Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
Something we don't often consider:
>
> *From an engineering perspective, if you need careful calorimetry to
> determine whether your generator works, then it really doesn't matter
> whether it works. Its output is so small as to be irrelevant.*
>
> A
An interesting read, but it only goes up to 2009 which is before the
subject gets really interesting if you are interested in CF utility as I
am. The English version is in too good English for it to be a translation!
The mind set was that one had to look for neutrons in the early days
rather
But countless times you have said Rossi is a fraud and the COP<1
Now you're saying the E-Cat maybe worked?
If the E-Cat worked earlier do you really suppose Rossi retrograded
performance with time?
AA
On 8/29/2016 5:09 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
a.ashfield
I wrote:
> Measuring industrial quantities of heat is dangerous; . . . and you
> cannot be as accurate.
>
People may not realize this. When you see a factory installation, you might
assume that the instruments measure precise performance. In some cases they
do. In something like a
a.ashfield wrote:
> It seems the American Physical Society is going to publish replication
> results of Rossi's Ni/H2/L reactor
> How are you going to explain that Jed?
>
Any member can publish anything at an APS conference. (They set that rule
many years ago, after a
It seems the American Physical Society is going to publish replication
results of Rossi's Ni/H2/L reactor
How are you going to explain that Jed?
That Rossi, who has been working on it for years can't do it, but a new
group using hints he has published can?
Electrons with no mass acquire a mass in the presence of a high magnetic
field
http://flip.it/bkDC21
"zirconium pentatelluride,ZrTe5, that provides strong evidence for the
chiral magnetic effect:.
My research is all based on chirality of coils that produce fundamentally
different "currents".
This is no doubt closely related to my work!
On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 1:23 PM, John Berry
http://phys.org/news/2016-03-cool-pressure-superconductivity-3d-dirac.html
Cool under pressure: Superconductivity in 3D Dirac semimetal zirconium
pentatelluride ZrTe5
The https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weyl_semimetal
The *Weyl quasiparticle is a light speed particle found in *Weyl_semimetal.
"This is because in ZrTe5 the electrons responsible for the current have no
mass."
That itself sounds like a dramatic claim, electrons with no mass?
I am able to produce a current of something that I believe is like an
electron albeit not propperly physical, and I believe it gains something by
“Electrons with no mass”… wow… imagine the possibilities.
Massless electrons ? Actually we should call them Weyl Fermions (WF) since by
definition, the electron has mass and we do not want to ruffle too many
feathers. And a quick googling indicates high probability that WF have been
http://arxiv.org/pdf/1412.6543.pdf
The chiral magnetic effect is the generation of electric current induced by
chirality imbalance in the presence of magnetic field. It is a macroscopic
manifestation of the quantum anomaly1,2 in relativistic field theory of
chiral fermions (massless spin 1/2
In a quick search to see if there are known candidates for Weyl semimetals
which also are known to be contaminants of palladium in small quantities, one
candidate has turned up - Pr2Ir2O7. In fact iridium is commonly found with
palladium ore. Praseodymium is a rare earth element that also has a
http://libtreasures.utdallas.edu/xmlui/bitstream/handle/10735.1/4175/NSM-FR-FZhang-271294.23.pdf?sequence=1
Dirac and Weyl Superconductors in Three Dimensions
It looks like both Dirac and Weyl semimetals are superconductors. Magnetic
field will affect them with respect of their quasiparticles.
In reply to mix...@bigpond.com's message of Mon, 29 Aug 2016 15:59:40 +1000:
Hi,
BTW, after distribution of reaction energy over both the new Ni59 nucleus and
the proton, the proton ends up with 6.66 MeV which rounds nicely to 6.7 MeV.
[snip]
>If the measured energy of the proton is 6.7 MeV,
In reply to a.ashfield's message of Sun, 28 Aug 2016 18:01:40 -0400:
Hi,
[snip]
>Reviewing Lewan's piece, with the videos by the Greenyer, linked below,
>he makes a good case for process being basically the swap of a nickel's
>electron by a hydrogen ion.
Bob Greenyer has a new video that proposes a method to determine which
theory is right and then goes on the talk about muon generation. It is
a curiously awkward presentation and you can safely skip the first nine
minutes.
Something we don't often consider:
*From an engineering perspective, if you need careful calorimetry to
determine whether your generator works, then it really doesn't matter
whether it works. Its output is so small as to be irrelevant.*
A device producing a megawatt of heat energy should
This is certainly a wonderful [possible] explanation for Piantelli's
observations and great piece of work, but there is this nagging question
that Piantelli has mentioned that adding Deuterium kills/poisons the
reaction as far as heat and particle production. Perhaps just a slight
increase in
In Italian:
ENEA, *FUSIONE FREDDA Storia Della Ricerca in Italia*. 2009, Rome, Italy:
ENEA.
http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/ENEAfusionefre.pdf
In English:
ENEA, *COLD FUSION The History of Research in Italy.* 2009, Rome, Italy:
ENEA.
http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/ENEAcoldfusion.pdf
http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2016/08/aug-29-2016-lenr-about-root-causes.html
best wishes,
peter
--
Dr. Peter Gluck
Cluj, Romania
http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
21 matches
Mail list logo