Vo - Dr Pollack's premise is not so very different than the ideas on hidden "water structure" which we have been discussing here for years. In fact, he has been at it for years too - mainly in the biological aspects.
It is certainly encouraging that now - there is "imprimatur" attaching to the field. This is good well-documented work, instead of Rube Goldberg contraptions. And yes, sadly -- It will not be long before the mainstream takes full credit for it, and starts to tell the general public "I told you so". [side note] An "Imprimatur" was once an official declaration from the Pope and the hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church that a subject was "free from error." At any rate, one of the best things about this long presentation (glad I got it early as now the server is bogged down) is the nicely illustrated introduction to the "water exclusion zone". As fate would would have it, this kind of structured water has a catchy name = "easy-water" which comes from EZ = "exclusion zone" or to take that a step further, we could call the "fuel" variety which is structured water with maximized capacitance charge EZHHO. EZHHO - It is almost certainly the great unknown (under-appreciated) factor which has allowed past water energy anomalies to have been documented - but then when others have been unable to duplicate, questions arose. Obviously, you cannot duplicate something which you did not appreciate was there in the first place. Perhaps Griggs, Graneau, Meyer, Yull Brown, Dingle and the many others who claimed to see water energy anomalies of various sort were -at one time or another- simply "getting lucky" with an apparatus which sometimes would properly structure water, and other times would not. BTW as regards Griggs and the cavitation anomaly, it can be said that *structure alone* even without utilizing charge anihilation - can give nearly a one eV boost per molecule (the value of a hydrogen bond) whereas gasoline burned in air (given that air is 80% nitrogen) actually ends up giving less energy to the exhaust products "per molecule" than this. IOW it is not trivial, even if a small percentage of the water structure is lost before the "fuel" can be "burned". It probably gets down to statistics: if you can successfully structure the water into EZHHO so that (x) percentage is active, then you get the anomaly - otherwise you are left scratching your head as to "why didn't it work this time?" In the case of Meyer, this could be related to the anecdotal information that a buildup of calcium (lime) on the tubes was necessary (possibly as a dielectric) --- but it probably needed to be a very precise dielectric layer (which he never tried to control) -- and also in the case of the so-called "Joe cell" the only reliable evidence which I have seen (in the mountain of BS) apparently depended on a special kind of water **pretreatment** which as it turns out is overwhelming importatance, and the cell itself possibly does nada (except perhaps to keep the structure intact). Almost nobody amongst the hundreds of failed replicators of these technologies has had much of a clue.... although some of the ones who have been able to get the Meyer cell to work on occassion, have recognized that the effect was capacitance -- and had almost *nothing* to do with actual electroylsis!! Jones ----- Original Message ---- From: Mark Iverson Great! He qualifies the self-ordering as only occurring adjacent to a membrane or other interface, i.e., it is not ubiquitous. And does that interface need to be a dielectric so as to support a separation of charge? Kind of makes you rethink why Meyers' had the cylinder within a cylinder design? How do the physical props of the liquid crystalline region differ from that of the disordered bulk? How does this impact the 'theories' regarding LENR? Duty calls... -Mark
