>From the interview it sure sounds like the researchers did not see any 
>significant gamma radiation.  This seems unlikely given 14 MEV protons.   
>Another direct question would be what neutron detection  instrument they used.

It seems given the technology associated with what the claim to have 
accomplished, they would know how to monitor for neutrons and protons as well.

What knock-on nuclear reactions can resonate with energetic protons and not 
involve gammas?  

I would say that without a source of fast initiators, a fast large explosion 
like Jones suggested is unlikely.

Bob Cook

  
From: Axil Axil 
Sent: Saturday, July 18, 2015 1:41 PM
To: vortex-l 
Subject: Re: [Vo]:The Land of Fire an

Sveinn did a radio interview



and following a request by Ecco, a follower, Sveinbjörn, made a translation for 
the community - it is here:

https://goo.gl/RT71Sa





Sveinbjörn Höskuldsson Q: What is cold fusion?
A: Conventional release of hydrogen power, such as in hydrogen powered cars is 
a chemical reaction between oxygen and hydrogen that results in the formation 
of water and release of chemical energy. Cold fusion releases energy in a 
similar way as happens in the sun by binding of hydrogen nucleus to form 
helium. This is therefore nuclear energy but not chemical.
Q: OK, is this dangerous process, sounds like dangerous? Nuclear power, 
hydrogen...?
A: Yes, this is a dangerous process as it happens in the sun and if you try to 
replicate the sun you will have a very dangerous and highly radioactive 
process. Since 25 years ago when cold fusion surfaced the main argument of the 
skeptics has indeed been that the scientists originally demonstrating the 
effect did survive the experiment.
Therefore, what they experienced could not have been a fusion process but 
something else. However, the cold fusion experiments that have 
been conducted until now have shown extremely low radiation values.
Q: We all know bad nuclear accidents, such as Chernobyl and Fukushima, do we 
need to show precaution if we would start harvesting cold fusion as energy 
source?
A: Yes, precaution is necessary. So far no signs of radiation have been 
observed but with additional research we will know for sure if the process is 
always and absolutely free of radioactivity. It is too early to tell at this 
point in time.
Q: Ok, if it is possible to harvest this type of energy, how complicated is it 
to build the necessary power stations and how much energy could we expect to be 
able to generate?
A: Well, it seems to be possible to run the process with a relatively simple 
equipment, for research purposes we have equipment that easily fits into a 
corner of a normal room. Even a 1MW power generator fits into a relatively 
small space. Compared with our geothermal power stations where the 
energy-source comes from a deep drill-hole, the generating energy-source will 
be much smaller in size.
Q: Can this technology be used anywhere in the world?
A: Yes, you could say that this technology will revolve the energy market, but 
we are not there yet, this publication supports the numerous previous 
publications demonstrating excess heat under circumstances were such energy 
release should not occur. It provides an understanding of what could be 
happening, thereby hopefully focusing future research effort on a more focused 
pathway that will eventually accelerate the progress.
Q: This looks promising and at this time where the leaders of the world are 
trying to find a way out of using hydro-carbonates as the main energy source, 
this could be the answer they are looking for?
A: Yes, but the current task is to convince other scientists that this whole 
thing is not nonsense and that they should spend time and effort into this 
research field.
Q: Do you then believe that this energy source will totally eliminate the use 
of hydro-carbonates as energy source?
A: Yes, as long as we can reach sufficiently high reaction rate. There are 
already a number of groups, public and underground, that claim to have already 
reach this or that level of power but science has not given this the attention 
needed to explain what is actually happening.
Q: I assume that this is not embraced by all, there is a large oil industry out 
there?
A: Yes, but it is not the only business in the world and the rest should be 
satisfied.
Q: Have you experienced criticism or pressure to withdraw from the research?
A: No. There is probably only around thousand people around the world following 
the field and making experiments that are leading to excess heat generation. 
Our publication should be looked at as a step to explain why many of those 
other experiments are providing seemingly randomly excess heat.
Q: Can you predict how long it will take science to complete the groundwork?
A: Well, no, the resources being spent on this field are very thin so it is 
hard to predict how long that would take. However if significant science 
resources would be focused on this field, we cold reach that point of 
understanding in 1, 2, 5 or 10 years. Hard to say.
Q: Should the Icelandic authorities increase the funding to this field 
especially?
A: Well, my group will just submit for national research grants like any other 
scientists here does were the submissions will be classified and rated through a
peer-reviewed process. The Icelandic government is increasing significantly 
funding for research so there is no need for any other involvement from the 
state. However the energy companies should most likely spend some of their 
funding on this field as this is a dynamic world that we live in. At some point 
in time the energy companies will need to make the decision to change their 
policies due to changes in technology and face the facts that as energy 
supplier, they can no longer do things as they are used to. 
Q: There has been a loud debate here in Iceland regarding building of new 
hydropower stations due to environmental concerns, how will this affect that 
debate?
A: Well, you can in general say that the better that the performance of this 
technology will get, more and more conventional technologies used for energy 
generation will become obsolete. The most expensive technologies will be the 
first to go, probably starting with solar and wind but then carry-on down the 
ladder. If developers manage to create really high performance solutions, it 
will eventually kill hydropower as well.
Q: This is exciting and obviously a field starting to pick up speed, but you 
scientist are now asking for stronger financial support?
A: Well, first we need the scientific acknowledgement that this is actually 
real science providing real results that should not be taken lightly. There are 
already significant funding spent on all types of research but not necessarily 
on the most important fields.


On Sat, Jul 18, 2015 at 4:00 PM, Terry Blanton <hohlr...@gmail.com> wrote:



  On Sat, Jul 18, 2015 at 3:39 PM, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote:

    The paper makes no mention of neutrons. 

  I think that might be one of the obvious "emissions" of which Jones spoke. 

Reply via email to