Published on Mar 10, 2018
A capacity is calculated from the nameplate spec.s of this "energy savings"
solid state transformer or SST by it's output spec.s of 15,000 volts open
circuit and conversely amperage delivery @20 ma short. Dividing these two
values to obtain an ohmic value of (AC) intern
I have been looking at the graph titled
"After the MASSIVE broad band 'turn on' pulse, the excess heat mode is
between 0 and 100KeV"
at
http://www.quantumheat.org/index.php/en/home/mfmp-blog/519-the-cookbook-is-in-the-signal
which shows the steady state gamma radiation from the Parkhomov-like
It has the characteristics of bremsstrahlung radiation, likely from
stopping of beta emission within the reactor.
On Sat, Mar 10, 2018 at 8:24 AM, Nigel Dyer wrote:
> I have been looking at the graph titled
> "After the MASSIVE broad band 'turn on' pulse, the excess heat mode is
> between 0 and
Looks quasi-Maxwellian to me.
Where is the inverse peak?
From: Nigel Dyer
I have been looking at the graph titled
"After the MASSIVE broad band 'turn on' pulse, the excess heat mode is
between 0 and 100KeV"
at
http://www.quantumheat.org/index.php/en/home/mfmp-blog/519-the-cookbook-is-in-th
It is like both like a Maxwellian distribution and Bremstrahlung, but
neither of these give a 1/f^2 distribtion. If you overlay a 1/f^2 line
over the red dots the fit is perfect, indeed it is so good that it
almost looks as if that is how it was generated.
On 10/03/2018 15:46, JonesBeene wrote
OK – but the context of what is being graphed is not clear ---
Is Trace 7 real or calculated? Maybe Trace 7 has been manipulated to show a
desired fit.
From: Nigel Dyer
It is like both like a Maxwellian distribution and Bremstrahlung, but neither
of these give a 1/f^2 distribtion. If you ov
This was discussed in depth here, and on the QuantumHeat blog. Bob
Higgins commented at that time:
The way the signal behaved, it was strong in Spectrum-07, weak in
Spectrum-08, missing in Spectrum-09, and tiny in Spectrum-10. It did not
exist in Spectrum-06 at all. If it were a hot particle,
In the calibrated trace, which you may not be seeing, it is not 1/f^2
exactly. Also, there will be absorption and scattering in going through
the reactor that will affect the shape of the curve.
On Sat, Mar 10, 2018 at 9:28 AM, JonesBeene wrote:
> OK – but the context of what is being graphed
The MFMP website is an embarrassment. They still give credence to Andrea Rossi
! Why would you site this site?
This is an example of cognitive dissonance.
From: Bob Higgins
Sent: Saturday, March 10, 2018 10:37 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:1/f s
There is plenty of excellent work from other researchers (other than Rossi) on
this site.
If we accept the reality of LENR we cannot reject Rossi solely because he is a
dishonest scam artist.
There is even the possibility that Rossi could stumble onto something valid at
this juncture (2018)
I know that you and Brian can't resist bad mouthing Rossi, but there are signs
that he has a commercial product with the QX. I have some independent evidence
that he has indeed started a factory to produce them and he remains optimistic
production will start in 2018.
If the QX does perform any
BTW - Wouldn’t it be a hoot if muons showed up on a particular detector as
1/f^2 noise ??
Nigel,
Since you noticed the fit initially, were you looking for it based on phenomena
from another field ?
I see from Alan’s posting that the context is no mystery – except to someone
who was not p
Conversely, The muons may just be 1/f noise.
From: JonesBeene
Sent: Saturday, March 10, 2018 3:11 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: RE: [Vo]:1/f squared gamma distribution from Rossi-like
BTW - Wouldn’t it be a hoot if muons showed up on a particular detect
There is no factory and less obvious, there is no Santa Claus either.
From: Adrian Ashfield
Sent: Saturday, March 10, 2018 3:04 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:1/f squared gamma distribution from Rossi-like
I know that you and Brian can't resist bad
Quantum 1/f noise
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_1/f_noise
The *conventional Q1/fE* represents 1/f fluctuations caused by
bremsstrahlung, decoherence and interference in the scattering of charged
particles off one another, in tunneling or in any other process in solid
state physics and in
I think there is a real possibility that some detectors are not
detecting what we thought they were detecting. I had not considered
that possibility in this case, but I will keep that in mind.
On 10/03/2018 20:11, JonesBeene wrote:
BTW - Wouldn’t it be a hoot if muons showed up on a particul
Wait a minute – Adrian says he has independent evidence of a factory.
This seems at first blush to be irrational if not silly… but heck -- let’s
hear or see this evidence !
Hopefully it will not come from Rossi or one of his sock puppets and hopefully
there will be a building and assembly l
As you won't believe anything short of working reactors on the market, I see no
point in continuing this discussion. Rossi has stated he is not going to show
anything more of the QX until they are in production and he hopes that will be
before the end of 2018.
-Original Message
Hey guys
Perhaps we could forget I mentioned Rossi. Its the graph, which does
look as if it contains interesting data, that interested me.
Nigel
On 10/03/2018 22:23, Adrian Ashfield wrote:
As you won't believe anything short of working reactors on the market,
I see no point in continuing thi
As was obvious from the start, your so-called evidence sucks…
From: Adrian Ashfield
As you won't believe anything short of working reactors on the market, I see no
point in continuing this discussion. Rossi has stated he is not going to show
anything more of the QX until they are in production
Keep in mind that as large massive charged particles (200x that of an
electron), muons would not penetrate materials very well. For a given
energy, they are moving much slower than electrons. Also, because they are
so heavy, they will stop slowly, and hence, not create much bremsstrahlung
radiati
According to Holmlid, there is a high flux of neutral atomic fragments that
receive a ton of kinetic energy from the primary reaction(nucleon particle
decay). These fragments would dissipate their kinetic energy through
particle collision cascades. That particle collision cascade would produce
the
Pity you can't have an accident and stumble over something useful yourself.
-Original Message-
From: JonesBeene
To: vortex-l
Sent: Sat, Mar 10, 2018 6:04 pm
Subject: RE: [Vo]:1/f squared gamma distribution from Rossi-like
As was obvious from the start, your so-called evidence
Neutral particle flux probably won't create substantial electromagnetic
noise and certainly no gamma. Best case is that it would occasionally
knock off some electrons that would excite the characteristic x-ray
emission of their host atom. They will excite acoustic noise that would
quickly be conv
You made me go bact to the source article
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0169895
Abstract:
" Large signals of charged light mesons are observed in the laser-induced
particle flux from ultra-dense hydrogen H(0) layers. The mesons are formed
in such layers on meta
25 matches
Mail list logo
