Jones Beene Why you insist that e-cat don't emit gamma ray while both rossi and focardi claimed otherwise.
Here is a quote from Sergio Focardi talk in TEDx conference . "08:43 Now, one of the problems when we talk about these topics is the problem of safety. And, in this case the danger for the safety is the radioactivity, because being a nuclear reaction people foresee radioactivity emitted in the reaction. This is real, but we are lucky this process produce only gamma rays and not neutrons. I must say I pointed to the danger of neutrons from the start with the collaboration with Rossi; and Rossi, obviously, took the measures needed because, if there would be neutrons, the things would be difficult, because neutrons can be shielded but it is not a simple problem. Luckily there are not neutrons. But there are gamma rays. The presence of gamma ray I have experienced directly, in the first experiments in the laboratory Rossi had in Bondeno, because often I did the measures when Rossi was occupied doing his bidding. I, in the first measures used an instrument detecting radioactivity and measured the gamma rays. Not very dangerous, not big compared to the normal background, but anyway present. And it is obvious there was no reason to raise the natural radioactivity level." "10:40 But we never detected neutrons as this was my main fear because neutron are difficult to shield. But hey never showed. The problem of the gamma rays was solved simply adding, around the generators, small sheet of lead that are able to shield the gamma ray. So we can say, there is no risk of radioactivity when we work in this way. This is good not only for us but for when there will be commercial applications." full video and transcription http://www.e-catworld.com/2011/11/sergio-focardi-presents-ted-talk-on-nickelhydrogen-reaction-video-in-italian/ On 7/18/13, Giovanni Santostasi <[email protected]> wrote: > No, neutrino was proposed to explain missing momentum in nuclear reactions. > Alto it has a role in balancing nuclear reactions by balancing lepton > charge. > The solar neutrino problem came later and it was not invented to solve a > problem but it actually seemed to indicate a conflict between understood > nuclear reactions that were supposed to happen inside the sun and actual > detected. neutrino at earth. > The problem was solved by observing that the neutrino oscillates between 3 > different types. > Giovanni > > > > On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 10:41 AM, Jones Beene <[email protected]> wrote: > >> There are half a dozen new papers out this summer on various physical >> aspects of the neutrino - the elusive "ghost particle" of physics which >> was >> once an abstraction (lest we forget). The neutrino was invented with no >> evidence in order to "balance the books" of energetic stellar reactions. >> Nowadays, almost everyone (except Don Hotson) agrees that the neutrino >> has >> mass detectable on earth (formerly it was thought to be massless). More >> on >> integrating Hotson's view (and the zero point field) with neutrinos - >> later. >> >> This effective level of neutrino mass has strong implications for dark >> matter, due to the incredible neutrino flux... as well as implications >> for >> anomalous earthly energy. BTW the solar neutrino flux is estimated at a >> minimum of ~ 3.5 billion/cm^2/sec up to 200 billion/cm^2/sec. Even the >> low >> estimate is mind boggling in terms of how much energy is available on the >> capture and conversion of a tiny percentage, and we do know that some >> elements capture a few (very few). >> >> Best I can tell, the consensus for neutrino mass in 2013 is about half >> the >> value which was being floated around in 2010, which was an upper limit or >> .28 eV/c^2. This is complicated by the fact that various neutrinos have >> differing masses but can "flip" - which itself seems to violate CoE. >> >> Anyway, the most interesting factoid about the value of neutrino mass for >> LENR, and especially in the context of the Rossi HotCat are the >> "coincidences". The HotCat is the first devices which seems to work in a >> very robust manner at a peak photon resonance in the infrared range ... >> and >> around a wavelength of slightly over 10 microns. This wavelength just so >> happens ... drum roll ... ta da... >> >> ... to "coincidentally" be in a range where plasmon/polaritons are known >> to >> form, which happens "coincidentally" to be the value of the blackbody >> emission spectrum of planet earth, which happens "coincidentally" to be a >> range of mass-energy corresponding to ... you guessed it ... the solar >> neutrino. All of these details are connected at ~10 microns wavelength, >> hot-but-not-too-hot. >> >> Maybe it is too soon to connect the dots? (quantum dots indeed) >> >> It is worth mentioning the implications of one possibility - that the >> plasmon/polariton operates as an effective "antenna" for capturing a >> small >> fraction of the massive solar neutrino flux- since this would help to >> answer >> the major question of how Rossi can achieve so much thermal gain with >> zero >> gamma radiation. Even if true, this antenna-like function is not enough, >> since any IR emitter should show gain at 10 microns, and we know that is >> not >> the case. >> >> So if it is not thermal gain which is captured by plasmons/polaritons, >> then >> what is it? >> >> More on that later, but if you guessed that polaritons interact with >> neutrinos in something akin to [mass <-> charge] interaction, then go to >> the >> head of the class. That would be where the polariton gets it huge >> electric >> field. >> >> Jones >> >
