Regarding Geneste's paper, the 'strange radiation' tracks described were
replicated by Keith Fredericks and reported at ICCF18:
http://www.ecoinventions.ca/iccf-18-keith-fredericks-possibility-of-tachyon/
His analysis suggested they might be superluminal tachyons.
On 10/16/2015 12:38 PM, Lennart Thornros wrote:
Jones
Do you have ghosts at home?
How can this be to shame either Mats or Rossi.
If it is a 1 of April joke then you have certainly taken the edge off
it. Besides the people involved would not risk their careers for an
April 1 joke.
Nobody can say you did not see through it if it is one.
The problem is if there are certain aspects that are correct because
'the book' was off and a small detail is to be correcting the book.
Reading Peter's blog today and the following:
*6) This is Jean-Francois Geneste's second theory paper:" LENR- from
experiment to theory" presented a few hours ago at Toulouse,
absolutely remarkable:*
*https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B1_tFmz65k8BUGc3Um92SF9xSUozbGM5ZDFIWXpRLUViMmZB/view?usp=sharing*
makes me believe there are more to discover than is discovered.
Best Regards ,
Lennart Thornros
www.StrategicLeadershipSac.com <http://www.StrategicLeadershipSac.com>
lenn...@thornros.com
+1 916 436 1899
202 Granite Park Court, Lincoln CA 95648
YCDBSOYA
On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 12:07 PM, Jones Beene <jone...@pacbell.net
<mailto:jone...@pacbell.net>> wrote:
*From:*Eric Walker
ØWe should be encouraging and not take too critical an eye to
attempts such as the one by Lunden and Lidgren. In addition, we
should be open to fragments of insight that might be hidden in
such attempts.
Maybe so … but... there are limits to gullibility. This attempt at
a publishable scientific paper could actually be a spoof – it is
that bad.
Maybe the intent is to shame Mats – or Rossi, or the whole field
by promoting a spoof? Can you rule this out?
The silliness of a few of these errors (college level physics) is
awesome. The only thing missing is a date of “April 1”.
