Here is the one I remember http://www.phys.unsw.edu.au/STAFF/VISITING_FELLOWS&PROFESSORS/pdf/MileyClusterRydbLPBsing.pdf
On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 2:35 AM, Axil Axil <[email protected]> wrote: > 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). >>> >>> >>> >> >> >
