See http://www.e-catworld.com/why-i-believe-in-the-e-cat/
Like it or not, Rossi rekindled interest in LENR like no other has.
AA
On 4/2/2017 12:12 PM, Che wrote:
Have I missed something? Why is Rossi still being taken seriously here
on vortex-L?
At the very least, his proprietary secrecy has cost Science a great deal.
On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 3:31 PM, a.ashfield <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
It has been evident for years that Rossi has been spending time
boning up on atomic physics.
What he writes here makes sense to me, but perhaps others here,
more expert than me, will comment.
1.
Andrea Rossi
March 31, 2017 at 12:55 PM
<http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=892&cpage=223#comment-1273347>
Eugene Atthove:
As a matter of fact, neutrinos and antineutrinos in the
nuclear physics equations are “tricks”, assumed to be real to
obtain the respect of the leptons conservation law.
For example: the neutron decay, of which we talked yesterday,
gives one proton, one electron and one antineutrino: why?
Because at the left of the neutron decay equation you do not
have leptons, at the right you have one lepton and this would
be against the leptons number conservation law: therefore you
have to assume the emission of an antineutrino, so you have
one plus lepton ( the electron ), one minus lepton ( the
antineutrino ) = zero leptons also at the right of the
equation, so that the law is respected. You could say that
this sounds a little bit tricky, like an artifact, but…it is,
albeit without this trick the Standard Model would brutally
crack down: realistically, between a crack and a trick is
better the trick.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
