You're the one falling for your own bs. You can look at a volcano and call it an impact crater. And it's not only this set of data that points to an under-surface phenomenon. Hagelstein in his recent IAP lectures said that there is not evidence to support the contention that it's a surface phenomenon. You're the one who's lagging in understanding on this issue, no matter how often "I instruct you".
On Sat, May 10, 2014 at 8:19 AM, Axil Axil <[email protected]> wrote: > I remember this picture of the volcano. It was found and misrepresented in > the Brillouin energy theory document > > > > http://www.academia.edu/4206209/Brillouin_Energy_Corp._THE_QUANTUM_REACTION_HYPOTHESIS > > > > > > This photo is based on a piece of core from one of Roger Stringham’s > sono-fusion devices. > > > > You are failing for this propaganda that Brillouin energy is using to > support their theory. This is BS. > > > > The crater was created by a cavitation bubble which projects a plasma jet > that penetrates the surface of the metal to excavate a pit into the metal > as seen in the picture you reference.. > > > > Yes, the mechanism of cavitation is different from SPP in Ni/H because the > SPP is produced on the walls of the collapsing cavitation bubble exterior > to the metal and projected onto the nearest surface of metal that is > adjacent to the bubble. > > > > As often as I instruct your, you never learn. This stubbornness is a > problem that will keep you from true understanding. > > > On Sat, May 10, 2014 at 6:05 AM, Kevin O'Malley <[email protected]>wrote: > >> Right here, Axil: >> >> https://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg91559.html >> >> >> On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 9:05 PM, Axil Axil <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> LENR always occurs on the surface of the metal. show me experimental >>> results that contradict this fact. >>> >>> >>> On Thu, May 8, 2014 at 8:54 PM, Jed Rothwell <[email protected]>wrote: >>> >>>> Daniel Rocha <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> That's for deuterium! No one knows what happens with H! >>>>> >>>> >>>> Well, I suppose it produces some other gas, probably deuterium. But the >>>> point I was trying to make is that only half of the helium emerges. The >>>> rest is trapped. So there is no process going on that quickly and >>>> forcefully empties out the lattice and replaces all the gas in it. I do not >>>> think it is likely that the deuterium is be forced out and replaced, but >>>> the helium remains trapped. >>>> >>>> - Jed >>>> >>> >>> >> >
