This leads to a question:
What is better?
a) 6 times~ 10% heat excess
b) 2 times 500% heat excess, 4 times...no heat excess
Taking in account that 10% is a scientific curiosity, 500% is of
technological interest.
By the way, what are the performances of Melvin Miles' system?
Thank you for any
I have sent this once but it seems it has not arrived= communication
problems?
Dear Cousin Jed,
You are right in principle, we have many elements of *know wha*t and *know
how *re the cells.
We know the critical parameters but we cannot always achieve them. We
definitely have no*know why* because
2010/3/23 Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com:
Michel Jullian wrote:
If I was the inventor, I would take my cold fusion cell, *as a black
box to preserve my secrets*, to whatever authority accepts to test it
I do not think there is any chance that would work. I have never seen a cold
fusion
Dear peter,
I did get your original posting, about 11 hours ago. I had similar
problems of not getting my own posts, which were solved by adding
myself to my gmail contacts.
I agree with you that Jed's assertion that we know enough on what
makes a CF cell work to enable independent replication
Patenting is almost perfect for a mechanism, device, product, programme,
however
for a PROCESS it is always more imperfect and less talkative- usually there
are vital know-how elements that are absolutely necessary to be... known.
What I say is based on my long and very dynamic experience from the
http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/article/2010/03/electric-
vehicles-charge-ahead-in-us?cmpid=WNL-Wednesday-March24-2010
http://tinyurl.com/ydff5mk
What's billed as the biggest rollout of electric vehicle
infrastructure in the world is about to begin in the United States.
ABD wrote
Those people in the canoe, observed by a previously reliable
scientist, were wearing clothing, as well, and the movements they
were making were probably just exercises
Here is a funny exposition of pathological scepticism well worth five
minutes of anyone's time
Here again are the slides I discussed yesterday:
http://newenergytimes.com/v2/library/2010/2010KrivitS-ACS.pdf
A few weeks ago, Krivit discussed here the graph shown on Slide 30. I
pointed out that it should show the zero line, and it should include
error bars. In the presentation Krivit put
Well, this is getting closer to major media.
http://cosmiclog.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2010/03/23/2237165.aspx?CommentPosted=true#commentmessage
I've submitted a response about the media standard obligatory
boilerplate, couldn't be reproduced. I suggest hammering away at
that, because it is
This annoying trick is described on p. 62 of a marvelous little book
by Darrell Huff, How to Lie with Statistics (1954, now in its 39th printing).
This book was printed the year I was born. As I recall, my mother
gave me a copy as a child with the admonition: grown-ups sometimes
lie. In
At 02:07 AM 3/24/2010, Peter Gluck wrote:
This leads to a question:
What is better?
a) 6 times~ 10% heat excess
b) 2 times 500% heat excess, 4 times...no heat excess
Taking in account that 10% is a scientific curiosity, 500% is of
technological interest.
By the way, what are the performances
On Mar 24, 2010, at 7:34 AM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
Well, I was ten in 1954, and I think I read the book before I was
in high school, and it made a strong impression on me.
If you were ten in 1954 you must have been 17 and 18 when you
attended the two year Feynman lecture series for
At 11:56 AM 3/24/2010, Horace Heffner wrote:
On Mar 24, 2010, at 7:34 AM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
Well, I was ten in 1954, and I think I read the book before I was
in high school, and it made a strong impression on me.
If you were ten in 1954 you must have been 17 and 18 when you
Thank you, Abd! We have to wait anyway till we know Melvin's results.
However, based on my long experience in the field I think that the cathodes
belong to three
categories or castes - inactive, talented (10- 30% heat excess) and geniuses
(say 500 excess or more)
I have never met an example of
This was extensively discussed back a few months.
http://newenergytimes.com/v2/library/2010/2010KrivitS-ACS.pdf
Slide 36 asks a question, How Did ENEA Get 24 MeV?
He should know the answer. They didn't, and they
didn't claim to. They used the 24 MeV value as a
convenient conversion factor
Here is a conference on a particular type of solar power,
Concentrating Solar Thermal power:
http://www.regonline.co.uk/builder/site/default.aspx?EventID=791972http://www.regonline.co.uk/builder/site/default.aspx?EventID=791972
We will know that cold fusion has succeeded commercially and
You can dish it out, but you can't take it, can you?
You say researchers look like true believers or idiots, you use
cheap tricks to distort graphic data, and then when someone calls you
out, you quit in a huff. How childish. It is hard to believe anyone
can be reporter with such thin skin.
At 12:33 PM 3/24/2010, Peter Gluck wrote:
Thank you, Abd! We have to wait anyway till we know Melvin's results.
However, based on my long experience in the field I think that the
cathodes belong to three
categories or castes - inactive, talented (10- 30% heat excess) and
geniuses (say 500
To a moose. :-)
T
On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 9:30 PM, Harry Veeder hlvee...@yahoo.com wrote:
- Original Message
From: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com; vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Tue, March 23, 2010 6:52:41 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Request for fusion
I think nuclear physicists reserve the term fusion for interactions involving
the strong nuclear force, and the terms fission and neutron absorption are
terms reserved for interactionsinvolving the electro-weak force.
Perhaps the phenomena of cold fusion is a consequence of some sort of
Fits with your 159 IQ.
Back on topic, I understand why you are mad at Steve krivit for
pushing his POV that the heat/helium = 24 MeV/He is bogus, that's
because that correlation is what made you believe CF might well be
real. You don't want to doubt again.
Michel
2010/3/24 Abd ul-Rahman Lomax
At 02:17 PM 3/24/2010, Jed Rothwell wrote:
You can dish it out, but you can't take it, can you?
You say researchers look like true believers or idiots, you use
cheap tricks to distort graphic data, and then when someone calls
you out, you quit in a huff. How childish. It is hard to believe
Michel Jullian wrote:
Back on topic, I understand why you are mad at Steve krivit for
pushing his POV that the heat/helium = 24 MeV/He is bogus, that's
because that correlation is what made you believe CF might well be
real. You don't want to doubt again.
On behalf of Abd, let me say:
As with people, genius cathodes are rare- Martin and Stanley had one, Mizuno
had the best, Energetics had cathode no 64, Piantelli had one in the early
stage of development.. I have no complete list just now. Perhaps Jed is more
systematic than me.
Air is polluted almost everywhere, I am not
On Mar 24, 2010, at 8:29 AM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
At 11:56 AM 3/24/2010, Horace Heffner wrote:
On Mar 24, 2010, at 7:34 AM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
Well, I was ten in 1954, and I think I read the book before I was
in high school, and it made a strong impression on me.
If you
Here is an interview with Peter at the ACS conference:
http://io9.com/5499139/an-interview-with-peter-hagelsteinhttp://io9.com/5499139/an-interview-with-peter-hagelstein
This is linked in from:
At 03:10 PM 3/24/2010, Michel Jullian wrote:
Fits with your 159 IQ.
Someone else is paying attention, I like that.
159 is not well enough established to be a reliable figure, it's
based on one test in high school. There are other signs, though,
judge for yourself. Be careful. It is very,
-Original Message-
From: Harry Veeder
I think nuclear physicists reserve the term fusion for interactions
involving the strong nuclear force, and the terms fission and neutron
absorption are terms reserved for interactions involving the electro-weak
force.
Harry, the electroweak is
Jones Beene wrote:
We should also add: A Canadian is a fellow wearing English tweeds, a Hong
Kong shirt and Spanish shoes . . .
As long as we are beating up Canadians -- quoting a Canadian author:
By rights our nation should be the proud inheritor of British
culture, U.S. technology and
From Abd:
...
If the value turns out to be 48 MeV instead of 24, I'm
not offended at all. But I'll wonder what other products
there are in sufficient quantities to explain that. In
fact, if it's lower than 24, I'm not offended, it would
simply indicate other reactions besides those which
Jed sez:
...
By rights our nation should be the proud inheritor of British
culture, U.S. technology and French cooking. Somehow we ended
up with British cooking, U.S. culture, and French technology.
Quit bashing the French! We envy their Nuclear utility technology! 8-0
Canadians... well...
It's frightening to think that half of the people of the world have a
below average IQ!
T
(TiC)
Are Canadians proud of what happened at the UoO yesterday? I guess
freedom of speech is only okay if you believe in what the speaker has
to say.
T
In reply to Abd ul-Rahman Lomax's message of Wed, 24 Mar 2010 13:21:56 -0400:
Hi,
[snip]
How Does Hagelstein Explain
Energetic Alphas?
Theoretical Speculations on Upper Limits:
The alpha particle must be born with an
energy less than 20.3 KeV.
(Pay no attention to Lipson et al. 2002 11-16
Robin van Spaandonk wrote:
BTW I find the whole idea of using the volume of the cathode to compare energy
densities proving some form of fusion to be silly. Clearly the volume of
electrolyte is of far more consequence, given that it is this which
contains the
putative fuel anyway.
I
At 03:42 PM 3/24/2010, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Michel Jullian wrote:
Back on topic, I understand why you are mad at Steve krivit for
pushing his POV that the heat/helium = 24 MeV/He is bogus, that's
because that correlation is what made you believe CF might well be
real. You don't want to doubt
On Mar 24, 2010, at 1:42 PM, mix...@bigpond.com wrote:
In reply to Abd ul-Rahman Lomax's message of Wed, 24 Mar 2010
13:21:56 -0400:
Hi,
[snip]
How Does Hagelstein Explain
Energetic Alphas?
Theoretical Speculations on “Upper Limits”:
“The alpha particle must be born with an
energy less
I just wrote: I think this is a misunderstanding of what the 20.3
keV represents. It does not represent the Q of the reaction. It
represents an (experimental) upper limit on the kinetic energy the
4He obtains from the reaction. This is not at all a surprising
result if, as I and various
At 03:53 PM 3/24/2010, Horace Heffner wrote:
On Mar 24, 2010, at 8:29 AM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
At 11:56 AM 3/24/2010, Horace Heffner wrote:
On Mar 24, 2010, at 7:34 AM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
Well, I was ten in 1954, and I think I read the book before I was
in high school, and
At 03:55 PM 3/24/2010, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Here is an interview with Peter at the ACS conference:
http://io9.com/5499139/an-interview-with-peter-hagelsteinhttp://io9.com/5499139/an-interview-with-peter-hagelstein
This is linked in from:
At 03:52 PM 3/24/2010, Peter Gluck wrote:
www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/GluckPunderstand.pdf
Very interesting. I picked up particularly on the comment that
paradoxically, lack of reproducibility has an amazingly great
informational value.
That's absolutely right, except in narrow
- Original Message
From: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com; vortex-L@eskimo.com
Sent: Wed, March 24, 2010 7:53:02 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Interview with Peter Hagelstein
I'd say that we
are on the way, fasten your seat belt, things might change
At 04:41 PM 3/24/2010, Jones Beene wrote:
An alpha decay, say from Pd having been activated by a cold neutron is a QM
reaction - even if it involves an excited nucleus emitting an alpha
particle, which is of course identical to a helium-4 nucleus, since both
mass number and atomic number are the
At 04:41 PM 3/24/2010, Jones Beene wrote:
PS: in a followup to really important scientific insight, such as your
previous: A Canadian is someone who knows how to make love in a canoe
without tipping it.
We should also add: A Canadian is a fellow wearing English tweeds, a Hong
Kong shirt and
At 04:55 PM 3/24/2010, Jed Rothwell wrote:
That reminds me of JFK's comment that Washington DC is a city of
Southern efficiency and Northern charm.
That had me going for a minute, until I realized that he did *not*
get it backwards.
At 05:24 PM 3/24/2010, Terry Blanton wrote:
It's frightening to think that half of the people of the world have a
below average IQ!
Complain to your congressperson! It's a shame how education is
neglected. On the other hand, they do seem to have this problem
addressed in Lake Woebegone.
At 02:17 PM 3/24/2010, Jed Rothwell wrote:
You can dish it out, but you
can't take it, can you?
For the
record, people have said far worse things about me, countless times. The only
forum I ever quit was CMNS because they wanted to keep the discussion
confidential, and I can't be
At 05:42 PM 3/24/2010, mix...@bigpond.com wrote:
I haven't read Hagelstein's paper, but it seems to me that one must base any
such analysis on individual experiments where both He and heat are measured
concurrently and as precisely as possible.
Read the paper. It's not about what you think
On Mar 24, 2010, at 1:04 PM, OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson wrote:
Would you care to give your best guestamate (don't worry, I won't hold
you to it) on how much is theorized to be due to d+d = He+24 MeV, and
how much might be due to other processes?
Incidentally, to the rest of the Vort
Krivit has irrevocably cut me off in high dudgeon, throwing his wrist to his
his forehead and his head back to entreat The Heavens, like an incensed
Victorian maiden who overheard me telling an off-color joke. I should mail
him a bottle of smelling salts. Arata once sent me a similar message in
At 06:37 PM 3/24/2010, Horace Heffner wrote:
On Mar 24, 2010, at 1:42 PM, mix...@bigpond.com wrote:
In reply to Abd ul-Rahman Lomax's message of Wed, 24 Mar 2010
13:21:56 -0400:
Hi,
[snip]
How Does Hagelstein Explain
Energetic Alphas?
Theoretical Speculations on Upper Limits:
The
At 07:21 PM 3/24/2010, Horace Heffner wrote:
This was a wandering mind tying. 8^) It should say: I think this
is a misunderstanding of what the 20.3 keV represents. It does not
represent the Q of the reaction. It represents an (experimental)
upper limit on the kinetic energy the 4He obtains
On Mar 24, 2010, at 4:42 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
At 07:21 PM 3/24/2010, Horace Heffner wrote:
This was a wandering mind tying. 8^) It should say: I think this
is a misunderstanding of what the 20.3 keV represents. It does not
represent the Q of the reaction. It represents an
Below-median IQ.
I wonder what percentage have above or below average IQs.
Does anyone know if IQ has a discovered genetic basis? What happens to IQ as a
person grows older?
On Mar 24, 2010, at 2:24 PM, Terry Blanton wrote:
It's frightening to think that half of the people of the world
At 08:29 PM 3/24/2010, Harry Veeder wrote:
Is confidentiality maintained because some of the participants are
worried about losing their day jobs if word got out that they were
taking CF research seriously?
If some think that, and imagine that a mailing list is sufficiently
confidential,
-Original Message-
From: Horace Heffner
It is somewhat frustrating to me that no one seems to have ever read, or
if so, understood what I have written...
It requires time for us mere mortals - a considerable time of study
contemplation (not to mention procrastination) before the
At 05:04 PM 3/24/2010, OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson wrote:
Would you care to give your best guestamate (don't worry, I won't hold
you to it) on how much is theorized to be due to d+d = He+24 MeV, and
how much might be due to other processes?
Incidentally, to the rest of the Vort Collective,
At 06:11 PM 3/24/2010, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Robin van Spaandonk wrote:
BTW I find the whole idea of using the volume of the cathode to
compare energy
densities proving some form of fusion to be silly. Clearly the volume of
electrolyte is of far more consequence, given that it is this which
...we have known since the 1980s that atomic nuclei of certain neutron-rich
isotopes of the lightest elements - lithium,
helium and beryllium - completely contradict this conception. These
isotopes consist of a compact nuclear core and a cloud made of diluted
nuclear material - called
http://blogs.nature.com/news/blog/2010/03/acs_cold_fusion_calorimeter.html
Some good posts, very prominent. Larsen gets in first, not too bad,
but still essentially attacking the mainstream CF community.
There is a big problem with Larsen's approach. He's suggesting that
people look at his
- Original Message
From: Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Wed, March 24, 2010 4:41:29 PM
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Request for fusion definition
-Original Message-
From: Harry Veeder
I think nuclear
physicists reserve the term fusion for
Peter L Hagelstein 2D -- He4 + 24 MEV in fractal Pd or Au nanovoids, with
2-stage spin boson model for energy downshifts to 2 MEV to optical phonons:
Lomax: Murray 2010.03.24
Hi Vo gang, Duh, hey dudes, I'm impressed, so I'm sending this to Scott,
Marissa, and Hal at Earthtech in Austin --
Irv Dardik is no quack. He has developed an approach to human health and
performance that is based on extensive experience with the US Olympic effort,
an inquiring and astute mind, and a considerable track record. Like many new
things, it has its skeptics, but I've looked into it and it makes a
2010.03.24
Hi Abd, here's my two or three bits for your cells:
1. Cooperate closely with Melvin H Miles to replicate small, cheap
replications of his protocol -- I respected his quality in the ACS panel
video.
2. Fractal nanostructures mean that, as in the Mandelbulb 3D version of the
2D
Ann Coulter is luv'n it.
Harry
- Original Message
From: Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Wed, March 24, 2010 5:28:19 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Request for fusion definition
Are Canadians proud of what happened at the UoO yesterday? I
guess
freedom of
66 matches
Mail list logo
