Re: [Vo]:Re: Big surprise or big dud ?

Or Attenuate at the source and/or detector with a known response material (as suggested by Bob G)... ... We should have another scintillator at our disposal, thanks to Stanford! From: Mark Jurich Sent: Thursday, February 25, 2016 7:29 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]:Re: Big

RE: [Vo]:Stimulated Beta decay of resonant nuclei?

I believe the Barker patent suggested that you could transmute silver into rhodium if you could come up with a couple million volts (DC) for a number of hours. Good Luck with that. Fame and fortune awaits. The cool thing about his patent is that his documented empirical results contradict

RE: [Vo]:Stimulated Beta decay of resonant nuclei?

Santilli is seldom talked about because he has a decades old history of suing everyone who questions his work. http://www.sptimes.com/2007/05/09/news_pf/Hillsborough/Snubbed_by_mainstream.shtml From: Bob Higgins Santilli has also published a number of papers documenting massive

[Vo]:in the LENR world and around waves of sympathy for MFMP; Info too

http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2016/02/feb-25-2016-wave-of-interest-sympathy.html things evolve as usual Peter -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com

[Vo]:Re: Big surprise or big dud ?

The paper is well known to myself (I’ve studied it extensively several months ago in regards to the new peaks), but it’s good to bring it up again. I’m a little surprised that no one here has realized that Holmlid/Olafsson have also reported the broad low energy spectrum in one of their

Re: [Vo]:Big surprise or big dud ?

Nyet. That is the decay spectrum of a silver sample that has been exposed to a neutron activation flux from the FF. It is not the prompt emission from fusion of the FF. On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 11:33 AM, Jones Beene wrote: > Here is the silver gamma spectrum of the Fusor >

Re: [Vo]:Big surprise or big dud ?

Also if Bob higgins and MFMP could determine how the curve continues to rise at lower energies then they could use it to calculate the "excess heat". This method would be far more sensitive than bulk calorimetry. Harry On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 11:16 AM, H LV wrote: > On

RE: [Vo]:Big surprise or big dud ?

What might be the comparison of this recent radiation flux signature with that of something like a Farnsworth Fusor? From: Bob Higgins [mailto:rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, February 24, 2016 3:51 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Big surprise or big dud ? Alan has

[Vo]:Summary of NRL Research

I uploaded a large report from the NRL published in 1996: Dominguez, D.D., P.L. Hagans, and M.A. Imam, A Summary of NRL Research on Anomalous Effects in Deuterated Palladium Electrochemical Systems. 1996: Washington. 132 pages. http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/DominguezDasummaryof.pdf

RE: [Vo]:Stimulated Beta decay of resonant nuclei?

Ahh just realised that the broad spectrum difference from background is apparently from a Europa source which does not emit beta apparently. Still interesting though: "[0070] A reproduction of the resulting measurements is presented in FIG. 6 in which; the upper diagram shows the background

Re: [Vo]:Big surprise or big dud ?

As I understand the way Surface Plasmon Polaritons (SPP) work is that the photon becomes entangled with the electron that is vibrating as a dipole with a hole in the nickel lattice. The photons are accumulated in of soliton physically displaced from the electrons which are still in the nickel

Re: [Vo]:Big surprise or big dud ?

Ok. Presumably they would have caught their error had they succeeded in attaching a thermocouple to the surface of the reactor right over the reaction chamber. Harry On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 3:40 PM, Bob Higgins wrote: > AFAIK, the Lugano team never publicly commented

Re: [Vo]:Big surprise or big dud ?

That's an interesting question. The problem is that the FF is a known producer of neutrons, so you would need to measure the gamma spectrum on the far side of a neutron absorber. I have never seen a properly taken gamma spectrum from the FF, have you? On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 10:25 AM, Russ

RE: [Vo]:Big surprise or big dud ?

Here is the silver gamma spectrum of the Fusor http://www.fusor.net/board/download/file.php?id=3829 =a1b499f80621282e42d797de7b48729a There are several related threads on Fusor.net From: Bob

Re: [Vo]:Big surprise or big dud ?

To get the heat level up, we must progress from LENR which is low level activity to LENR+ which is high Level activity. LENR is the production of Surface Plasmon Polaritons (SPP). They generated heat up to COP1.2. To get the Heat higher, Hydrogen Rydberg Matter (RHM) must be generated, which is an

Re: [Vo]:Big surprise or big dud ?

more... arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1312/1312.6851.pdf How to extract metalized hydrogen from a 5 year old battery. On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 2:18 PM, Axil Axil wrote: > To get the heat level up, we must progress from LENR which is low level > activity to LENR+ which is high

Re: [Vo]:Stimulated Beta decay of resonant nuclei?

Jones Beene wrote: Santilli is seldom talked about because he has a decades old history of > suing everyone who questions his work. > You don't even need to question his work. I had never heard of the guy and he sent sent me a letter threatening to sue me! I think it was in

Re: [Vo]:Big surprise or big dud ?

The long view https://www.facebook.com/MartinFleischmannMemorialProject/photos/p.1126094137421284/1126094137421284/?type=3 Harry On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 10:33 AM, Eric Walker wrote: > On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 9:11 AM, Bob Higgins > wrote: > >>

[Vo]:The secondary heater

http://avonhistory.org/mil3/ro... Commentator 1 wrote: That is my guess. I think the AC heater wire is hotter than the active material. As I said, it is my understanding that heat and hydrogen pressure are the two control factors. I do not know how they

[Vo]:Simple upgrades for the Glow-Stick

If you feel like brain-storming today, please list any suggestions for low-cost improvements to the typical glow-stick experiment, such as the one of MFMP - and say why your suggestion could work in theory. My suggestion for a simple improvement is this - a mirrored reflector of thermal IR.

Re: [Vo]:Big surprise or big dud ?

[image: Inline image 1] A Landau distribution is what we are seeing in the MFMP radiation plot. It is the release of energy by particles based on a random release process. This is seen when a particle gives up its kinetic energy to a thin film as the particles interact randomly with the matter in

Re: [Vo]:Big surprise or big dud ?

As I said in the article, the deepest DDL level (see JofCMNS vol-18 Paillet and Meulenberg) is about 509keV. That is energy TAKEN from the atom to shrink it into that deepest state. Suppose that all of that energy catalyzed out by evanescent means was suddenly released applied to a photon or a

Re: [Vo]:Simple upgrades for the Glow-Stick

SPPs like light that is compatible with their structural materials. If we want to run a glow stick at 1400C, it is best to use deuterium and palladium powder. SPP formation requires that no photonic energy is wasted through absorption by the dielectric gas. There is a big difference between

Re: [Vo]:Big surprise or big dud ?

In reply to Bob Higgins's message of Wed, 24 Feb 2016 10:12:37 -0700: Hi, [snip] >What LENR theories presently can account for MeV electrons? Actually, there >appears to be energy out to over 1.4 MeV in the Bremsstrahlung. During f/H (thanks Jones ;) capture, the energy may be carried away by

Re: [Vo]:Big surprise or big dud ?

This is conceptually what we are thinking the distribution probably looks like, but I will have to see it in log scale. I will check. The peak would have to be below the 30keV cutoff seen in the GS5.2 spectrum. In the region of the GS5.2 spectrum just above 30keV, the slope just above 30keV has

Re: [Vo]:Big surprise or big dud ?

Great find Axil. Did you already forward it to MFMP? It's interesting that they use Boron as a neutron shield too. That might be important for them to know too. > On 25 Feb 2016, at 05:25, Axil Axil wrote: > >

Re: [Vo]:Big surprise or big dud ?

I made sure to apprise Ed on these experimental results. I am sure he will consider how they may be explained at some point. The detection count was not as low as you seem to believe. In spectrum 07 there were almost 300,000 counts in a signal that we believe probably lasted only a minute or

Re: [Vo]:Big surprise or big dud ?

I agree, this paper is a nice find. It used high end equipment - 4" NaI sensors and HPGe detector. It is presently beyond the scope of MFMP (at the moment). The advantage of the HPGe detector over the NaI is that it has a narrow detection bandwidth. The NaI detector has a 6.5% FWHM while the

RE: [Vo]:Big surprise or big dud ?

Once again, although the Focardi gain was in the tens of watts, the gamma radiation was about a trillion times too low to account for the thermal gain, but here - they did see transmutation also. This was a high quality research team and report. Another interesting thing is that the

Re: [Vo]:Stimulated Beta decay of resonant nuclei?

On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 8:21 PM, Bob Higgins wrote: > It is interesting to think about in light of our recent measurement of > high energy emissions from the Ni-H reaction. If the Ni-H reaction really > does generate MeV class electrons, they could be useful in the

Re: [Vo]:Big surprise or big dud ?

In reply to Bob Higgins's message of Thu, 25 Feb 2016 15:48:16 -0700: Hi, [snip] >As I said in the article, the deepest DDL level (see JofCMNS vol-18 Paillet >and Meulenberg) is about 509keV. That is energy TAKEN from the atom to >shrink it into that deepest state. Suppose that all of that

[Vo]:Re: Big surprise or big dud ?

Yes, we need to rig the MFMP “Mouse Trap” to see lower in energy and resolve it: http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ph/0305310 From: Bob Higgins Sent: Thursday, February 25, 2016 2:53 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Big surprise or big dud ? This is conceptually what we are thinking the

Re: [Vo]:Big surprise or big dud ?

You might see a Landau distribution if there is a random mixing of both low energy photons (infrared) and high energy photons (gamma's from the nucleus); Such mixing is produced by Fano resonance, where an SPPs are being feed by both infrared photon pumping and nuclear based gamma photon

Re: [Vo]:Simple upgrades for the Glow-Stick

On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 4:03 PM, Jones Beene wrote: If you feel like brain-storming today, please list any suggestions for > low-cost improvements to the typical glow-stick experiment, such as the > one of MFMP - and say why your suggestion could work in theory. I suggest

Re: [Vo]:Stimulated Beta decay of resonant nuclei?

I wrote: This one talks about transmuting thorium and radium ... > Sorry, that's thorium and uranium. Eric

Re: [Vo]:Stimulated Beta decay of resonant nuclei?

On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 10:53 AM, Chris Zell wrote: I believe the Barker patent suggested that you could transmute silver into > rhodium if you could come up with a couple million volts (DC) for a number > of hours. Perhaps you're thinking of another patent by Barker.

Re: [Vo]:Stimulated Beta decay of resonant nuclei?

You can get high electric fields at small scale, but that is not the same as having a total electric potential of 500kV. In a vacuum, a 500kV potential can generate 500keV electrons. It is interesting to think about in light of our recent measurement of high energy emissions from the Ni-H

RE: [Vo]:Big surprise or big dud ?

One theory and set of experiments which provides the fastest electron via f/H is Holmlid’s. He labels the dense hydrogen as UDH or UDD. But there is nothing low energy about Holmlid, if you look closely enough. He documents lots of muons, and when muons decay you get two neutrinos and an

[Vo]:Stimulated Beta decay of resonant nuclei?

Has stimulated beta decay been considered here already? I found this old but interesting patent application by Rugerro Santilli from 2003 on line. http://www.google.com/patents/US20030016774 Is it already known here? Given current ideas from Norman Cook and Andrea Rossi on the extended

Re: [Vo]:Stimulated Beta decay of resonant nuclei?

On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 9:46 AM, Stephen Cooke wrote: Has stimulated beta decay been considered here already? I found this old but interesting patent application by Rugerro Santilli > from 2003 on line. > http://www.google.com/patents/US20030016774 > Is it

Re: [Vo]:Big surprise or big dud ?

On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 9:11 AM, Bob Higgins wrote: The detection count was not as low as you seem to believe. In spectrum 07 > there were almost 300,000 counts in a signal that we believe probably > lasted only a minute or two. Suppose it was 2 minutes or 120 seconds.

RE: [Vo]:Stimulated Beta decay of resonant nuclei?

The whole patent is interesting in my opinion. But look at the graphs in Figure 6… look a little bit familiar? not quite the same profile as recently observed by MFMP or in the Piantelli, Focardi paper linked earlier by Axil, but definitely a raised broad profile. Figure 7 looks quite

Re: [Vo]:Big surprise or big dud ?

On LENR-Forum, Joshua Cude made a good suggestion - place a tungsten "tag" on the outside of the active reactor or inside. When this is hit by the high energy electrons or even the high energy gamma, it will excite tungsten's characteristic x-ray at about 60keV that will be visible as a line in

Re: [Vo]:Big surprise or big dud ?

On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 3:16 PM, Stefan Israelsson Tampe wrote: > Why can't the peak be at 100eV or 10eV and many order of magnitude more > intense. Yes. >There is not much in the shown signal > that indicates a peak in teh extreme spectra near the seen peak in the >

Re: [Vo]:Stimulated Beta decay of resonant nuclei?

Santilli has also published a number of papers documenting massive (pun) transmutations. See: ADDITIONAL CONFIRMATION OF "INTERMEDIATE CONTROLLED NUCLEAR FUSION" WITHOUT HARMFUL RADIATIONS OR WASTE Ruggero Maria Santilli On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 9:07 AM, Stephen Cooke