I am happy to hear peoples ideas with reasons behind those ideas. But to engage in testing others ideas often means one has to set aside ones own ideas. That is obviously an infinitely losing game as individuals are but one person and the world wide web is an infinite number of others ideas. Science has always been a combination of inspiration and perspiration though it is in the sweating in the performance that the donnas are separated from the primadonnas.
Watch and wait or join me and make a difference. The greatest threat to the world is waiting for someone else to save it. From: John Berry <aethe...@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, April 17, 2018 8:40 AM To: email@example.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Meshugganons Still, I have a reason for considering that this might possibly work better in the vertical plane, and not by producing an artifact, So I guess you have tried it in different orientations? On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 7:33 PM, Russ <russ.geo...@gmail.com <mailto:russ.geo...@gmail.com> > wrote: We have three identical Geiger’s that I switch positions to constantly challenge (and eliminate) any anomalous behaviour and to reveal glitches as well as to provide coincident background counts that are used to refine the precision of the background vs. hot counts. The high count rates can be intentionally produced and reduced with prescribed changes in the experiment. So far so good. Of course this must be repeated with ever more precision and care, an effort in process at this moment. From: John Berry <aethe...@gmail.com <mailto:aethe...@gmail.com> > Sent: Monday, April 16, 2018 11:38 PM To: firstname.lastname@example.org <mailto:email@example.com> Subject: Re: [Vo]:Meshugganons Is there any difference when the tube, shielding and Geiger counter are vertically disposed as in the image, or horizontally? How can you be sure it isn't some capacitive coupling effect? Could you ground the shields? Could you apply voltage spikes to the plates without them being exposed to the spark gap directly, see if that triggers the Geiger? On Mon, Apr 16, 2018 at 7:20 PM, Russ <russ.geo...@gmail.com <mailto:russ.geo...@gmail.com> > wrote: Nonsense there is no such lead shielding on the experiment as suggested. As well I have been interchanging 3 independent Geiger counters to eliminate any one being seen as being influenced by stray electrical fields. Only the Geiger that is nearest to the experimental source shows the anomalous count at multiples of the background. Much more work needs to be done to eliminate any and all possible errors in this but at least the anomalous emissions are predictably able to be induced in a repeatable fashion. In my opinion these emissions might well be either gammas or something unusual. The Geigers have been challenged with known beta sources and are quite unable to count betas. They are not behaving like my previous discovery of Mischugenons, I have recently renamed these ‘Tellerons’ in honour of my colleague Edward Teller who helped me with that discovery and indeed had speculated on their existence decades before my discovery experiments. There are clear paths to improve and enhance this Androcles protocol that will bring it in line with the work and teachings of Mills, Rossi, and Piantelli. From: Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com <mailto:janap...@gmail.com> > Sent: Sunday, April 15, 2018 8:00 PM To: vortex-l <firstname.lastname@example.org <mailto:email@example.com> > Subject: Re: [Vo]:Meshugganons In Alan's experiment, the Geiger counter's activity is the function of the thickness of the lead shielding. No shielding creates no Geiger counter activity. On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 2:54 PM, Brian Ahern <ahern_br...@msn.com <mailto:ahern_br...@msn.com> > wrote: Geiger counters are notoriously prone to high voltage noise interference. _____ From: Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com <mailto:janap...@gmail.com> > Sent: Sunday, April 15, 2018 2:15 PM To: vortex-l Subject: [Vo]:Meshugganons * New * * <https://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/thread/2461-new-energy-world-symposium-in-stockholm-on-june-18-2018/?postID=84069#post84069> #54 Regarding Alan glow tube test... <http://www.thunder-energies.com/> THUNDER ENERGIES, a company that uses DR. RUGGERO SANTILLI'S TECH to detect nuclear weapons in sealed containers uses a variant of Alan Smith's experiment. <http://www.thunder-energies.com/index.php/ct-menu-item-18/11-articles/19-article-10> http://www.thunder-energies.co…11-articles/19-article-10 Quote The hadronic reactors for the industrial synthesis of thermal neutrons from a hydrogen gas essentially include (TEC international patent pending): 1. A metal vessel filled up with a hydrogen gas at a pressure depending on the desired neutron CPS; 2. Electronic means for the remote control of the gap between a pair of tungsten electrodes located inside said metal vessel; and 3. A specially designed power unit delivering high voltage and high current rapid DC discharges in between said electrodes. As shown in Figure 5, the DC arc ionizes the hydrogen atoms, thus creating a plasma of protons and electrons; the DC arc then aligns the proton and the electron along a magnetic field line with the appropriate spin and other couplings; an engineering means called triggers compress the electron inside the proton, by supplying the missing energy (which is about one million electron Volts, 1 MeV). Display More Sometimes a theorist can save an experimenter a lot of work by avoiding duplicating existing technology. Santilli thinks that neutrons can be formed out of a union of protons and neutrons. This is nonsense. What Santilli is producing are muons. the same particle that Alan is generating. The US government is using cosmic ray generated muons to detect nuclear material in shipping containers now. Cosmic-Ray Muons Reveal Hidden Void in the Great Pyramid <http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/next/ancient/cosmic-ray-muons-reveal-hidden-void-in-the-great-pyramid/> http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/n…oid-in-the-great-pyramid/ Muon Thomography are well known as a means to detect nuclear material Innovations In Nuclear Detection: Muon Tomography <http://large.stanford.edu/courses/2012/ph241/khan1/> http://large.stanford.edu/courses/2012/ph241/khan1/