Maybe. Maybe not. Though I don't believe them to be fraudulent, you haven't even entertained the idea that DGT may play fast & loose with data they release to the public and company insiders? It's at the very least raised doubts in my mind. I think that's a very faithful attitude of yours to have considering, even if your faith turns out to be well-deserved.
On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 6:51 PM, Axil Axil <[email protected]> wrote: > Considering DGT likely botched a simple demo last July, I'm not as > confident in their technical know-how as I once was. > > DGT had a hard time with the demo because of RF interference with their > test equipment and computers. This is caused by nuclear magnetic resanance > active elements that convert magnetic energy to very intense radio waves. > > > On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 5:57 PM, Foks0904 . <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Axil -- How is a plasmon condensate promoting a heat generating effect >> in NiH systems? What is the quantum-coherent quasi-particle (aka >> soliton) system, connected through a "whispering quantum hall effect" >> between nano-cavities (perhaps being drawn in by nano-whiskers), doing with >> the hydrogen to produce observed excess heat? Fusing it? Fusion/Fission? >> Why/how? Based on your systems engineering background, I can see why you >> were drawn to such a complex and holistic model. >> >> Another thing is, I'm not yet convinced of superconductivity for example >> -- I'd be interested for sure to see someone measure NAE for a >> mini-Meissner effect. That would be more convincing than just >> Miley's measurements that has a number of different explanations beyond >> achieving SC. I think you take SC as a given based on scant evidence. Or >> Tesla-scale magnetic fields that I think you take as a given without proper >> replication or surety of truth. Considering DGT likely botched a simple >> demo last July, I'm not as confident in their technical know-how as I once >> was. >> >> Regards, >> John >> >> >> On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 5:46 PM, Axil Axil <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> at this point, the idea of plasmon-induced BEC makes a number of leaps >>> of faith & assumptions that I don't think are yet born out by experiment. >>> >>> I could help you go through those many experiments one at a time. >>> >>> >>> On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 5:31 PM, Foks0904 . <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Axil, don't misunderstand, I have definitely read reference material >>>> concerning what you're talking about. I find a lot of it interesting and >>>> possibly suggestive of what might be going on in plasmatic NiH systems. I >>>> don't take any current theory as "the truth" -- yours or Ed's. I have >>>> questions about all of them. Like all theories at this point, the idea of >>>> plasmon-induced BEC makes a number of leaps of faith & assumptions that I >>>> don't think are yet born out by experiment. There's hints, as you've >>>> stated, that could be connected, but they don't necessarily have to be. But >>>> again, at least it seems like w/ NiH you're trying to put together some >>>> experimental tests, which I appreciate & like about what you're doing. >>>> Also, I know you trust all the DGT data, but I don't, so we're at an >>>> impasse there. I will be very excited if they are actually doing legitimate >>>> mass spectroscopy work as promised however. >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> John >>>> >>>> >>>> On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 5:23 PM, Axil Axil <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> I will answer the other two, but I also hope that you will attempt to >>>>> understand some Nanoplasmonics. Just read the intro, and concentrate on >>>>> how >>>>> hot spots work. Please....I need more targets. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 5:20 PM, Foks0904 . <[email protected]> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> 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? >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> >
