Thanks for a bit about your background, I appreciate that. But you still
have two more to go before the toll is paid I'm afraid.


On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 5:14 PM, Axil Axil <[email protected]> wrote:

> Ok, I will pay your price so here is #2
>
> * Do you have a background in science, a self-taught amateur, or somewhere
> in between? I don't think it's fair to be completely anonymous when putting
> forth some sort of grand unified TOE.*
>
> I have a degree in physics, but make a living as a system engineer. I
> specialize in reverse engineering old system's where all info about
> how they work and what they do has been lose to the ravages of time. I
> study such systems  in order to upgrade them to a new and/or higher level
> of technology.
>
> The skill set that I have perfected over many years  is a great help
> in connecting the dots. I believe I can connect the dots with the best of
> them. A systems engineer is a generalist and a good one will
> become competent or expert is any technology that is required to understand
> how a given system works.
>
> As a paranoid, I am afraid of Putin. When Putin finds out that the LENR
> GUT has destroyed his dreams, his friends, and is removing him from power,
> he will be pissed and being unknown to him for as long as possible is
> reassuring to me.
>
> And there are many centers of power like Putin.
>
> Rossi has said that he has  protection. I think that he does but I surly
> don't.
>
> The more people who know how LENR works, the more targets there will be
> during the big reveal. But no one is willing to take that path. I want more
> target so I am not the only one. Any volunteers?
>
>
> On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 4:42 PM, Foks0904 . <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> I know you can explain them away. That's not much of an accomplishment.
>> Are you going to take the time to answer the other three questions I posed
>> to you before we go off on this tangent?
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 4:35 PM, Axil Axil <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> Are you referencing a transition to a BEC state in NiH-LENR, something
>>> which is far from conclusive or self-evident? BEC theories like Kim's or
>>> Takahashi's, even though I find them attractive, still confront a number of
>>> problems as you probably know.
>>>
>>> Great, let us talk about these problems. I don't see problems. I bet I
>>> can explain away these problems. Please give be a shot at that.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 4:27 PM, Foks0904 . <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> OK...you sort of lost me. What are you getting at exactly? It doesn't
>>>> contradict what I wrote in the slightest. Yeah, fermions & bosons play
>>>> different roles in nuclear process, in all processes actually -- so what?
>>>>
>>>> Are you referencing a transition to a BEC state in NiH-LENR, something
>>>> which is far from conclusive or self-evident? BEC theories like Kim's or
>>>> Takahashi's, even though I find them attractive, still confront a number of
>>>> problems as you probably know.
>>>>
>>>> One can just as easily picture a more general process (as I
>>>> just highlighted in two different hot fusion systems), absent of different
>>>> phase transitions, occurring across different LENR systems. Based on the
>>>> evidence so far, I think at best it could be argued that there a draw
>>>> exists between the two points of view.
>>>>
>>>> I appreciate you clearing up any confusions. Take care.
>>>>
>>>> John
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 4:14 PM, Jones Beene <[email protected]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>   *From:* Foks0904 .
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> …But in many cases, under the umbrella of a general process, such as
>>>>> traditional nuclear reactions, despite the difference, the different
>>>>> isotopes all tend to follow the same general script in terms of how a
>>>>> reaction path progresses and generates effects.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Not so! Bosons are very different from Fermions – profoundly different
>>>>> when it comes to nuclear interaction.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Enough said?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>

Reply via email to