Axil--

Fission reactors with water cooling generally have a negative temperature  
feedback and are much safer than metal coolant reactors with positive 
temperature feedback.  However,  metal cooled reactors have been designed and 
worked ok.  With good design even a positive temperature feedback  may work.  
In a QM system things happen so fast it would be harder to control than in a 
fission reactor.   The key for control may be to limit the size of the QM 
system that reacts at any time, or increase the response time of the 
initiator--may the on-off pulse of the magnetic field in the case of the Pd and 
Ni systems.

Bob 
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Axil Axil 
  To: vortex-l 
  Sent: Sunday, March 02, 2014 12:04 PM
  Subject: Re: [Vo]:"Christopher H. Cooper"


  What is the course of an open ender positive feedback loop without limit. An 
eventual explosion. Nothing lasts forever in a positive feedback loop. There is 
always a limit to everything.



  On Sun, Mar 2, 2014 at 3:00 PM, David Roberson <[email protected]> wrote:

    Interesting.  But how does the net field become large unless some mechanism 
coordinates the destruction of the balls?  Many random direction vectors yields 
near zero sums.

    Dave







    -----Original Message-----
    From: Axil Axil <[email protected]>
    To: vortex-l <[email protected]>

    Sent: Sun, Mar 2, 2014 2:55 pm
    Subject: Re: [Vo]:"Christopher H. Cooper"


    Yes, there is a load of fun in this sort of speculation. One possibility is 
that micro sized magnetic balls as described by DGT that start small and grow 
to huge power until they explode could produce a varying magnetic field that 
would induce a current through changing magnetic flux.. 



    On Sun, Mar 2, 2014 at 2:46 PM, David Roberson <[email protected]> wrote:

      That brings back fond memories.  He does say e.m.f. which makes me wonder 
how he performed that measurement.  I would anticipate that he must use at 
least two probes to come to that conclusion and his active material hopefully 
does not short out the voltage.

      Another possibility is that he measured a large magnetic field which he 
assumes must be as a result of DC current flowing.  Since DC current or AC for 
that matter requires a loop voltage in order to flow, it makes sense to believe 
that an e.m.f. is present.  Actually, an e.m.f. should be present in that case 
and what Rossi states below about an expert observing it falls into line.

      I find myself wondering if there are other good ways to achieve very high 
strength magnetic fields without currents flowing.  Permanent magnets offer a 
clue.

      I am guessing here and attempting to decode Rossi speak at the same time. 
 That has its hazards! :-)

      Dave







      -----Original Message-----
      From: Axil Axil <[email protected]>
      To: vortex-l <[email protected]>

      Sent: Sun, Mar 2, 2014 2:25 pm
      Subject: Re: [Vo]:"Christopher H. Cooper"


      Andrea Rossi
      > December 30th, 2012 at 3:01 PM
      > http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=771&cpage=4#comment-514345
       
        Dear Bernie Koppenhofer:
        You are touching a very important point: during these very days, and 
also
        during the more recent tests, we are working on this issue. I think we 
will
        be able to produce directly e.m.f. , but much work has to be done.
        Actually, we already produced direct e.m.f. with the reactors at high
        temperature, and we measured it with the very precise measurement
        instrumentation introduced by the third party expert, but we are not 
ready
        for an industrial production, while we are at a high level of
        industrialization for the production of heat and, at this point , also 
of
        high temperature steam, which is the gate to the Carnot Cycle. Thank you
        for your good comment.
        Warm Regards,
        A.R.
       




      On Sun, Mar 2, 2014 at 2:04 PM, Axil Axil <[email protected]> wrote:

        I believe that heat is not the only product of the LENR reaction. It 
may not even the most important sink for LENR power generation. I believe that 
electron production is a major magnification of over unity power generation.
        Rossi indicated that there was an unknown source of current production 
in his reactor and he was looking into how this could happen.
        I know that the PAPP engine produced current out of whole cloth. The 
design of the engine depended on it.  
        Here is my take on where these electrons are coming from. When the 
magnetic field strength gets strong enough, mesons are condensed out of the 
vacuum. The final decay products of mesons are electrons.




        On Sun, Mar 2, 2014 at 1:34 PM, David Roberson <[email protected]> 
wrote:

          I also find it amazing that DGT seems to overlook the implications of 
their discovery.  It reminds me of not seeing the forest through the trees.

          Since Rossi made an earlier claim that he might be able to generate 
electricity directly by some obscure discovery, I suspect that he realized the 
importance of the large magnetic fields residing within his device.  So far he 
has kept this type of information private, carefully leaking out the news of 
some non specific discovery.  Rossi knows when to release findings that might 
assist competitors.

          Dave







          -----Original Message-----
          From: Axil Axil <[email protected]>
          To: vortex-l <[email protected]>
          Sent: Sun, Mar 2, 2014 1:23 pm
          Subject: Re: [Vo]:"Christopher H. Cooper"


          Like you, any one of us can only  do so much of what is required. To 
come up with an all inclusive theory, we must trust the word and the work done 
by others. 


          I must admit that I trust DGT. So far, their experimental observation 
about magnetic field strength has no impact on the theory (HEMI) that they put 
forward. 


          They have no theroritical based interest in misleading us to advance 
their theory base on Dr. Kims work.


          Like us, DGT is simply amazed at the magnetic nature of their 
experimental find but have not connected it to HEMI in any way. This is hard to 
understand.


          On the part of DGT, there is no self interest in tossing an almost 
unbelievable finding into their finding and in fact this finding undercuts HEMI.


          In fact such a finding is a major distraction. They really need to do 
a major rethink of their experimental position on HEMI and BEC as per Dr. Kim.



          On Sun, Mar 2, 2014 at 1:03 PM, Edmund Storms <[email protected]> 
wrote:


            On Mar 2, 2014, at 10:47 AM, Axil Axil wrote:

            > These Nanoplasmonic experiments with uranium can be done 
inexpensively, why can't Ed replicate these experiments?


            Because I have only two hands and no financial support.  If you 
want this replicated, I suggest you hire someone to do this.

            Ed Storms













Reply via email to