Axil -- Can you link the paper(s) where Miley measured zero-resistance in NAE? I've always been curious where the origin of synthesizing LENR w/ superconductivity originated. Was his work the original? Thanks.
On Sun, Jul 20, 2014 at 11:46 PM, Kevin O'Malley <[email protected]> wrote: > My responses embedded by 3 asterisks***. > > > On Sun, Jul 20, 2014 at 8:27 PM, Foks0904 . <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Kevin -- I'm not a scientist, its not my theory, take your objections >> directly to Ed >> > ***My responses are to YOU. If you say something about his theory, I'm > responding to YOU. Do YOU know what you're talking about? > > >> (you have his email it would appear) if you're serious about finding out >> the nitty-gritty specifics. I don't think he's doing the same thing at all. >> Nothing about thermodynamics is being violated in Ed's theory. >> > ***Other than the fact that he submits that thermodynamics don't apply to > his very special cracks... I might agree. > >> >> But quickly, based on my understanding -- if nuclear level heat events >> were going to take place within a chemical lattice, where a chemically >> bonded environment is pervasive, any energy concentration rivaling a >> nuclear level phenomenon is going to cause all kinds of chemical changes to >> the environment well before a long-series of nuclear-level reactions could >> take place. >> > ***Uh huh, yeay, yum, goodie. But where does Ed Storms say such a thing? > He doesn't. > >> >> Because we know LENR is inexorably tied to "solid materials", >> > ***That there is a BIG FRIGGIN CLUE. Yup. Uh huh. > > > > > >> there are only two places for it to be taking place. The bulk, or a >> nano-gap environment. >> > ***Or on the surface. Swartz says it ain't on the surface. It is my > impression that others do say so as well, in particular when P& F melted a > device by increasing the bulk by a great amount but not necessarily the > surface by much amount. And others.... > > > > >> The NGE can allow for higher concentrations of energy, >> > ***I think you mean the NAE here. > > > >> deuterium/hydrogen, and long-periods of reactions (because the overall >> lattice retains its overall chemical structure sufficiently to maintain the >> NAE), >> > ***Gee, that sounds a lot like my BEC analogy of a house blowing up by > dynamite. The house is the BAE, the dynamite is the nuclear event, and > the victim is either protected or not protected by the remnants of the > house. Perhaps you'd care to comment? > > > > > >> because while to some degree the nuclear reactions cause transformations >> to their surroundings, it is only altering the lattice locally on the >> surface for the most part. >> > ***You might make light of a nuclear event but I don't. Nuke > transformations are a BIG DEAL. In my theory, they represent vectors that > exit outside of a chain of connected atoms (much as Storms says). > > >
