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

Axil Axil wrote: On the contrary, the storage of energy is at the core of the LENR reaction. > No, it isn't. The only examples of endothermic storage before the reaction turns on are caused by palladium loading. They are fully explained by conventional chemistry. There is no

Re: [Vo]:Electron plasma frequency

I'm wondering if highly hydrogenated or doped materials such as Metals, CNT, activated BNNT etc. in particular those with high concentrations of atomic hydrogen with high consent rations of valance electrons would have much higher electron density than normal metals. If so I suppose the plasma

Re: [Vo]:Stimulated Decay

The One very important concept that Ken Shoulders never stumbled upon was the polariton. He thought that the EV was made up of electrons which are fermions only but they are made up of bosons called polaritons. Polaritons are and entangled mixture of photons and electrons. The EV can store an

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

I wrote: > In some cases they have been anti-correlated. Cells have produced > radiation and neutrons, then heat and no radiation, then radiation again. > By radiation I mean gamma rays (MeV). Lots of cells produce x-rays (keV) as detected with dental film placed close to the cathode. Maybe

[Vo]:Solitonic / Oscillonic Stimulation

As a complete novice in all things LENR i've been following the developments of recent years with interest and optimism, not least via the very informative discussions here. However i have one small area of interest that might be relevant, which i haven't seen mentioned elsewhere: It concerns

RE: [Vo]:Stimulated Decay

Is this polaritron concept – that of mashing electrons and photons together- related to Barbat claims? http://www.levitronicsenergy.com/science.htm

Re: [Vo]:Stimulated Decay

This video will explain how photons and electrons become entangled in an optical cavity. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sWmvZ0IGrsU Polaritons like to exist in a condensate and be coherent much more than light. On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 4:27 PM, Chris Zell wrote: > Is

[Vo]:Implied personal radiation dose ?

If the radiation signal in the recent MFMP experiment holds up what does this infer as a dose for the person doing the experiment? Clearly that person is both a much larger ‘detector’, likely often closer to the source, and has a long exposure from this and many similar experiments. It would

[Vo]:Progress in humanoid robots

There is a remarkable video in this article, showing the latest humanoid robot from Boston Dynamics. Clearly this machine is not humanoid in the emotional sense, because if it were, it might punch the operator in the nose. I felt sorry for the poor thing, which is like feeling sorry for a

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

Jones Beene wrote: > Otherwise that would mean that there is no connection between excess heat > and radiation . . . > There is no correlation. In some cases they have been anti-correlated. Cells have produced radiation and neutrons, then heat and no radiation, then

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

MFMP performed a great service by collecting and tabulating this data. https://www.facebook.com/MartinFleischmannMemorialProject/photos/p.1126094137421284/1126094137421284/?type=3 What story do you read when you compare the active and null data sets over time? My reading of the active data set

[Vo]:Electron plasma frequency

Apparently Silver or copper has a plasma frequency in the UV region which is why it reflects light of below these frequencies https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plasma_oscillation If i understand correctly at frequencies below the plasma frequency photon emission no longer propagates but instead

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

Harry, I can see where you would think that based on the active side being lower than null to start and later higher. However, there was already the differential with the active side reading lower than the null side even during the calibration. Also, chemistry effects in these types of

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

H LV wrote: > My reading of the active data set begins with the storage of energy > for the first 19 hrs and ends with the periodic release of energy for > the last 9hrs. 'Excess Heat' is not evident. > I doubt there is a mechanism that would allow significant energy

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

You on touching on one of the fundamental issues with experimental LENR - what do you use for a metric? If you want to progress from no results or poor results in your experiment, you need to have a way to measure whether you are getting better or worse as you introduce changes - you need a

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

-Original Message- From: H LV MFMP performed a great service by collecting and tabulating this data What story do you read when you compare the active and null data sets over time? My reading of the active data set begins with the storage of energy for the first 19 hrs and ends

RE: [Vo]:Implied personal radiation dose ?

You might at least use an appropriate emoticon ;) I have posed the dose question is to discover some idea of context. Clearly what has been stated in this recent experiment is a dose orders of magnitude beyond ‘natural background.’ In another context for example if Rossi feels it is necessary

Re: [Vo]:Implied personal radiation dose ?

P.S. Alpha particles from radioactive substances have energies below 8 MeV (range in air is about 7 cm) Range of a typical alpha particles (say 6 MeV) is 5cm in air (about 2 inches). Ludwik == On Feb 26, 2016, at 10:46 PM, Ludwik Kowalski wrote: > Typical alpha

Re: [Vo]:Implied personal radiation dose ?

RE: [Vo]:Big surprise or big dud ?Hi Russ: I happen to know one of the possibly irradiated parties of this experiment, very well ... He’s a total idiot, actually ... I’m not talking about Alan, here. He’s such an idiot that he actually didn’t even realize he got irradiated until the

Re: [Vo]:Implied personal radiation dose ?

I believe that the Hydrogen Rydberg Matter (HRM) can escape the reactor by penetrating glass or hot alumina. If this stuff gets into the lungs, it could produce nuclear reactions inside the body and produce 10s of thousands of alpha particles as a by-product. John Fisher has seen such particles

[Vo]:Re: Implied personal radiation dose ?

RE: [Vo]:Big surprise or big dud ?Sorry, Russ ... You’re right. The emoticon went missing ... My bad ... Please keep in mind that the detector signal-to-noise was enhanced by dropping the noise floor by almost an order of magnitude in the region of interest in this experiment. Although I

RE: [Vo]:Implied personal radiation dose ?

HRM … hmmm… So if hrm passes through glass what will happen when it enters some other matter, say metals… will the alpha’s suddenly be released? If so will they reveal themselves via alpha knock-on emissions? From: Axil Axil [mailto:janap...@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, February 26, 2016 3:01

Re: [Vo]:Implied personal radiation dose ?

Typical alpha particles do not penetrate human skin. Ludwik On Feb 26, 2016, at 6:16 PM, Russ George wrote: > HRM … hmmm… So if hrm passes through glass what will happen when it enters > some other matter, say metals… will the alpha’s suddenly be

Re: [Vo]:Implied personal radiation dose ?

The so called Erzion phenomenon was discovered in a series of electrolytic experiments marked by unexplained changes in a pool of cooling water outside of the catalytic cell. After 40 minutes of electrolytic cell operation, water on the tungsten anode side of the cooling vessel started loosing its

[Vo]:Schrodinger's E-Cat dose?

My apologies for starting this thread with the subject implied personal radiation dose when it is clear what we are talking about is the dose for Schrodinger’s E-Cat! The alpha-knock-on emissions resulting from HRM might explain the observed MFMP ‘iceberg.’ My apologies to monarchists who are

Re: [Vo]:Implied personal radiation dose ?

>From the signal pulse, I estimate about 5 micro-Sieverts (uS) per steradian. So, it depends on how close you were. On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 3:13 PM, Russ George wrote: > If the radiation signal in the recent MFMP experiment holds up what does > this infer as a dose for

Re: [Vo]:Progress in humanoid robots

Another story on the subject http://techxplore.com/news/2016-02-next-gen-atlas-door-woods.html On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 3:34 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > There is a remarkable video in this article, showing the latest humanoid > robot from Boston Dynamics. Clearly this

Re: [Vo]:Implied personal radiation dose ?

Like any alpha emitter, they are exceedingly dangerous if they are taken inside the body by drinking or breathing. When inside the body, there is no protection provided by the skin. On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 10:46 PM, Ludwik Kowalski < kowals...@mail.montclair.edu> wrote: > Typical alpha particles

Re: [Vo]:Implied personal radiation dose ?

I looked at the math again. The 5 uS was for the full 4pi steradians. It would be more like 0.4 uS for 1 steradian. A person would have to be really chubby or really close to subtend 1 steradian. On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 4:42 PM, Bob Higgins wrote: > From the signal

Re: [Vo]:Progress in humanoid robots

Nearly half of Australia's workforce at risk of computerisation and automation, CSIRO report finds - In the next 20 years, 44 per cent of Australian jobs are at risk of computerisation and automation - All industries will be affected by automation - More people will work in shared

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

Jack, Okay that would explain it. Were the active and null sides both calibrated empty? Harry On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 9:57 AM, Jack Cole wrote: > Harry, > > I can see where you would think that based on the active side being lower > than null to start and later higher.

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

Jack, thanks for the links. The calibration curves seem to indicate that the temperature difference is significantly smaller then the temperature difference which occurs during the experimental run so my interpretation is still valid. Harry On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 10:37 AM, Jack Cole

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

On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 9:57 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > H LV wrote: > >> >> My reading of the active data set begins with the storage of energy >> for the first 19 hrs and ends with the periodic release of energy for >> the last 9hrs. 'Excess Heat' is

Re: [Vo]:Stimulated Decay

On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 9:59 AM, Chris Zell wrote: Nucell folks made big claims, years ago, about using radioactive materials > as a stimulated power source but I never could figure out if this was > complete fraud or if they truly stumbled onto something big. My working

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

OTOH, presence of gamma rays (for example in an electrolytic cell), not due to natural background, is a convincing indicator of a nuclear effect, as often stated by others. Ludwik === On Feb 26, 2016, at 10:39 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > Bob Higgins

[Vo]:Stimulated Decay

While some patents are complete BS, there are a few that assert revolutionary ideas together with lengthy specifics that add to their credibility such as Barker, also Shoulders and Correa. There have been some folks experimenting with Tesla coils and claiming to stimulate radioactive decay but

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

Harry, Here is an animated chart of the calibrations. https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BxxJkjesxe4kZ295dXF0cTVLSW8/view It doesn't appear that it was calibrated empty, but rather had an alumina rod inserted. It's not completely clear to me what they did, but they did do 4 calibrations it

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

Bob Higgins wrote: > OTOH, radiation measurements are an excellent metric. > I do not think so. There are many reports of experiments that produced massive excess heat, easily measured, orders of magnitude beyond the limits of chemistry and yet which produced *no

Re: [Vo]:Electron plasma frequency

Like local DC magnetic fields, evanescent fields quickly decay to 0. These are non-propagating local fields. These are the fields responsible for inductance and capacitance. It is the opposite of a radiating field. On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 6:03 AM, Stephen Cooke

[Vo]:LENR DISCOVERIES ARE NOT BORN EQUAL

I am a peaceful old man. however what I say here is not so.In my Notes. There a re News too. http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2016/02/feb-26-2016-lenr-discoveries-are-not.html peter Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com

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

As an experimentalist, I think you are wrong. It is extremely frustrating to run an experiment and have the outcome produce 0 useful metric. This is the usual case in early LENR development when the metric is heat COP because it is so hard to measure with precision and accuracy. Radiation

[Vo]:Stimulated Decay

Since you guys bring this up, the subject of radioactive decay constants has been a puzzlement for much of my adult life. On the one hand, you have the near absolute standard of Rutherford/Emery in which you can't do anything practical about using radioactive materials as a power source

RE: [Vo]:Electron plasma frequency

Hi Bob Yup regarding the evanescent fields… thats kind of the point. But maybe you wanted to clarify what I wrote in which case thanks ;) Interesting point about Capacitance and Inductance. I did not know that. Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2016 07:13:11 -0700 Subject: Re: [Vo]:Electron plasma frequency

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

The interpretation (or in this case the mis-interpretation) of the metric can me more important than the metric itself. For instance, as Rothwell says, “There are many reports of experiments that produced massive excess heat, easily measured, orders of magnitude beyond the limits of chemistry

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

On the contrary, the storage of energy is at the core of the LENR reaction. Photons are stored in the SPPs and on hydrogen Rydberg matter. X-rays occurs when SPPs release their energy. When the SPP are coherent in a BEC, heat photons are released. If the BEC of SPP is destroyed, all the energy

Re: [Vo]:Stimulated Decay

My ideas about analog black holes and EVs as dark matter are supported by the work of Ken Shoulders. It is unfortunate that these ideas make many people very nervous and hostile so I don't express those incendiary ideas very often. However, hawking radiation is how I believe that gamma radiation

Re: [Vo]:Electron plasma frequency

https://www.caltech.edu/news/topolariton-new-half-matter-half-light-particle-48222 A topolariton is a one way flow of photons into a topological defect in a metal. All the photons move to that point and collect. They form a soliton. A solution is an huge single wave. When heat and gamma enter

Re: [Vo]:Stimulated Decay

Effects of Vacuum Fluctuation Suppression on Atomic Decay Rates”. http://arxiv.org/pdf/0907.1638v1.pdf This theory when put in simple terms connects negative vacuum energy with radioactive decay rates. When an imbalance is produced in the vacuum energy by increasing vacuum energy in one spot in

[Vo]:Stimulated Decay

There was a guy named Adamenko who produced results similar to Shoulders. http://rexresearch.com/adamenko/adamenko.htm Judging from the discussion here, it sounds as if people are looking for a particle to explain things - a particle similar to Shoulders charge clusters. It's so sad...his

Re: [Vo]:Electron plasma frequency

Axil, I found this interesting but very clear and simply explained presentation on bulk and surface plasmons, online. https://www.slideshare.net/mobile/AnuradhaKVerma/m2-plasmons I thought of you when reading it even though it is at a much more basic level than some of the concepts you