Us against the world...

On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 5:31 PM, ChemE Stewart <[email protected]> wrote:

> Axil, I am on your side man
>
>
> On Friday, October 23, 2015, Axil Axil <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Also see:
>>
>>
>> https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn19508-hawking-radiation-glimpsed-in-artificial-black-hole/
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 5:23 PM, Axil Axil <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> See
>>>
>>> https://physics.aps.org/synopsis-for/10.1103/PhysRevLett.114.036402
>>>
>>> http://www.nature.com/news/hawking-radiation-mimicked-in-the-lab-1.16131
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 5:18 PM, Axil Axil <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> No, this analog light based black hole referenced in that video
>>>> produces hawking radiation.
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 5:09 PM, David Roberson <[email protected]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I believe you are referring to a simulation of a black hole.
>>>>>
>>>>> Dave
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: Axil Axil <[email protected]>
>>>>> To: vortex-l <[email protected]>
>>>>> Sent: Fri, Oct 23, 2015 5:00 pm
>>>>> Subject: Re: [Vo]:Colloquium at SRI
>>>>>
>>>>> The rotation of polaritons in a vortex produces a ANALOG black hole.
>>>>> Any wave structure in a vortex will produce a black hole even water.
>>>>>
>>>>> See
>>>>>
>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YyMYcqxuZ_I
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 4:55 PM, David Roberson <[email protected]>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> But SPP's can be coaxed into generating enormous magnetic fields.
>>>>>> It is not too difficult to understand that these super fields can 
>>>>>> interact
>>>>>> strongly with nucleons.  Is there reason to believe that magnetic
>>>>>> interaction by SPP's is not going to be adequate?  The multiparticle
>>>>>> entanglement theory is not proven to be required for LENR.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No one has ever captured a small black hole and lived to tell about
>>>>>> it!  :-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Dave
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>> From: Axil Axil <[email protected]>
>>>>>> To: vortex-l <[email protected]>
>>>>>> Sent: Fri, Oct 23, 2015 4:47 pm
>>>>>> Subject: Re: [Vo]:Colloquium at SRI
>>>>>>
>>>>>> One of the tell tail indications that a black hole is involved is the
>>>>>> cluster fusion mode in LENR reaction. This requires multiparticle
>>>>>> entanglement. Only black holes produce this sort of entanglement(see
>>>>>> ER=ERP: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ER%3DEPR). Standard QM
>>>>>> entanglement is monogamous. Only two particles can be entangled.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 4:38 PM, David Roberson <[email protected]>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> SPP's are one thing, small black holes another.  Why is there any
>>>>>>> reason to believe that a black hole is required to initiate LENR
>>>>>>> reactions?  I suspect that SPP's can do the job without extra help.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Dave
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>>> From: Axil Axil <[email protected]>
>>>>>>> To: vortex-l <[email protected]>
>>>>>>> Sent: Fri, Oct 23, 2015 12:15 pm
>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [Vo]:Colloquium at SRI
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> During a typical replication run of the Rossi effect, the pressure
>>>>>>> of the hydrogen gas goes down over a relatively short timeframe. This 
>>>>>>> might
>>>>>>> mean that hydrogen Rydberg matter(HRM) has formed in major part because 
>>>>>>> gas
>>>>>>> is transformed into a solid.  But the reaction does not take off
>>>>>>> immediately. It might be that the energy needed for the HRM to produce
>>>>>>> heavy SPP solitons need more time to accumulate. The Rossi reaction may 
>>>>>>> be
>>>>>>> a two step process that first forms rydberg matter, then that HRM
>>>>>>> accumulates energy in SPPs to form the real cause of LENR: SPP black 
>>>>>>> holes.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 11:37 AM, Axil Axil <[email protected]>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Why does it take so long for the Holmlid effect to manifest?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> When you have to pump energy into a population of black holes that
>>>>>>>> stores huge amounts of energy, it take time and a lot of EMF power to 
>>>>>>>> do
>>>>>>>> this. But once these solitons are well formed and their power storage
>>>>>>>> threshold is reached, they become exquisitely responsive to any 
>>>>>>>> additional
>>>>>>>> energy input.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> This is the reason why the Rossi replicators cannot get a quick
>>>>>>>> response. They don't keep at it for long enough. Rossi must cook his 
>>>>>>>> fuel
>>>>>>>> for a long time to deposit enough energy into those solitons for them 
>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>> become active.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I believe that application of just heat and laser light is not
>>>>>>>> powerful enough EMF stimulation to fill up the energy bucket to the 
>>>>>>>> proper
>>>>>>>> level. An electric arc might be the best way to pump power into the
>>>>>>>> solitons.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The lessen to take away, use an electric arc to preprocess your
>>>>>>>> fuel. It will save a lot of time.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 11:16 AM, Eric Walker <
>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 9:57 AM, Bob Higgins <
>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Does anyone else find these just too incredible to believe?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Very much so.  I should spend some time looking at the raw data.
>>>>>>>>> Holmlid may have something interesting.  His interpretation may have
>>>>>>>>> sufficiently alienated the people who could help him interpret his 
>>>>>>>>> results
>>>>>>>>> that he may be a little in a bind.  Energy conservation considerations
>>>>>>>>> point to a misinterpretation of some kind on his part.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> While these things truly offend my physical sensibilities, having
>>>>>>>>>> these nervous concerns also makes me worry that I am becoming a
>>>>>>>>>> patho-skeptic.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Not at all.  What is important is to not write off raw
>>>>>>>>> experimental data.  Explanations of the data are always fair game.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Eric
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>

Reply via email to