@Che Your expectations about how LENR will evolve is almost universally held but unfortunately incorrect. LENR produces energy by ripping apart matter into subatomic particles thereby producing radiation loading that is proportional to the heat produced. If LENR produces tons of energy in the aggregate, it will also produce tons of all pervasive and highly penetrating meson based radiation exposure.
Because of this radiation risk, LENR will be regulated just like neutron based nuclear energy is today. Meson based nuclear energy will be similar to neutron based nuclear energy except without the radioactive nuclear waste problem. Large LENR reactors will be sited underground feeding gigawatts of electric power to the grid. There will be no LENR powered cars or hot water heaters or stand alone how based electric power generators. Those huge LENR based underground electric power stations won't be sited and running until most of the Vort membership is long gone. On Sun, Apr 2, 2017 at 4:38 PM, Che <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Sun, Apr 2, 2017 at 1:33 PM, a.ashfield <[email protected]> wrote: > >> 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. >> > > > Where's the BEEF?? > Where's the damned water-heater the World was promised..? > (Where's the 'Orbo' Revolution, for that matter...) > > Damned 'private-property' interests. > Capitalist 'efficiency' (Over-Unity, at that) at its best... > Pfft. > > > > > > > > > >> 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]> >> 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. >>> >>> >> >> >
