Ed, When Szpak observed the flashes was it possible for him to determine the 
magnitude of the source of energy?  I realize that he saw individual flashes, 
but how powerful was each one?  Is it possible to prove that each flash was at 
a level consistent with the energy released by just one fusion?  I know that 
this sort of technique is used in nuclear research to detect particles, but 
they have a pretty good idea of the intensity of the flash expected during the 
event.


You know I love to speculate Ed.  I plea guilty as charged.  I have been 
involved in what we call "Blue Sky Thinking" where people freely come up with 
ideas that happen to enter their minds and know that most are not possible.  
The key ingredient is that the ideas are not immediately negatively criticized 
by the other participants.  On many occasions this leads in unexpected 
directions which often become productive.  Is this not what vortex is intended 
to offer?   It is my hope that someone else will have a spark of genius ignited 
by another idea, perhaps one of mine.  Until someone can deliver a working LENR 
device at will that matches their theory in detail without exception, there is 
room for wild speculation.  One day, someone will generate that theory from the 
collection of evidence where all the pieces will fit together perfectly.


Ed, you have a pretty good theory but there are still others in contention.  Do 
you consider your theory as iron clad at this time?  If so, I understand why 
you want to ensure that noise coming from other directions does not misdirect 
the understanding of how LENR behaves.  My question above is important to 
answer and if you are absolutely confident that each fusion reaction is of only 
a single pair of D's that is randomly occurring and disconnected please let me 
know.  That tiny bit of knowledge is vital to my understanding.


Evidence exists that there is connection between individual events which just 
popped into my mind.  You have stated that the effect is temperature dependent 
as we believe which implies that each energy release adds heat to the system 
leading to more of the same.  This is correlated in time.  Now, how fast does 
the energy released by each reaction dissipate among the NAE?  There most 
likely exists a relaxation time during which the energy becomes spread 
throughout the material.  Would it not seem likely that the nearby NAE would be 
effected much more strongly than those far removed?  The density of NAE that 
are present within a region of the metal could be a major indication of the 
magnitude of energy released due to this interaction.  You might want to 
consider how this effect could fit into your theory.


Dave



-----Original Message-----
From: Edmund Storms <stor...@ix.netcom.com>
To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Cc: Edmund Storms <stor...@ix.netcom.com>
Sent: Fri, Feb 22, 2013 5:30 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:explaining LENR -III




On Feb 22, 2013, at 3:19 PM, David Roberson wrote:


You pose an interesting question.  Perhaps the fresh helium leads to an 
increase in the number of NAE that form due to its interaction with the metal.  
Who knows? 


If enough helium forms, this will certainly be true. However, this requires the 
effect run for a long time without this aid. 


 
 
I have long wondered if evidence exists for a limited chain reaction of some 
sort since some of the earlier surface pictures appeared to demonstrate 
explosive crater formations. 



Two kinds of surface effects occur. Some are caused by material depositing from 
an impure electrolyte at the site of H2 loss from a crack. Others are caused by 
local melting produced by a very high concentration of NAE. These two types are 
easy to separate. 


 Perhaps Ed or someone has seen very strong evidence that each LENR event is 
entirely independent of the next one and limited in scale to just one helium 
formation.  Is anyone aware of evidence in support to this hypothesis?



The local areas flash off and on in apparently random ways, as been seen and 
measured by Szpak et al. 

 

 
 
I could imagine that some form of precursor event is required before another 
can be initiated.  Perhaps our favorite spark plug in the form of a cosmic ray 
deposits the secret ingredient that then allows for the follow up LENR action.  
No one could doubt that a cosmic ray has sufficient energy to trigger a small 
nuclear fusion reaction.  We need to be careful not to automatically reject 
such a nuclear event as being inconsistent since no high energy radiation is 
evident.  I would contend that a cosmic ray represents a very high level of 
high energy radiation by itself.



Before you speculate too much, Dave, you really need to understand all that has 
been discovered and observed. I spent 23 years doing this, so my model is not 
based on casual ideas. 


Ed

 

 
 
Dave
 
 
 
-----Original Message-----
 From: Paul Breed <p...@rasdoc.com>
 To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
 Sent: Fri, Feb 22, 2013 4:25 pm
 Subject: Re: [Vo]:explaining LENR -III
 
 
 
>The fusion process has a beginning and an ending. It is not continuous. Once 
>the He forms, the reaction must stop until the He leaves the site and more D 
>takes its place. 
 

 
 
Has anyone melted a working cathode to see if it contains any trapped He?
 
We all believe LENR is a surface effect, but its possible that its a bulk 
effect, that only works once then is dependent on giving He a way to escape to 
the surface?
 

 
 
 
 
 

 
 
 
 
 

 
 
  
 
 


 

Reply via email to