a conservative field, there is
>> little point in experimenting.
>>
>
> You have that backward. Cold fusion was discovered by experiment. We know
> it is real because it has been widely replicated, often at high signal to
> noise ratios. There is no theory to explain it.
>
> You seem to believe that science must begin with theory and then proceed
> to experiment. That does happen from time to time, but more often it begins
> with a discovery which only later is explained by theory.
>
>

Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves

[Jed Rothwell]

John Franks  wrote:


> What is your C.O.P? 100 Watts (in the 1990s) tending to zero Watts today.
>

A COP is a ratio, not a power level. The COP for many cold fusion reactions
is infinity.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves

[John Franks]

What's the COP? Why don't they just commercialise it?


On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 3:04 PM, James Bowery  wrote:

> Yes R. A. ORIANI, JOHN C. NELSON, SUNG-KYU LEE, and J. H. BROADHURST
>  University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota are just like Bessler's
> Wheel crowd:
>
> Conducting a replication of a device's extraordinary effect which they
> attempted (unlike Nathan Lewis et al) AFTER the publication of the full
> paper describing the experimental protocol to be replicated, and then
> submitting a paper on that replication to "Nature" for peer review.
>
> The peer reviewers had comments on needed corrections.  That right there
> proves Oriani et al are kooks to anyone in their right mind.  No reputable
> scientist has any second drafts submitted to a journal as prestigious as
> "Nature" in response to peer review and expects that revised draft to be
> published.
>
> Oh, but Oriani et al were clearly not reputable because they went ahead
> and provided the corrections, submitted to "Nature" the draft for peer
> review and the peer reviewers, not realizing they were being "had" by
> obviously invalid publishing protocol, reviewed the revised draft!!
>
> Outrageous.
>
> What's even more outrageous is that they not only reviewed it -- they
> passed it on to the editors of "Nature" to publish!
>
> We can all be grateful to the editors of "Nature" for telling it like it
> is in their rejection letter to Oriani -- that this experimental outcome
> doesn't fit with theory so -- circular file time.
>
> If only we could inculcate more would-be scientists with this kind of
> ruthless rigor!
>
>>
>>>

Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves

[Jed Rothwell]

John Franks  wrote:


> Everyone will tell you, until you sort out the mechanism (not nuts and
> bolts) but how this would be possible in a conservative field, there is
> little point in experimenting.
>

You have that backward. Cold fusion was discovered by experiment. We know
it is real because it has been widely replicated, often at high signal to
noise ratios. There is no theory to explain it.

You seem to believe that science must begin with theory and then proceed to
experiment. That does happen from time to time, but more often it begins
with a discovery which only later is explained by theory.

Even if you can show that theory predicts cold fusion cannot exist, that
only proves the theory is wrong. It is fundamental to the scientific method
that when theory and experiment conflict, experiment always wins.

It may be that you are not familiar with the experimental evidence, such as
heat beyond the limits of chemistry, the fact that no chemical fuel exists
in the cells and no chemical changes are found, and the tritium and helium.
I suggest you learn about these things before commenting on this research.

I suggest you tone it down, and do your homework.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves

[John Franks]

I have a new fancy name for Bessler's Wheel / RAR  Low Energy Nutation
Research (LENR) or Lossless Anomalous Nutation Rectification (LANR).

CF/LENR/LANR whatever fancy dancy name you're calling it these days is
another STEORN.

What is your C.O.P? 100 Watts (in the 1990s) tending to zero Watts today.
Pathological Science.


On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 2:53 PM, John Franks  wrote:

> You're just like the Bessler's Wheel crowd. You're convinced that some new
> arrangement of the weights and arm length will make the wheel turn around
> in perpetuity.
>
> Everyone will tell you, until you sort out the mechanism (not nuts and
> bolts) but how this would be possible in a conservative field, there is
> little point in experimenting.
>
> Another way... it's like this, we know wheels are round, so there is
> little point in experimenting in the shape of wheels (on a flat surface
> that is) convincing yourself that some magical arrangement is going to be
> more efficient than a flat wheel.
>
> If you are going to do research, you have to say your logical point of
> departure. It is not enough to have hope or belief, you have to say where
> in the theory base everyone is getting it wrong. Theory is a summary of
> experiments, all the billions of person hours that have been put in. Like
> Bessler's Wheel, CF is trying to do the impossible because it cannot say
> how it could possibly work in the first instance. Coupled with
> observational data (how white dwarves are cooling, not heating), just what
> do you have as a starting point?
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 2:46 PM, James Bowery  wrote:
>
>> As Norman 
>> Ramseypointed out 
>> in his preamble to the DoE's original review of cold fusion:
>> "However, even a *single* short but valid cold fusion period would be
>> revolutionary."
>>
>> Dr. Franks will be gratified to learn that this kook died recently --
>> still believing that scientific funding priorities could be altered by a
>> "single" experimental outcome.  A "single" experimental outcome is not
>> reliable replication comprising the "extraordinary proof" required of
>> "extraordinary claims" and surely a "revolutionary" claim qualifies as
>> "extraordinary".
>>
>> Now, for the rest of us to die off so the pious can get back to placing
>> argumentation over experimentation the way it was before that pesky thing
>> called the Enlightenment came along and caused such a ruckus -- and the way
>> Dr. Franks is here.
>>
>

Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves

[John Franks]

You're just like the Bessler's Wheel crowd. You're convinced that some new
arrangement of the weights and arm length will make the wheel turn around
in perpetuity.

Everyone will tell you, until you sort out the mechanism (not nuts and
bolts) but how this would be possible in a conservative field, there is
little point in experimenting.

Another way... it's like this, we know wheels are round, so there is little
point in experimenting in the shape of wheels (on a flat surface that is)
convincing yourself that some magical arrangement is going to be more
efficient than a flat wheel.

If you are going to do research, you have to say your logical point of
departure. It is not enough to have hope or belief, you have to say where
in the theory base everyone is getting it wrong. Theory is a summary of
experiments, all the billions of person hours that have been put in. Like
Bessler's Wheel, CF is trying to do the impossible because it cannot say
how it could possibly work in the first instance. Coupled with
observational data (how white dwarves are cooling, not heating), just what
do you have as a starting point?


On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 2:46 PM, James Bowery  wrote:

> As Norman Ramsey 
> pointed out in his 
> preamble to the DoE's original review of cold fusion:
> "However, even a *single* short but valid cold fusion period would be
> revolutionary."
>
> Dr. Franks will be gratified to learn that this kook died recently --
> still believing that scientific funding priorities could be altered by a
> "single" experimental outcome.  A "single" experimental outcome is not
> reliable replication comprising the "extraordinary proof" required of
> "extraordinary claims" and surely a "revolutionary" claim qualifies as
> "extraordinary".
>
> Now, for the rest of us to die off so the pious can get back to placing
> argumentation over experimentation the way it was before that pesky thing
> called the Enlightenment came along and caused such a ruckus -- and the way
> Dr. Franks is here.
>

Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves

[James Bowery]

As Norman Ramsey
pointed out
in his preamble to the DoE's original review of cold fusion:
"However, even a *single* short but valid cold fusion period would be
revolutionary."

Dr. Franks will be gratified to learn that this kook died recently -- still
believing that scientific funding priorities could be altered by a "single"
experimental outcome.  A "single" experimental outcome is not reliable
replication comprising the "extraordinary proof" required of "extraordinary
claims" and surely a "revolutionary" claim qualifies as "extraordinary".

Now, for the rest of us to die off so the pious can get back to placing
argumentation over experimentation the way it was before that pesky thing
called the Enlightenment came along and caused such a ruckus -- and the way
Dr. Franks is here.


On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 8:26 AM, Foks0904 .  wrote:

> Mr. Franks why are you still on this list? We thought you "got on your
> coat", *twice* in one day, and found a hole to crawl into. Why are you
> still wasting everyone's time with your antagonism? Are you mentally
> dependent on catharsis and trolling?
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 9:24 AM, John Franks  wrote:
>
>> With respect, who the f... are you? Are you a faculty member of any half
>> decent university? Will I find you in Nature, Science or Phys. Rev?
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 2:05 PM,  wrote:
>>
>>> In short, if you can't even get in the ball park of white dwarf matter in
>>> the lab, what chance in hell have you of even approaching muon catalysed
>>> reaction rates?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 
>>>
>>>   Yes, No chance at all for any kind of fusion, especially with heavy
>>> metals.  Forget about shrunken atoms, the heavy neutrons of the Larson
>>> Widom theory,  and the like.
>>> They are all working with the strong force.  It need high temps to work.
>>> In order to reactions working at low temperature you have to invoke
>>> another force the nuclear spin orbit force.  It's the magnetic component of
>>> the strong nuclear force.  Its called the spin orbit force and its not
>>> conserved.  Its a long story that takes a book to describe.  That's why I
>>> wrote one.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&field-keywords=%22znidarsic+science+books%22&rh=n%3A133140011%2Ck%3A%22znidarsic+science+books%22
>>>
>>>
>>>  Frank Z
>>>
>>>
>>
>

Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves

[John Franks]

You wot?


On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 2:35 PM,  wrote:

> What do you need to make a strong electromagnet?  Just line up the
> electron spins.  The electrons are already moving.
>
>  What do you need to make a strong long range spin orbit force magnet.
>  Line a the nuclear spins and get them  moving.  This is best done is a
> proton conductor.
>
>  How fast to they have to go you say, 1.094,000 meters per second.
>
>  Frank Z
>
>

Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves

[John Franks]

Why should I buy his book? Why can't he give a brief overview? Why can't he
just write a Hamiltonian so we can see what he's on about? If it's some
exchange type interaction, wouldn't the wavefunctions have to overlap or
there would be some mediating particle with spin, even then all it would do
is align the spins. If he is saying that electromagnetism is mediating
fusion, why does it do such a good job preventing it?


On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 2:26 PM, Foks0904 .  wrote:

> Mr. Franks why are you still on this list? We thought you "got on your
> coat", *twice* in one day, and found a hole to crawl into. Why are you
> still wasting everyone's time with your antagonism? Are you mentally
> dependent on catharsis and trolling?
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 9:24 AM, John Franks  wrote:
>
>> With respect, who the f... are you? Are you a faculty member of any half
>> decent university? Will I find you in Nature, Science or Phys. Rev?
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 2:05 PM,  wrote:
>>
>>> ... Its a long story that takes a book to describe.  That's why I wrote one.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Frank Z
>>>
>>>
>>
>

Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves

[fznidarsic]

What do you need to make a strong electromagnet?  Just line up the electron 
spins.  The electrons are already moving.


What do you need to make a strong long range spin orbit force magnet.  Line a 
the nuclear spins and get them  moving.  This is best done is a proton 
conductor.


How fast to they have to go you say, 1.094,000 meters per second.  


Frank



-Original Message-
From: fznidarsic 
To: vortex-l 
Sent: Thu, Dec 19, 2013 9:05 am
Subject: Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves


In short, if you can't even get in the ball park of white dwarf matter in
the lab, what chance in hell have you of even approaching muon catalysed
reaction rates?











Yes, No chance at all for any kind of fusion, especially with heavy metals.  
Forget about shrunken atoms, the heavy neutrons of the Larson Widom theory,  
and the like.
They are all working with the strong force.  It need high temps to work.
In order to reactions working at low temperature you have to invoke another 
force the nuclear spin orbit force.  It's the magnetic component of the strong 
nuclear force.  Its called the spin orbit force and its not conserved.  Its a 
long story that takes a book to describe.  That's why I wrote one.




http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&field-keywords=%22znidarsic+science+books%22&rh=n%3A133140011%2Ck%3A%22znidarsic+science+books%22




Frank Z

Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves

[Foks0904 .]

Mr. Franks why are you still on this list? We thought you "got on your
coat", *twice* in one day, and found a hole to crawl into. Why are you
still wasting everyone's time with your antagonism? Are you mentally
dependent on catharsis and trolling?


On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 9:24 AM, John Franks  wrote:

> With respect, who the f... are you? Are you a faculty member of any half
> decent university? Will I find you in Nature, Science or Phys. Rev?
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 2:05 PM,  wrote:
>
>> In short, if you can't even get in the ball park of white dwarf matter in
>> the lab, what chance in hell have you of even approaching muon catalysed
>> reaction rates?
>>
>>
>>
>> 
>>
>>   Yes, No chance at all for any kind of fusion, especially with heavy
>> metals.  Forget about shrunken atoms, the heavy neutrons of the Larson
>> Widom theory,  and the like.
>> They are all working with the strong force.  It need high temps to work.
>> In order to reactions working at low temperature you have to invoke
>> another force the nuclear spin orbit force.  It's the magnetic component of
>> the strong nuclear force.  Its called the spin orbit force and its not
>> conserved.  Its a long story that takes a book to describe.  That's why I
>> wrote one.
>>
>>
>>
>> http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&field-keywords=%22znidarsic+science+books%22&rh=n%3A133140011%2Ck%3A%22znidarsic+science+books%22
>>
>>
>>  Frank Z
>>
>>
>

Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves

[John Franks]

The only thing a metal lattice has is periodicity, it certainly wouldn't
have the density of a white dwarf. So, this leads to the question, what has
periodicity got to do with cold fusion?


On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 2:04 PM, Jed Rothwell  wrote:

> John Franks  wrote:
>
> If CF is real, why doesn't it occur in white dwarves with their high
>> temperature and pressure electron degenerate matter?
>>
>
> This reminds me of the question posed by Morrison: Why doesn't cold fusion
> occur in heavy water ice?
>
> To address your question, let me quote Schwinger, "The defense is simply
> stated: The circumstances of cold fusion are not those of hot fusion." A
> metal lattice does not resemble the inside of the sun. They are about as
> different as any two configurations of matter could be.
>
> - Jed
>
>

Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves

[John Franks]

With respect, who the f... are you? Are you a faculty member of any half
decent university? Will I find you in Nature, Science or Phys. Rev?


On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 2:05 PM,  wrote:

> In short, if you can't even get in the ball park of white dwarf matter in
> the lab, what chance in hell have you of even approaching muon catalysed
> reaction rates?
>
>
>
> 
>
>   Yes, No chance at all for any kind of fusion, especially with heavy
> metals.  Forget about shrunken atoms, the heavy neutrons of the Larson
> Widom theory,  and the like.
> They are all working with the strong force.  It need high temps to work.
> In order to reactions working at low temperature you have to invoke
> another force the nuclear spin orbit force.  It's the magnetic component of
> the strong nuclear force.  Its called the spin orbit force and its not
> conserved.  Its a long story that takes a book to describe.  That's why I
> wrote one.
>
>
>
> http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&field-keywords=%22znidarsic+science+books%22&rh=n%3A133140011%2Ck%3A%22znidarsic+science+books%22
>
>
>  Frank Z
>
>

Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves

[fznidarsic]

In short, if you can't even get in the ball park of white dwarf matter in
the lab, what chance in hell have you of even approaching muon catalysed
reaction rates?









Yes, No chance at all for any kind of fusion, especially with heavy metals.  
Forget about shrunken atoms, the heavy neutrons of the Larson Widom theory,  
and the like.
They are all working with the strong force.  It need high temps to work.
In order to reactions working at low temperature you have to invoke another 
force the nuclear spin orbit force.  It's the magnetic component of the strong 
nuclear force.  Its called the spin orbit force and its not conserved.  Its a 
long story that takes a book to describe.  That's why I wrote one.




http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&field-keywords=%22znidarsic+science+books%22&rh=n%3A133140011%2Ck%3A%22znidarsic+science+books%22




Frank Z

Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves

[Jed Rothwell]

John Franks  wrote:

If CF is real, why doesn't it occur in white dwarves with their high
> temperature and pressure electron degenerate matter?
>

This reminds me of the question posed by Morrison: Why doesn't cold fusion
occur in heavy water ice?

To address your question, let me quote Schwinger, "The defense is simply
stated: The circumstances of cold fusion are not those of hot fusion." A
metal lattice does not resemble the inside of the sun. They are about as
different as any two configurations of matter could be.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves

[John Franks]

Further furthermore if 90% of main sequence stars end up as white dwarves
when they have finished hot fusion, according to their limits, why don't
they go on burning in a CF manner so that the sky is full of UV,Xray or
even gamma ray dwarves? As the temperature built up again thermal runaway
would occur as radiation would be limited by the small size and SB law so
that hot fusion would occur again and a supernova would result. In that
case all main sequence stars would end up as neutron stars or black holes
and the sky would be littered with them.


On Thu, Dec 19, 2013 at 10:03 AM, John Franks  wrote:

> Furthermore,
>
> The density of white dwarves is some 10^6g/cm^3 compared to water at
> 1g/cm^3. This would mean that the inter-nuclei spacing was 1/100 of water.
>
> Now Muon catalyzed fusion
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muon-catalyzed_fusion which we know works
> brings the nuclei 1/207 of the distance with electrons. It happens at an
> appreciable rate.
>
> since white dwarves are not more luminous than a black body radiating away
> with the Stefan Boltzmann law, we can conclude that there are no nuclear
> reactions AND that is the limit of what can be done with ordinary matter.
>
> In short, if you can't even get in the ball park of white dwarf matter in
> the lab, what chance in hell have you of even approaching muon catalysed
> reaction rates?
>

If CF is real, why doesn't it occur in white dwarves with their high
temperature and pressure electron degenerate matter? After all, that is the
belief system of CF in cramming these lattices with hydrogen.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_dwarf

"The material in a white dwarf no longer undergoes fusion reactions, so the
star has no source of energy, nor is it supported by the heat generated by
fusion against gravitational collapse."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electron-degenerate_matter#Degenerate_gases

"Under high densities the matter becomes a degenerate gas when the
electrons are all stripped from their parent atoms. In the core of a star,
once hydrogen burning in nuclear
fusion reactions
stops, it becomes a collection of positively charged
ions,
largely helium and carbon nuclei, floating in a sea of electrons, which
have been stripped from the nuclei. Degenerate gas is an almost perfect
conductor of heat and does not obey the ordinary gas laws. White
dwarfs are
luminous not because they are generating any energy but rather because they
have trapped a large amount of heat."

Re: [Vo]: White Dwarves

[John Franks]

Furthermore,

The density of white dwarves is some 10^6g/cm^3 compared to water at
1g/cm^3. This would mean that the inter-nuclei spacing was 1/100 of water.

Now Muon catalyzed fusion
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muon-catalyzed_fusion which
we know works brings the nuclei 1/207 of the distance with electrons. It
happens at an appreciable rate.

since white dwarves are not more luminous than a black body radiating away
with the Stefan Boltzmann law, we can conclude that there are no nuclear
reactions AND that is the limit of what can be done with ordinary matter.

In short, if you can't even get in the ball park of white dwarf matter in
the lab, what chance in hell have you of even approaching muon catalysed
reaction rates?

[Vo]: White Dwarves

[John Franks]

If CF is real, why doesn't it occur in white dwarves with their high
temperature and pressure electron degenerate matter? After all, that is the
belief system of CF in cramming these lattices with hydrogen.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_dwarf

"The material in a white dwarf no longer undergoes fusion reactions, so the
star has no source of energy, nor is it supported by the heat generated by
fusion against gravitational collapse."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electron-degenerate_matter#Degenerate_gases

"Under high densities the matter becomes a degenerate gas when the
electrons are all stripped from their parent atoms. In the core of a star,
once hydrogen burning in nuclear
fusion reactions
stops, it becomes a collection of positively charged
ions,
largely helium and carbon nuclei, floating in a sea of electrons, which
have been stripped from the nuclei. Degenerate gas is an almost perfect
conductor of heat and does not obey the ordinary gas laws. White
dwarfs are
luminous not because they are generating any energy but rather because they
have trapped a large amount of heat."