Bob Greenyer explains in this video that the lack of radiation in the
Lugano test is probably due ~1mm or so tungsten envelope
between the reactor core and the alumina tube.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zMs2We34jXo&feature=youtu.be
He also describes some neat ideas for a ECat type reactor whic
One of the amazing properties of the monopole field is that it makes the
matter that it encompasses impervious to destruction. Hydrogen Rydberg
Matter covered in a monopole EMF field would be impervious to a nuclear
bomb blast. This can be understood in the experiments of LeClair, where he
produces
From: Eric Walker
* To play devil's advocate, the hypothetical neutron flux could have
produced short-lived beta radioisotopes when they activated something in or
near the experiment.
Eric,
Even without activation - the neutron itself is a beta emitter. Free neutrons
have a half-life
There are non nuclear mechanisms how may generate x-gamma radiation.
Tape can produce it.
http://www.nature.com/news/2008/012345/full/news.2008.1185.html
Maybe same mechanism is in work during crack formation. The energy may
be enough to produce gamma rays if its enough to produce fraktofus
On Sun, Feb 28, 2016 at 8:50 PM, Bob Higgins
wrote:
Jones, the moral of the story is that the large amount of lead (and it
> probably took a whole lot for the HPGe detector) converted some of the
> cosmic rays into a small *neutron* flux. MFMP did not measure neutrons.
>
To play devil's advocat
There is some sort of radiation coming out of Rossi's Mouse reactor that
stimulates the unpowered Cat reactors. Maybe pions and muons... how can we
tell now that MDMP has a reactor that maybe is functional at a Mouse level
COP of 1.2
On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 12:05 AM, Jones Beene wrote:
> Bob,
>
Bob,
Isn’t the reality check that eliminating a cosmic ray contribution means the
expected gamma counts are going to be too low to impress anyone? However, I am
very glad you are going to the trouble – if you also test for radiation (all
types) with and without the enclosure, and then compar
some strange
emissions lurking in cold fusion/lenr that are not yet well understood, perhaps
never having been described!
From: Bob Higgins [mailto:rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com]
Sent: Sunday, February 28, 2016 7:27 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Bremsstrahlung radiation
Do you
Do you have a reference on this? Otherwise, a lead cave would not be
useful - it is there to protect the sensor from the cosmic rays.
My understanding is that the cosmic rays produce the neutrons by
spallation. If the neutrons are absorbed in the lead, they will likely
cause isotopic shift which
If the spectrum from the MFMP experiment really does come from the
reactor, and if MFMP reactor could run for 32 days
without lead shielding would one have to sit right next to it for the
entire time for it to be harmful?
Harry
On Sun, Feb 28, 2016 at 6:42 PM, Bob Higgins wrote:
> The sensors w
From: Bob Higgins
* Jones, the moral of the story is that the large amount of lead (and it
probably took a whole lot for the HPGe detector) converted some of the cosmic
rays into a small neutron flux.
Bob, as the thesis clearly states – the neutrons then are absorbed by the lead,
caus
ion
> experiments and had not seen any up to that time.
>
> Moral of the story is radiation measurements are so wonderfully sensitive
> one can be fooled by what appears to be large signals but which are really
> such tiny signals many simple explanations can explain them away.
>
erfully sensitive one
can be fooled by what appears to be large signals but which are really such
tiny signals many simple explanations can explain them away.
-----Original Message-
From: H LV
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Bremsstrahlung radiation
Jones Beene wrote: From: H LV
>> In the Lugan
-Original Message-
From: H LV
> If it is do due cosmic rays then it is quite a coincident that it happens
> just when the reactor enters phase 7.
No coincidence at all. Please notice that section 7 is NOT the zone of greatest
gain. Just the opposite - it is the zone of greatest "appare
From: H LV [mailto:hveeder...@gmail.com]
Sent: Sunday, February 28, 2016 5:29 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Bremsstrahlung radiation
On Sun, Feb 28, 2016 at 6:44 PM, Jones Beene wrote:
> -Original Message-
> From: H LV
>
>> In the Lugano test dosimeters were
On Sun, Feb 28, 2016 at 6:44 PM, Jones Beene wrote:
> -Original Message-
> From: H LV
>
>> In the Lugano test dosimeters were used to check for gamma/xray emissions at
>> more than 50 cm from the reactor... over the 32 day duration test it looks
>> like the dosimeters didn't record anyth
; of a joule of nuclear activity, if hundreds of joules of cold fusion
> nuclear activity are seen in similar x-rays the dose would be multiplied by
> a very large number.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: H LV [mailto:hveeder...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Sunday, February 28, 2016 4:
On Sun, Feb 28, 2016 at 7:58 PM, Russ George wrote:
> The photo of the detector placement has helped to understand this mystery
>
> As far as 'breaking radiation' aka Bremstrahlung, any form of energetic
> particle coming to a halt produces that characteristic signal, whether they
> are crazy he
f hundreds of joules of cold fusion nuclear
activity are seen in similar x-rays the dose would be multiplied by a very
large number.
-Original Message-
From: H LV [mailto:hveeder...@gmail.com]
Sent: Sunday, February 28, 2016 4:41 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Brem
On Sun, Feb 28, 2016 at 6:44 PM, Jones Beene wrote:
> -Original Message-
> From: H LV
>
>> In the Lugano test dosimeters were used to check for gamma/xray emissions at
>> more than 50 cm from the reactor... over the 32 day duration test it looks
>> like the dosimeters didn't record anyth
nal can be reproduced at will.
-Original Message-
From: Jones Beene [mailto:jone...@pacbell.net]
Sent: Sunday, February 28, 2016 3:44 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Bremsstrahlung radiation
-Original Message-
From: H LV
> In the Lugano test dosimeters were used to ch
clear' event
observed is likely to have been less than a billionth of a watt of 'cold
fusion' equivalence.
-Original Message-
From: H LV [mailto:hveeder...@gmail.com]
Sent: Sunday, February 28, 2016 3:12 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Bremsstrahlung radiation
-Original Message-
From: H LV
> In the Lugano test dosimeters were used to check for gamma/xray emissions at
> more than 50 cm from the reactor... over the 32 day duration test it looks
> like the dosimeters didn't record anything above background... If the MFMP
> reactor resembles the
The sensors were placed relatively far away, and the total "dose" was low.
For the electronic rate meters, they did not report what they detected,
simply that it was below the alarm level that they had set (set where?).
There was no spectrometry.
On Sun, Feb 28, 2016 at 4:12 PM, H LV wrote:
> In
In the Lugano test dosimeters were used to check for gamma/xray
emissions at more than 50 cm from the reactor. (see Appendix 1)
http://amsacta.unibo.it/4084/1/LuganoReportSubmit.pdf
I don't understand all the jargon but over the 32 day duration test it
looks like the dosimeters didn't record anythi
o a temperature that is lower than its melting point.
Dave
-Original Message-
From: Bob Higgins
To: vortex-l
Sent: Sun, Feb 28, 2016 3:16 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Bremsstrahlung radiation
OR, the materials in the stack of his flat plate reactor include a thermal
resistance material.
OR, the materials in the stack of his flat plate reactor include a thermal
resistance material. It doesn't have to be an air gap to provide the
thermal resistance that would allow the fuel to be at a different
temperature than the molten lead.
On Sun, Feb 28, 2016 at 1:09 PM, David Roberson wrot
Bob made an interesting video but I believe that his thoughts about melted lead
surrounding the active cells are incorrect. It is much more likely that these
core cells are operating at a very high external temperature of over 1000 C and
radiation to a low temperature surface is the main escape
28 matches
Mail list logo
