I was excited about pulsing the nanopowders at a range of frequencies seeking a resonance, but my supply burned out and the funding ended.
The appearance of the Manelas device showed a resonance around 130kiloHertz with interacting pulses around a strontium ferrite billet. The SrFeOx billet is a soft ferromagnetic material with very high resistivity that limits eddy currents. I noted a cooling of the billet that was continuous for 6 days in 2012. The billet was 5 degrees C below ambient. These measurements were rock solid as was the 60 watts excess power production. ________________________________ From: bobcook39...@hotmail.com <bobcook39...@hotmail.com> Sent: Saturday, March 17, 2018 3:28 PM To: firstname.lastname@example.org Subject: RE: [Vo]:LENR fission Brian— Did the EPRI 2012 experiments include resonant stimulation of any kind once a low level heating was observed? I am thinking about dipole and or quadrupole electric and /or magnetic field stimulation over a range of frequencies that could resonate with the reactants present. I particularly consider resonant magnetic field coupling of nuclear species and Ni lattice electronic orbital spin energy states of the nano Ni particles may be important. A Ni alloy may offer more varied energy states and enhance the coupling and exchange of nuclear potential for increased lattice thermal energy associated with the entire nano particle lattice. (This would be a many-body reaction of a QM coherent system IMHO.) The following link addresses ultra fast reactions in certain solid state systems of many particles, including reactions within and among molecules. https://aca.scitation.org/doi/full/10.1063/1.4936290 Bob Cook ________________________________ From: Brian Ahern <ahern_br...@msn.com> Sent: Saturday, March 17, 2018 10:24:06 AM To: Vortex Subject: Re: [Vo]:LENR fission In My 2012 EPRI on gas loading Nickel nanopowders I always saw continuing heating, but at levels below 200 milliwatts. I did not find any accelerant property. My attempts at dielectric discharges was terminated when I burned out the power supply and was introduced to Arthur Manelas ________________________________ From: Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com> Sent: Saturday, March 17, 2018 11:12 AM To: Vortex Subject: Re: [Vo]:LENR fission JonesBeene <jone...@pacbell.net<mailto:jone...@pacbell.net>> wrote: FAIL Apparently this is too an issue which is either not important or too technical for you. I looked at the few of these references and none of them mention COP wrt thermal feedback. As I said, that is because the COP is meaningless in cold fusion. However, as I also said, a thermal pulse often produces heat after death, with a COP of infinity. You can't ask for more enhancement than that! A lack of comprehension of the value of COP as an intuitive and accurate metric in LENR and the silly attempt to change its meaning is apparently guiding an uncharacteristic flood of disinformation… I do not see what is intuitive or accurate about a parameter that does not even exist in many experiments. Input power with electrolysis affects the formation of material, but it has nothing to do with the performance of the reaction itself. The reaction works with no input power during heat after death or with gas loading, so how can the ratio of input to output (the COP) be a critical parameter? I suggest you address that question rather than insulting top experts in this field such as Fleischmann, Storms and Miles. (They are the ones who say this, not me. Or not just me.) - Jed