http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/MileyGHcondensedm.pdf
There are others but I hope this one will do for you. On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 12:56 AM, Foks0904 . <[email protected]> wrote: > 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). >> >> >> > >
