On Fri, May 3, 2013 at 6:28 PM, Joseph S. Barrera III
jbarr...@slac.stanford.edu wrote:
On 5/3/2013 2:02 PM, Axil Axil wrote:
Are you guys positing that a proton is (u, u, d) and a neutron is (u, u,
d, e+) but only until you probe it at high energies at which point it
suddenly looks like
Again, hardly an attack on the strongest of the arguments of the opposing
proposition.
Please, let's have some intellectual honesty for a change.
On Sat, May 4, 2013 at 12:27 AM, Rich Murray rmfor...@gmail.com wrote:
Joshua Cude is right -- today, 24 years after 1989, is there any lab
On 5/3/2013 11:07 PM, Harry Veeder wrote:
What I am saying is that neutrons and protons conform to the quark
models (u,u,d) and (u,u,d) when they are probed at high energies. At
lower energies they are different.
What is your model for them at low energies?
- Joe
On Fri, May 03, 2013 at 01:06:21PM -0500, Jack Cole wrote:
Looks like AR has delivered on his promise.
http://www.e-catworld.com/2013/05/e-cat-shipping-pictures-posted-on-the-jonp/
That being showing photos of a shipping container?
Interestingly, the boiling temperature of potassium is 759 degrees C at 1
bar.
Vapourizing potassium could cause such subnano effect.
The “secret sauce” is a chemical additive that forms solid dust like metal
nano-particles, little solid balls of alkali metal droplets, with sizes
that range in
One of the more interesting episodes in science that bears on the cold
fusion controversy is the history of perceptrons which later became known
as artificial neural nets.
Not only was a prominent member of the establishment able to suppress
funding to the field through a bogus critique, thereby
There's non need to compare scratches for who carefully followed the 2011
Oct demo.
What i wanted to point out is that A.R. promised pictures of the customer
delivery of three assets but what we saw is just the moving of the same old
box from a dismissing facility (bologna) to the new one
Beside cold fusion problem I would raise that this claim is incoherent with
the work of Thomas Kuhn on scientifc revolutions.
Howevet the claim is coherent with tha work of Nassim Nicholas Taleb that
explain that history is rewritten so that some members of the mainstream
community get the
On Fri, May 3, 2013 at 7:59 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
Joshua Cude wrote:
That's cold fusion's problem: the quality of the evidence is abysmal --
not better than the evidence for bigfoot, alien visits, dowsing,
homeopathy. . .
Incorrect. The quality of evidence is
On Fri, May 3, 2013 at 10:24 PM, Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.com wrote:
Not totally wrong, just wrongly interpreted.
Then you should help the laymen and failed scientists here interpret the
misinterpreted evidentiary record -- specifically, you should focus your
energy on specific
I wrote:
That's the small incandescent gadget in the foreground. Right? Much
smaller than a 1 MW reactor, shown behind it.
Here is Rossi's description of the incandescent gadget:
http://www.e-catworld.com/2012/10/final-update-corrected-again-pordenone-hot-cat-report/
- Jed
Susanna Gipp susan.g...@gmail.com wrote:
I know that for hard believing fans these worth gold but for us poor
skeptics it looks like one of our smart energy hero's countless jokes.
It might be a joke, but it would be an expensive and pointless one. What
purpose would it serve? If he is
On Sat, May 04, 2013 at 09:37:17AM -0400, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Susanna Gipp susan.g...@gmail.com wrote:
I know that for hard believing fans these worth gold but for us poor
skeptics it looks like one of our smart energy hero's countless jokes.
It might be a joke, but it would be an
Someone wrote:
Don't be silly. The field is already dead. No one cares anymore. The
credit of which you speak has already been handed out to Koonin and Lewis
and Huizenga and others.
Lewis' experiment was positive. He showed that cold fusion probably does
exist. This was some of the best
This could be absurdly false - and could kill any remaining credibility that
Rossi has.
I will defer to anyone who does this kind heat transfer calculation on a
regular basis but it looks absurd to me now based on the one basic simple
issue - heat transfer limitations.
With only 20 grams
Joshua, I find your arguments not only logically inconsistent but not
even accurate. First of all, you and many other people made such a
fuss about CF being impossible, that the money required to advance
understanding was denied. OK, we all know that some money was
provided. This amount
Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:
This could be absurdly false - and could kill any remaining credibility
that Rossi has.
If absurdity could kill credibility Rossi would have none. He is a charming
fellow but he tends to say and do absurd things. At least, they seem absurd
from the
My vortex-l posting habits has gone down significantly within the last six
months due to the fact that I need to focus on my own personal research as
compared to constantly getting ensnared in another discussion thread.
(Vortex-l can be so addictive!)
Nevertheless, every now and then,
Remember that in both the high school reactor and the DGT reactor, these
use electric sparks where very high temperatures are produced. Rossi does
not use sparks, but might use cesium.
On Sat, May 4, 2013 at 3:44 AM, Teslaalset robbiehobbiesh...@gmail.comwrote:
Interestingly, the boiling
Joshua Cude wrote:
Poor choice of words on my part. Of course I know that skeptics and
believers disagree about the quality of the evidence . . .
This is not a matter of opinion. The quality of evidence is measured
objectively, based on repeatability and the signal to noise ratio. Anyone
Rossi does use an internal heater which could function to vaporize this
alkali metal.
On Sat, May 4, 2013 at 11:28 AM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote:
Remember that in both the high school reactor and the DGT reactor, these
use electric sparks where very high temperatures are produced.
http://phys.org/news/2013-04-freedom-scientists-nanoparticles-larger-real.html
Freedom of assembly: Scientists see nanoparticles form larger structures in
real time
The connection point between each of these nano-particles could be a NAE
site.
On Sat, May 4, 2013 at 11:47 AM, Axil Axil
Harry has an interesting point. It is quite apparent that a proton does not
contain within it all of the particles that are ejected when it is subjected to
high energy collisions as in the LHC. Where does the fundamental particle stop
and the new ones begin?
Dave
-Original
I wrote:
An automobile catalytic converter has very little Pd in it. The metal is
exposed to a terrific flow of hot gas. Yet the Pd does not sublime or
vaporize.
Plus, most of the hot gas must come in contact with the Pd particles,
because it is all catalyzed (cleaned up). I assume if there
In the standard model, fundamental particles are the quarks and some
others. see
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_Model
On Sat, May 4, 2013 at 11:56 AM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:
Harry has an interesting point. It is quite apparent that a proton does
not contain within
Courtesy of SPECTRE ... err... make that the new Kurchatov Institute
Possible Way To Industrial Production of Nickel-63 and the Prospects of Its
Use
Tsvetkov, et al. Research-Industrial Enterprise BIAPOS, Moscow, Russia,
Formerly Kurchatov Institute, Moscow, Russia
Nickel-63 (a pure
The role of the substrate depends on the mechanism. While all of the
proposed mechanism are applied to Pd, this does not mean Pd is the
only material that supports the NAE. People have used Ti, Ni, various
alloys, and various oxides with success. Once the NAE can be made on
purpose and in
On Sat, May 4, 2013 at 2:15 AM, Joshua Cude joshua.c...@gmail.com wrote:
What makes you think that? They are certainly not seen as overzealous now,
except by true believers. If it plays out in such a way that there are no
true believers left, there is no reason to think *anyone* will regard
Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com wrote:
While all of the proposed mechanism are applied to Pd, this does not mean
Pd is the only material that supports the NAE. People have used Ti, Ni,
various alloys, and various oxides with success.
The ENEA and others still research mainly Pd, or
Joshua Cude wrote:
Surely you're aware of the Jones' challenge to Miles' results in Jones
Hansen, Examination of Claims of Miles…, J. Phys. Chem. 95 (1995) 6966.
Ah yes. That one slipped my mind. The recombination hypothesis.
That is even more pathetic and preposterous than Morrison. As
Kindly remove me from this list! Thank YOU!
--
SD
fourthamm...@fastmail.co.uk
Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.com wrote:
It is clear that you're willing to do this -- you just posted a very nice
post addressing points in Jed's reply and raising a number of juicy details.
Nope. He said nothing that skeptics did not say in 1990. Everything they
said then and that Cude
Unfortunately for John Huizenga, he will die the broken, angry
curmudgeon of a man he is. Were he of a stature anywhere near Ptolemy
he might have a place in science ignominy as the primary example of a
failed orthodox scientist. But Huizenga is incapable of carrying even
Ptolemy's shoes. He
Disambiguating: The cited Wikipedia article was the book Perceptrons
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perceptrons_(book)
In particular note how Wikipedia's editors have made it look as though the
scholars have shown Minsky had no deleterious effect on the field -- that
it was all fabricated spin
I address this issue in my book, which Joshua obviously has not read.
But you are right, Jed. This issue has been laid to rest so
completely, one has to wonder why it has been brought up now. This is
like someone now arguing for the flat earth concept.
Ed
On May 4, 2013, at 11:12 AM, Jed
Speech Defender fourthamm...@fastmail.co.uk wrote:
Kindly remove me from this list! Thank YOU!
No can do. This you must do for yourself. Please see:
http://amasci.com/weird/wvort.html#sub
Quote:
To unsubscribe, send a *blank* message to:
vortex-l-requ...@eskimo.com
Put the single
Why now?
Perhaps it was the publication of the photos after this:
Jam
April 30th, 2013 at 5:46
AMhttp://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=802cpage=6#comment-687451
Did you start loading on the truck? Don’t forget to take a few pictures.
Andrea Rossi
May 1st, 2013 at 8:04 AM
Dear Neri
A correspondent alerted me to this:
http://pesn.com/2013/05/03/9602306_Live_Andrea-Rossi_Interview_May7/
QUOTE:
Frank Ackland [wrote:]
April 30th was the date that Andrea Rossi said he would be making the
delivery of the first 1MW plant to the non-military customer. There was
some confusion as
The local production of energy does not necessarily have to result in a
local production of heat.
For example see this article posted by pagnucco a few days ago.
http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/2013/apr/22/spin-waves-carry-energy-from-cold-to-hot
On Sat, May 4, 2013 at 10:15 AM, Jones
Harry - I liked that paper - but aren't you adding up the miracles ? i.e.
the thermal miracle first and with spin current as the second miracle?
One conceivable scenario using only the original miracle is this - if the
reaction rate is so strong that hot ions of intermediate energy (tens of
Note that the enrichment process for Ni-62, invented by the Russians at
Kurchatov (after it became a capitalist tool) gives an 80% enrichment,
using the same kind of ultracentrifuge device employed in similar enrichment
activities. If the following explanation is accurate, Forbes and other
On Sat, May 4, 2013 at 8:54 AM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
Someone wrote:
Don't be silly. The field is already dead. No one cares anymore. The
credit of which you speak has already been handed out to Koonin and Lewis
and Huizenga and others.
Lewis' experiment was positive.
On Sat, May 4, 2013 at 9:23 AM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com wrote:
First of all, you and many other people made such a fuss about CF being
impossible, that the money required to advance understanding was denied.
Poppycock. The argument was that CF was highly unlikely, but in spite of
On Sat, May 4, 2013 at 10:46 AM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
Joshua Cude wrote:
Poor choice of words on my part. Of course I know that skeptics and
believers disagree about the quality of the evidence . . .
This is not a matter of opinion. The quality of evidence is measured
On Sat, May 4, 2013 at 2:34 AM, Joseph S. Barrera III j...@barrera.orgwrote:
On 5/3/2013 11:07 PM, Harry Veeder wrote:
What I am saying is that neutrons and protons conform to the quark
models (u,u,d) and (u,u,d) when they are probed at high energies. At lower
energies they are different.
On Sat, May 4, 2013 at 11:28 AM, Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.com wrote:
The second was that they seemed to have undue confidence in their
knowledge, leaving them vulnerable to overlooking evidence and explaining
it away.
That's always a danger, but funding agencies and journal editors and
On Sat, May 4, 2013 at 12:12 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
Ah yes. That one slipped my mind. The recombination hypothesis.
That is even more pathetic and preposterous than Morrison.
It's one thing to say that you don't agree with any of the published
challenges to cold
On Sat, May 4, 2013 at 12:30 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
He said nothing that skeptics did not say in 1990.
Please. My main argument is the complete absence of progress in 24 years.
No one argued that in 1990. I refer to your 2001 opinion that the results
fail to stand out,
I do not want to beat this recombination issue to death, but let me mention
one other thing.
With an open cell, you ensure there is no significant recombination with a
variety of methods, such as measuring the gas flow with an inverted test
tube underwater, or with a gas flowmeter. The other
On Sat, May 4, 2013 at 6:31 PM, Harry Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, May 4, 2013 at 2:34 AM, Joseph S. Barrera III j...@barrera.orgwrote:
On 5/3/2013 11:07 PM, Harry Veeder wrote:
What I am saying is that neutrons and protons conform to the quark
models (u,u,d) and (u,u,d)
While I agree with Cude about the need for ideas to be challenged and
claims to be questioned, his style is not helpful in clarifying the
issues about CF. Consequently, I for one will not continue the
discussion. I suggest other people consider what happened last time
Vortex was subjected
Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com wrote:
Consequently, I for one will not continue the discussion.
Me neither! I promise to shut up.
- Jed
You criticize others for being disconnected from reality, from experimental
data, having preconceptions, and using imagination to invent thinks
disengaged from reality.
This conversation is a good example of the The pot calling the kettle
black.
Look at the experimental data describing the assay
Joshua Cude,
Seems you might end up being the last person standing...
May ask you to offer a few decisive critiques to refute Lomax's claim, much
repeated for a year or longer, that heat and helium are correlated in
standard cold fusion experiments, some years ago -- for instance, have
there
Steven:
What I was thinking as I was reading your most eloquent explanation and
question to Josh, was not quite so eloquent.
. what a waste of good brain cells.
-Mark
From: OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson [mailto:orionwo...@charter.net]
Sent: Saturday, May 04, 2013 8:15 AM
To:
On Sat, May 4, 2013 at 7:02 PM, Harry Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, May 4, 2013 at 6:31 PM, Harry Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, May 4, 2013 at 2:34 AM, Joseph S. Barrera III
j...@barrera.orgwrote:
On 5/3/2013 11:07 PM, Harry Veeder wrote:
What I am saying
In an attempt to trigger some out of the box thinking, let me contribute the
following...
Excerpt from Brookhaven National Lab:
-
http://www.bnl.gov/rhic/newPhysics.asp
A Perfect Liquid
RHIC scientists had
On Sat, May 4, 2013 at 5:34 PM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:
If - in fact it turns out that Rossi is using this particular nickel
isotope, and from the Kurchatov source, there is a good chance the above
scenario is a fairly accurate portrayal of what is happening.
Any comment on
Mark
You have contributed a profound insight to LENR in the Ni/H reactor.
I am confident the there is a global condensation of polariton states in a
Ni/H reactor. This general condition of Bose-Einstein condensation means
that the micro-powder and perhaps even the hydrogen envelope is a
Joshua Cude
I wonder if you have been keeping up with the new thinking in LENR.
Specifically, I would like your opinion of the new theories posed by NASA
and Widom-Larsen centered on the polariton.
These theories are more applicable to the Ni/H reactor (LENR+) rather than
the older LENR theories
60 matches
Mail list logo
