Re: [Vo]:Beiting paper at ICCF-21

[Brian Ahern]

Coincidentally, I presented my EPRI data on ZrONiH to Richard Garwin at my home 
lab in February 2011. He was a paid consultant fr a millionaire, Robert King. 
Robert was advised not to invest even though I had repeatable excess energy.



From: Rich Murray 
Sent: Tuesday, June 5, 2018 11:23 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Beiting paper at ICCF-21

Glad and hopeful...   rmfor...@gmail.com<mailto:rmfor...@gmail.com>
blog 
rmforall.blogspot.com<https://nam01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Frmforall.blogspot.com&data=02%7C01%7C%7Ce6f9b09ff9e84ebb469b08d5cb5ce827%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435%7C1%7C0%7C636638522240552309&sdata=02lmKHput03QjG0LLEIIc1kfMbBtRA5enCJsZJGb6cE%3D&reserved=0>



On Tue, Jun 5, 2018, 5:01 PM Jed Rothwell 
mailto:jedrothw...@gmail.com>> wrote:
This was marvelous:

E. Beiting, “Investigation of the nickel-hydrogen anomalous heat effect,” 
Aerospace Report No. ATR-2017-01760, The Aerospace Corporation, El Segundo CA, 
USA, May 15, 2017.

http://coldfusioncommunity.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/Beiting-Edward-1.pdf<https://nam01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fcoldfusioncommunity.net%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2018%2F05%2FBeiting-Edward-1.pdf&data=02%7C01%7C%7Ce6f9b09ff9e84ebb469b08d5cb5ce827%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435%7C1%7C0%7C636638522240708579&sdata=d6oto3wejrkoKDUjM084MokkMJuk1JxcwyzN4HcEWFM%3D&reserved=0>

In my opinion, this is one of the best reports in the history of cold fusion. 
Great calorimetry -- IRREFUTABLE results. I now fully believe the ZrO2NiPd 
material works. Kudos to Brian Ahern.

The response to this from Richard Garwin was hilarious. I shall describe it 
later, when I get a chance.

I can't wait to read the full report listed at the end of the abstract. I hope 
I can upload the full report to LENR-CANR.org soon.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Beiting paper at ICCF-21

[Jed Rothwell]

 wrote:


> The only thing I don't like about this report is the energy density
> calculation.
> The assumption is made that the energy comes from the solid material.
> Whereas,
> if instead, it comes from the Hydrogen, then the calculation is worthless.


I think "worthless" overstates the problem. It is a loose approximation.
People have been making this comparison since the beginning of cold fusion.
Everyone knows the hydrogen is probably the fuel, and everyone also knows
that the mass of hydrogen is far smaller than the mass of palladium.

If we are going to quibble, I would add that this comparison neglects the
mass of oxygen needed to burn the chemical fuels listed.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Beiting paper at ICCF-21

[Axil Axil]

 Samarium  is
well known catalyst in organic chemisty as a chiral additive that aids in
the preparation of drugs. All active drugs must be left handed chiral.

https://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/ja00074a057

A chiral samarium-based catalyst for the asymmetric
Meerwein-Ponndorf-Verley reduction

A SmCo magnetic produces a chiral polarized magnetic field that is at the
core of the LENR reaction. It is chiral magnetic interaction inside of
protons and neutrons that excite the instanton sea whereby quark flavor
changes from up/down to strange.

Instantons are chiral.

https://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ph/9602375

Chiral Symmetry Breaking by Instantons


On Wed, Jun 6, 2018 at 11:27 AM, Bob Higgins 
wrote:

> I asked Beiting about the addition of SmCo magnets. SmCo was chosen for
> its higher curie temp.  The magnets began as charged SmCo disks and were
> crushed into apparently 1-2 mm fragments for inclusion with the fuel.
> Enhancement of the LENR by magnetic field when using light hydrogen (as he
> used) is a surprise. It could have been the Sm or Co instead of the
> magnetic field - he did not have an experiment with un-charged SmCo
> material for comparison.
>
> A wonderful replication report.
>
> On Tue, Jun 5, 2018, 10:13 PM Jed Rothwell  wrote:
>
>> Richard Garwin of the Jasons was brought in to evaluate the experiment.
>> He said there is a problem because it uses K-type thermocouples which are
>> susceptible to errors from exposure to hydrogen. Beiting pointed out three
>> problems with this hypothesis:
>>
>>1. The thermocouples were shielded.
>>2. The damage only happens at ~600°C and these cells were run at
>>300°C.
>>3. The damage causes the thermocouples to show a lower temperature.
>>If would reduce the estimate of excess heat, not increase it.
>>
>> Garwin is grasping at straws, trying to find an excuse to dismiss the
>> results. He said the first thing that popped into his head, which could not
>> have happened and would have had the opposite effect if it could. Soon
>> after cold fusion began, Garwin was called in to evaluate SRI. The gist of
>> his report was: "I could not find an error but I am sure something must be
>> wrong."
>>
>

Re: [Vo]:Beiting paper at ICCF-21

[mixent]

In reply to  Jed Rothwell's message of Tue, 5 Jun 2018 18:00:54 -0600:
Hi,

The only thing I don't like about this report is the energy density calculation.
The assumption is made that the energy comes from the solid material. Whereas,
if instead, it comes from the Hydrogen, then the calculation is worthless.


>This was marvelous:
>
>E. Beiting, “Investigation of the nickel-hydrogen anomalous heat effect,”
>Aerospace Report No. ATR-2017-01760, The Aerospace Corporation, El Segundo
>CA, USA, May 15, 2017.
>
>http://coldfusioncommunity.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/Beiting-Edward-1.pdf
>
>In my opinion, this is one of the best reports in the history of cold
>fusion. Great calorimetry -- IRREFUTABLE results. I now fully believe the
>ZrO2NiPd material works. Kudos to Brian Ahern.
>
>The response to this from Richard Garwin was hilarious. I shall describe it
>later, when I get a chance.
>
>I can't wait to read the full report listed at the end of the abstract. I
>hope I can upload the full report to LENR-CANR.org soon.
>
>- Jed
Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

RE: [Vo]:Beiting paper at ICCF-21

[JonesBeene]

For anyone not familiar with the Aerospace Corporation

http://www.aerospace.org/about-us/history/

… they are the crème-de-la-crème of official Pentagon R&D insofar as aerospace 
in general, is concerned.

I doubt that it is any accident that Garwin appears early-on.

 It would surprise no one to learn that he was involved from day1 as a Jason. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JASON_(advisory_group)

His reservations are there for a reason. This is not just a good sign for the 
future of LENR… it is fabulous. Had there been doubt, it would not have seen 
the light of day.

…despite the very low COP. The thoroughness of Beiting means that the gain is 
rock solid, even if lower than we want it to be.

Maybe the field can shed the stench of Rossi now and move on.

Jones


From: Bob Higgins

I asked Beiting about the addition of SmCo magnets. SmCo was chosen for its 
higher curie temp.  The magnets began as charged SmCo disks and were crushed 
into apparently 1-2 mm fragments for inclusion with the fuel. Enhancement of 
the LENR by magnetic field when using light hydrogen (as he used) is a 
surprise. It could have been the Sm or Co instead of the magnetic field - he 
did not have an experiment with un-charged SmCo material for comparison. 

A wonderful replication report.


Jed Rothwell wrote:
Richard Garwin of the Jasons was brought in to evaluate the experiment. He said 
there is a problem because it uses K-type thermocouples which are susceptible 
to errors from exposure to hydrogen. Beiting pointed out three problems with 
this hypothesis:
1. The thermocouples were shielded.
2. The damage only happens at ~600°C and these cells were run at 300°C.
3. The damage causes the thermocouples to show a lower temperature. If would 
reduce the estimate of excess heat, not increase it.
Garwin is grasping at straws, trying to find an excuse to dismiss the results. 
He said the first thing that popped into his head, which could not have 
happened and would have had the opposite effect if it could. Soon after cold 
fusion began, Garwin was called in to evaluate SRI. The gist of his report was: 
"I could not find an error but I am sure something must be wrong."

Re: [Vo]:Beiting paper at ICCF-21

[Bob Higgins]

I asked Beiting about the addition of SmCo magnets. SmCo was chosen for its
higher curie temp.  The magnets began as charged SmCo disks and were
crushed into apparently 1-2 mm fragments for inclusion with the fuel.
Enhancement of the LENR by magnetic field when using light hydrogen (as he
used) is a surprise. It could have been the Sm or Co instead of the
magnetic field - he did not have an experiment with un-charged SmCo
material for comparison.

A wonderful replication report.

On Tue, Jun 5, 2018, 10:13 PM Jed Rothwell  wrote:

> Richard Garwin of the Jasons was brought in to evaluate the experiment. He
> said there is a problem because it uses K-type thermocouples which are
> susceptible to errors from exposure to hydrogen. Beiting pointed out three
> problems with this hypothesis:
>
>1. The thermocouples were shielded.
>2. The damage only happens at ~600°C and these cells were run at 300°C.
>3. The damage causes the thermocouples to show a lower temperature. If
>would reduce the estimate of excess heat, not increase it.
>
> Garwin is grasping at straws, trying to find an excuse to dismiss the
> results. He said the first thing that popped into his head, which could not
> have happened and would have had the opposite effect if it could. Soon
> after cold fusion began, Garwin was called in to evaluate SRI. The gist of
> his report was: "I could not find an error but I am sure something must be
> wrong."
>

Re: [Vo]:Beiting paper at ICCF-21

[Jed Rothwell]

Richard Garwin of the Jasons was brought in to evaluate the experiment. He
said there is a problem because it uses K-type thermocouples which are
susceptible to errors from exposure to hydrogen. Beiting pointed out three
problems with this hypothesis:

   1. The thermocouples were shielded.
   2. The damage only happens at ~600°C and these cells were run at 300°C.
   3. The damage causes the thermocouples to show a lower temperature. If
   would reduce the estimate of excess heat, not increase it.

Garwin is grasping at straws, trying to find an excuse to dismiss the
results. He said the first thing that popped into his head, which could not
have happened and would have had the opposite effect if it could. Soon
after cold fusion began, Garwin was called in to evaluate SRI. The gist of
his report was: "I could not find an error but I am sure something must be
wrong."

Re: [Vo]:Beiting paper at ICCF-21

[Rich Murray]

Glad and hopeful...   rmfor...@gmail.com
blog rmforall.blogspot.com



On Tue, Jun 5, 2018, 5:01 PM Jed Rothwell  wrote:

> This was marvelous:
>
> E. Beiting, “Investigation of the nickel-hydrogen anomalous heat effect,”
> Aerospace Report No. ATR-2017-01760, The Aerospace Corporation, El Segundo
> CA, USA, May 15, 2017.
>
>
> http://coldfusioncommunity.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/Beiting-Edward-1.pdf
>
> In my opinion, this is one of the best reports in the history of cold
> fusion. Great calorimetry -- IRREFUTABLE results. I now fully believe the
> ZrO2NiPd material works. Kudos to Brian Ahern.
>
> The response to this from Richard Garwin was hilarious. I shall describe
> it later, when I get a chance.
>
> I can't wait to read the full report listed at the end of the abstract. I
> hope I can upload the full report to LENR-CANR.org soon.
>
> - Jed
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Beiting paper at ICCF-21

[Jed Rothwell]

Overall, I would say the people selected to give oral presentations have
upped their game. The quality is better than most previous conferences.
Several other experimental papers impressed me. I will list them below.
Here are all the abstracts:

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/sp71necll4mfv2w/AABLXuUL0v3NrkY7BPYPKDA_a?dl=0

Letts & Cravens
Mizuno (if I do say so myself)

Takahashi
Hioki   - These two describe different aspects of the same project.
Unfortunately, the funding for it ended last year

Tanzella
Staker
Beiting
Biberian

Olafsson
Zeiner-Gunderson - Both about Holmlid. Not exactly cold fusion, but good.

That's just the first two days. Impressive.

Note that I cannot judge theory papers and I have nothing to say about them.