[Vo]:Energy Catalyzer Wiki : FLAT EARTH! FLAT EARTH! FLAT EARTH!

[Alan J Fletcher]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_Catalyzer

The Wiki "Reliable Source" police have won.  Brian Josephson has been driven off, and I'm giving up.

Since the discussion on an article is removed after a month or so, I'm putting up my "final straws" for the record.

The article is chock-a-block full of "defies the laws of physics" . I tried to get Kim's Bose Einstein Condensate paper admitted:
http://www.physics.purdue.edu/people/faculty/yekim.shtml
... resume too long to post, Fellow of the American Physical Society :  He published (on  a U of Purdue letterhead) a draft of an invited paper ... but the wiki police wouldn't let it in until it's published. (Should be soon).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alanf777#Attempts_at_theoretical_explanation

I've made several attempts to Get Widom-Larsen in .. not because I believe it's true, but because it IS in a peer-reviewed paper. But W-L only talks about Deuterium-Palladium, and not Hydrogen-Nickel, so it was deleted -- even though Bushnell (a mere Chief Scientist at NASA) said they were using it.

I tried again with the Zawodny patent (which DOES say Proton+Metal = Hydrogen+Nickel) ....


Last call on the revised bushnell quote -- see the ref's properly formatted at [ [19]]

Dennis M. Bushnell, Chief Scientist at NASA Langley Research Center, described LENR as a "promising" technology and praised the work of Rossi and Focardi. ^[1] Bushnell also said that they were starting an experiment to test the Widom-Larson theory ^[2], in which a Heavy electron combines with a proton, through the Weak Nuclear Force (and thus avoiding theCoulomb barrier), creating a neutrino and a neutron. The neutron can then enter a nearby nucleus, causing additional nuclear reactions. On Oct 6, 2011 the US Patent Office published an application by NASA Langley scientist Joseph Zawodny ^[3] for a patent "Method For Producing Heavy Electrons" ^[4], which quotes the Widom-Larsen theory ^[5] and includes "by reference in its entirety" Larsen's Patent No. 7,893,414. Alanf777 (talk) 22:12, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Everything beyond the first sentence is off-topic in an article on the E-Cat. AndyTheGrump (talk) 22:13, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Then take out " He cites the unlikelihood of a chemical reaction being strong enough to overcome the Coulomb barrier, the lack of gamma rays, the lack of explanation for the origin of the extra energy" .... " The principles defy the laws of physics" ...

We previously had WL in a separate "Theoretical Explanations" section, but you disallowed WL because it only described deuterium-palladium : but now Zawodny has opened the door with "Proton=Hydrogen" + "Metal Hydride=Nickel" and therefore applies to the eCat. My two-sentence summary avoids the technical language of the paper and patent.Alanf777 (talk) 22:29, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

I agree with Andy. I don't think anyone has said "E-cat is based on Widom-Larson theory", so it's off-topic Bhny (talk) 22:33, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

You're all quite right. If I stand on my head , pat my stomach and say "Flat Earth" very quickly three times, I can convince myself that although Bushnell referred to WL and the eCat in the same interview, and it's components in the same paragraph "Back in 05-06 Widom-Larsen came out with a theory that said, no it’s not cold fusion, it’s weak interactions using the Standard Model of quantum mechanics, only the weak interaction part. Says that if you set up one of these cells, and you don’t have to use deuterium, hydrogen works fine, nickel works fine, you don’t need palladium. " -- the fact that he did not use them in the same SENTENCE means that he meant that WL had nothing at all to do with the eCat, but everything to do with deuterium-palladium. Flat Earth. Flat Earth. Flat Earth. OK? Alanf777 (talk) 23:21, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Since Bushnell has no more idea than the rest of us as to what Rossi's E-Cat consists of, how can he possibly say that WL is relevant? This is just speculation, once again. AndyTheGrump (talk) 23:32, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

The eCat doesn't use hydrogen and nickel. FE! FE! FE! Alanf777 (talk) 00:06, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

We have no reliable source that states that the E-Cat 'uses' anything. All we have is Rossi's waffle... AndyTheGrump (talk) 00:18, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Then yesterday some wiki mega-editor came in and deleted a whole bunch of stuff.

Binksternet Deletions / Goodbye, and thanks for all the fish

OK, so this guy has 20,000 edits in 4 1/2 years. 68000 / (4.5 * 365) = 41.4003044 edits per day.
I'm impressed by his use of the ctrl-a ctrl-x keys -- although he still needs to up his quota by 700,000 to get to the top of the list. Alanf777 (talk) 19:27, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

I give up. You win. Flat Earth .. pat pat .. Flat earth .. pat pat Flat earth ... Alanf777 (talk) 19:31, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

Yup. And come next winter, when you are basking in the warm glow from your E-Cat central heating, you'll have the consolation of knowing that you were right... AndyTheGrump (talk) 19:59, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

Heh heh... Nothing warms me more than a shot of Don Julio Añejo. Looking forward to the day when the E-Cat warms more than its backers' wallets. Binksternet (talk) 20:40, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

(Rant Over)

(lenr.qumbu.com -- analyzing the Rossi/Focardi eCat  -- Hi, google!)