Re: [Vo]:Steven Jones: Excess heat is real, but probably not nuclear

[ken deboer]

Interesting stuff (even to a completely ignorant one like me).  Have y'all
heard of  the work at Rice Univ. by Halas et al vaporizing (cold) water
directly in a couple seconds by various nanoparticles. In ACS Nano.

On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 3:43 PM, MarkI-ZeroPoint wrote:

> I just remembered something that ties in with the 430Khz… and anomalous
> effects with water and piezos.
>
> ** **
>
> When I was involved with the International Tesla Society back in the 80s,
> we would meet once a month to discuss fringe topics, and a few of the group
> were hacking together some experiments… nothing earth shattering ever came
> of their work that I know of.
>
> ** **
>
> One of the regulars was a very introverted guy, physics degree, who was
> quite intelligent; worked in the semiconductor industry.  He told us about
> something he’d heard of a way to ‘aetherize’ water… went from liquid to
> ‘nothing’ w/o boiling… Had to use a fused quartz cylindrical tube (6”L by
> ~1.5” I.D.), water (pure?), 500+W signal generator hooked up to piezo
> transducer which was glued/epoxied to one open end of the quartz tube.
> Fill tube with water, but had to calc the wavelength of the sound wave and
> keep the water level at least at a multiple of the wavelength… what was the
> frequency  ~*41Khz to 43Khz*!  Just a coincidence, I’m sure…
>
> ** **
>
> Could it be done at any frequency so long as the height of the water
> column was a multiple of the wavelength of the sound waves generated by the
> piezo transducer?  Don’t think so… but we never got as far as trying it.  I
> moved out of the area and shortly thereafter the Tesla Society went
> belly-up.  Never heard anything more about it…
>
> ** **
>
> Oh, the story was that it wasn’t a good idea to put your hand over the
> quartz tube when operating…. When the water ‘aetherized’, it pretty much
> instantly disappeared from the quartz tube, apparently as an
> ‘aether-bullet’, and put a hole thru whatever was in the ‘line of fire’
> (e.g., the ceiling and roof)…  yeah, that’s what I thought too, but the
> vids that Jones posted about Davey and WITTS, makes me wonder if that
> spherical stainless steel contraption is somewhat related… just slightly
> out-of-tune so as not to aetherize the water.
>
> ** **
>
> It’s all about resonance…
>
> ** **
>
> -Mark Iverson
>
> ** **
>
> *From:* Jones Beene [mailto:jone...@pacbell.net]
> *Sent:* Wednesday, November 21, 2012 2:10 PM
> *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com
> *Subject:* RE: [Vo]:Steven Jones: Excess heat is real, but probably not
> nuclear
>
> ** **
>
> Curiously, 430 kHz is also in the range which is considered to be
> ultrasound…
>
> ** **
>
> That frequency turns up as a signature of one form of LENR, according to
> recent revelations - and it would be a mistake to over-generalize from that
> alone; but … there are a number of principles of reciprocity which turn up
> in electromagnetism, so it is not at stretch to imagine that this frequency
> would be of interest when used as input. 
>
> ** **
>
> *From:* David Roberson 
>
> ** **
>
> Thinking of acousticsIf the hemispheres are very accurately machined
> then any ultrasonic excitement of the surface that is symmetrical will form
> waves that collide at the center of the device.  
>
> ** **
>

RE: [Vo]:Steven Jones: Excess heat is real, but probably not nuclear

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

I just remembered something that ties in with the 430Khz. and anomalous
effects with water and piezos.

 

When I was involved with the International Tesla Society back in the 80s, we
would meet once a month to discuss fringe topics, and a few of the group
were hacking together some experiments. nothing earth shattering ever came
of their work that I know of.

 

One of the regulars was a very introverted guy, physics degree, who was
quite intelligent; worked in the semiconductor industry.  He told us about
something he'd heard of a way to 'aetherize' water. went from liquid to
'nothing' w/o boiling. Had to use a fused quartz cylindrical tube (6"L by
~1.5" I.D.), water (pure?), 500+W signal generator hooked up to piezo
transducer which was glued/epoxied to one open end of the quartz tube.  Fill
tube with water, but had to calc the wavelength of the sound wave and keep
the water level at least at a multiple of the wavelength. what was the
frequency  ~41Khz to 43Khz!  Just a coincidence, I'm sure.

 

Could it be done at any frequency so long as the height of the water column
was a multiple of the wavelength of the sound waves generated by the piezo
transducer?  Don't think so. but we never got as far as trying it.  I moved
out of the area and shortly thereafter the Tesla Society went belly-up.
Never heard anything more about it.

 

Oh, the story was that it wasn't a good idea to put your hand over the
quartz tube when operating.. When the water 'aetherized', it pretty much
instantly disappeared from the quartz tube, apparently as an
'aether-bullet', and put a hole thru whatever was in the 'line of fire'
(e.g., the ceiling and roof).  yeah, that's what I thought too, but the vids
that Jones posted about Davey and WITTS, makes me wonder if that spherical
stainless steel contraption is somewhat related. just slightly out-of-tune
so as not to aetherize the water.

 

It's all about resonance.

 

-Mark Iverson

 

From: Jones Beene [mailto:jone...@pacbell.net] 
Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2012 2:10 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Steven Jones: Excess heat is real, but probably not
nuclear

 

Curiously, 430 kHz is also in the range which is considered to be
ultrasound.

 

That frequency turns up as a signature of one form of LENR, according to
recent revelations - and it would be a mistake to over-generalize from that
alone; but . there are a number of principles of reciprocity which turn up
in electromagnetism, so it is not at stretch to imagine that this frequency
would be of interest when used as input. 

 

From: David Roberson 

 

Thinking of acousticsIf the hemispheres are very accurately machined
then any ultrasonic excitement of the surface that is symmetrical will form
waves that collide at the center of the device.  

 

Re: [Vo]:Steven Jones: Excess heat is real, but probably not nuclear

[Terry Blanton]

On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 5:09 PM, Jones Beene  wrote:
> Curiously, 430 kHz is also in the range which is considered to be
> ultrasound…

10 times Stanley Meyer's dissociation frequency, too.

RE: [Vo]:Steven Jones: Excess heat is real, but probably not nuclear

[Jones Beene]

Curiously, 430 kHz is also in the range which is considered to be
ultrasound.

 

That frequency turns up as a signature of one form of LENR, according to
recent revelations - and it would be a mistake to over-generalize from that
alone; but . there are a number of principles of reciprocity which turn up
in electromagnetism, so it is not at stretch to imagine that this frequency
would be of interest when used as input. 

 

From: David Roberson 

 

Thinking of acousticsIf the hemispheres are very accurately machined
then any ultrasonic excitement of the surface that is symmetrical will form
waves that collide at the center of the device.  

 

Re: [Vo]:Steven Jones: Excess heat is real, but probably not nuclear

[mixent]

In reply to  David Roberson's message of Wed, 21 Nov 2012 01:07:06 -0500 (EST):
Hi,
[snip]
>Thinking of acousticsIf the hemispheres are very accurately machined then 
>any ultrasonic excitement of the surface that is symmetrical will form waves 
>that collide at the center of the device.  Very large pressure will be 
>generated similar to the collapse of a bubble.  I know of a fingerprint 
>reading technique that uses a partial half sphere emitter of ultrasonic 
>energy.  This allows reading of the finger shape very accurately even through 
>rubber gloves since the energy is focused to a tiny point.

This is not a bad idea. The speed of sound in water is about 1500 m/s. A 5 mm
separation distance would imply a wavelength of 5 mm, which in turn implies a
frequency of about 350 kHz, which is certainly in the ballpark.

>
>
>Maybe the extreme pressure can lead to a form of LENR that generates excess 
>heating in water.
>
>
>I wonder whether the effect is due to ultrasonic or RF activation.  A 
>'resonator' could apply to both and the frequencies used for ultrasonic 
>generation are within the RF range.
>
>
>I also would assume that the structure has an RF resonance, but it would 
>definitely posses an ultrasonic one.  If the Q of the ultrasonic resonator is 
>high, then standing waves would form within the structure.  A moderate amount 
>of drive energy could result in a far larger amount of stored energy in this 
>configuration.  Perhaps this type of system would behave as a cavitation 
>generator on steroids. 

Especially if the RF resonant frequency matched the ultrasonic one? (Tunable
with a variable inductance coil in the RF circuit.)


Years ago I suggested that sono-fusion might be mediated by Hydrinos created in
the plasma at the heart of the bubble by the action of O++ as a Mills catalyst.
Mills has recently suggested (CIHT) that "nascent" H2O could also function as a
catalyst. (Single water molecules catalyze, where molecules bound by Hydrogen
bonds in a liquid water don't.) The high temperatures found in the bubbles would
be more than sufficient to vaporize some of the liquid water, creating
individual molecules, and also some free H atoms for them to catalyze.

Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html

Re: [Vo]:Steven Jones: Excess heat is real, but probably not nuclear

[David Roberson]

Thinking of acousticsIf the hemispheres are very accurately machined then 
any ultrasonic excitement of the surface that is symmetrical will form waves 
that collide at the center of the device.  Very large pressure will be 
generated similar to the collapse of a bubble.  I know of a fingerprint reading 
technique that uses a partial half sphere emitter of ultrasonic energy.  This 
allows reading of the finger shape very accurately even through rubber gloves 
since the energy is focused to a tiny point.


Maybe the extreme pressure can lead to a form of LENR that generates excess 
heating in water.


I wonder whether the effect is due to ultrasonic or RF activation.  A 
'resonator' could apply to both and the frequencies used for ultrasonic 
generation are within the RF range.


I also would assume that the structure has an RF resonance, but it would 
definitely posses an ultrasonic one.  If the Q of the ultrasonic resonator is 
high, then standing waves would form within the structure.  A moderate amount 
of drive energy could result in a far larger amount of stored energy in this 
configuration.  Perhaps this type of system would behave as a cavitation 
generator on steroids. 



Dave



-Original Message-
From: mixent 
To: vortex-l 
Sent: Tue, Nov 20, 2012 4:53 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Steven Jones: Excess heat is real, but probably not nuclear


In reply to  David Roberson's message of Tue, 20 Nov 2012 12:59:07 -0500 (EST):
Hi,
[snip]
>Does this device operate with standard tap water that has impurities?  The 
mention of an RF resonator in the video has interesting implications if this 
device actually works.  The spherical shape of the unit suggests that it would 
have resonances at radio frequencies within and some might be closely coupled 
to 
the water molecules or atoms to which they are composed.  The heating energy 
must arise from some mechanism since the device appears to warm up at a rate 
that far exceeds the possible output power of the 9 volt battery.

Two (hemi)spherical electrodes with water in between would form a crude
electrolytic capacitor which, in combination with attached wiring, would form a
tank circuit. The resonant frequency of such a tank circuit would likely lie in
the RF frequency band. Thus any anomalous energy that fed into the tank circuit
could produce RF emissions from the wiring.

Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html


 

Re: [Vo]:Steven Jones: Excess heat is real, but probably not nuclear

[Eric Walker]

On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 10:36 AM, Jones Beene  wrote:

 The biggest problem with Thrapp/Davey is that here we are 4 years later
> and there is no commercial unit, BUT this situation is little different to
> Rossi’s delay - since AR claimed to be in full production over a year ago.
>

One of the pleasures of following this list is the zoo of strange and
curious overunity devices that one learns about, some of which look
promising and all of which look dubious.  I am reminded of Roz Chast:

http://imgc.allpostersimages.com/images/P-473-488-90/61/6147/AX2G100Z/posters/roz-chast-little-things-new-yorker-cartoon.jpg

Eric

Re: [Vo]:Steven Jones: Excess heat is real, but probably not nuclear

[mixent]

In reply to  David Roberson's message of Tue, 20 Nov 2012 12:59:07 -0500 (EST):
Hi,
[snip]
>Does this device operate with standard tap water that has impurities?  The 
>mention of an RF resonator in the video has interesting implications if this 
>device actually works.  The spherical shape of the unit suggests that it would 
>have resonances at radio frequencies within and some might be closely coupled 
>to the water molecules or atoms to which they are composed.  The heating 
>energy must arise from some mechanism since the device appears to warm up at a 
>rate that far exceeds the possible output power of the 9 volt battery.

Two (hemi)spherical electrodes with water in between would form a crude
electrolytic capacitor which, in combination with attached wiring, would form a
tank circuit. The resonant frequency of such a tank circuit would likely lie in
the RF frequency band. Thus any anomalous energy that fed into the tank circuit
could produce RF emissions from the wiring.

Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html

RE: [Vo]:Steven Jones: Excess heat is real, but probably not nuclear

[Jones Beene]

One explanation for the gain involves wave polarization leading to 
multiplication of sonic energy. This would be similar to the “singing bowl” 
phenomenon. S and P Polarization is probably natural to nested hemispheres when 
the gap is ideal. Thus one can rationalize using basically what is in this 
abstract: 

 

http://iopscience.iop.org/1063-7818/40/6/A06

 

“It is shown that when an s-polarized wave is mixed with a [planar] wave of the 
same frequency, which is incident along the normal to the metal surface, three 
frequency-doubled waves are generated.”

 

OK the naïve implication would be that 50 Hz grid current can somehow project 
itself into medium as 3 x 100 Hz harmonics – which ostensibly would be gainful.

 

LOL. If only overunity were so simple.

 

The coordinate system relates to the plane and a vector perpendicular to the 
plane - a reflecting surface. The component of the electric field parallel to 
this plane is termed p (parallel) and the component perpendicular to this plane 
is termed s (senkrecht German for perpendicular). Then we throw in a dose of 
Dicke superradiance, some pixie dust and voila – OU  :-)

 

 

 

From: David Roberson 

 

Very strange behavior indeed.  The thing that amazes me is the rapidity with 
which the heat seems to be generated.  It appears as though many thousands of 
watts of power would be required to boil water this fast.  We could be a bit 
confused by the bubbles since they might just be cavitation due to ultrasonic 
drive, but they also might be true boiling.  Has anyone had a close look at any 
of these types of experiments to uncover deception? 

 

Dave

-Original Message-
From: Jones Beene 

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LTV85J2QHj0 
 &feature=plcp

 

contrast this one with the Thrapp video as it is a bit more believable – there 
are differences and similarities – however, can there be any doubt that 
geometry and resonance are involved as much, or more so than Ohmic heating or 
direct water-splitting? 

 

 

Dave,

 

You are exactly right – the video is suspicious, and that suspicion is not 
mitigated by the inventor’s demeanor, nor the fact that he is supposedly a 
Christian minister. But I prefer this Thrapp scenario - to the Rossi’s 
credentials anytime. 

 

The biggest problem with Thrapp/Davey is that here we are 4 years later and 
there is no commercial unit, BUT this situation is little different to Rossi’s 
delay - since AR claimed to be in full production over a year ago.

 

I would not even have mentioned Thrapp - had not the Davey device, with its 
undeniable similarity, been investigated by Steven Jones with what appear to be 
positive results.

 

It there is anything to the claim of excess heat, SJ will probably find it. 

 

 

From: David Roberson 

 

Does this device operate with standard tap water that has impurities?  The 
mention of an RF resonator in the video has interesting implications if this 
device actually works.  The spherical shape of the unit suggests that it would 
have resonances at radio frequencies within and some might be closely coupled 
to the water molecules or atoms to which they are composed.  The heating energy 
must arise from some mechanism since the device appears to warm up at a rate 
that far exceeds the possible output power of the 9 volt battery. 

 

My opinion is that there is some kind of trick being displayed here although 
there is no proof.  Perhaps the 'water' is not really water but some mixture 
that self heats when triggered by the battery input.  The invention needs to be 
tested with fresh water applied and controlled by the experimenter without 
interference of the inventor.  This test should be run several times in a row 
to ensure that the metal enclosure does not contribute to the heating as well.  
I would further carefully measure the time required to heat the fresh tap water 
during each warm up period to ensure that this is the same while using fresh 
batteries for each run.

 

One can never be positive that a demonstration such as this is not a magic 
trick since there are many ways to confuse people.  I guess that Rossi has 
determined that the only way to prove his ECAT to the world is to sell them and 
he might be correct is that assumption.  This device might be another case 
where that concept is valid.

 

Dave

-Original Message-
From: Jones Beene 

Actually, I think that this is one of the better slide presentations out
there this year - in the entire field - despite a few controversial
statements and being in need of massive editing. Hats off to Steven Jones to
support the Davey device, even though that inventor was nutty - and the
prior claims were heavy on anecdote. Both the Davey and Timothy Thrapp
spherical hot water heaters have been demonstrated to be way overunity, and
operate on what could be a similar principal, and also are the product of
inventors who are their own worst 

Re: [Vo]:Steven Jones: Excess heat is real, but probably not nuclear

[David Roberson]

Very strange behavior indeed.  The thing that amazes me is the rapidity with 
which the heat seems to be generated.  It appears as though many thousands of 
watts of power would be required to boil water this fast.  We could be a bit 
confused by the bubbles since they might just be cavitation due to ultrasonic 
drive, but they also might be true boiling.  Has anyone had a close look at any 
of these types of experiments to uncover deception?


Dave



-Original Message-
From: Jones Beene 
To: vortex-l 
Sent: Tue, Nov 20, 2012 1:51 pm
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Steven Jones: Excess heat is real, but probably not nuclear



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LTV85J2QHj0&feature=plcp
 
contrast this one with theThrapp video as it is a bit more believable – there 
are differences andsimilarities – however, can there be any doubt that geometry 
andresonance are involved as much, or more so than Ohmic heating or 
directwater-splitting? 
 
 
Dave,
 
You are exactly right – the video is suspicious, and thatsuspicion is not 
mitigated by the inventor’s demeanor, nor the fact thathe is supposedly a 
Christian minister. But I prefer this Thrapp scenario - tothe Rossi’s 
credentials anytime. 
 
The biggest problem with Thrapp/Davey is that here we are 4 yearslater and 
there is no commercial unit, BUT this situation is little differentto Rossi’s 
delay - since AR claimed to be in full production over a yearago.
 
I would not even have mentioned Thrapp - had not the Davey device,with its 
undeniable similarity, been investigated by Steven Jones with whatappear to be 
positive results.
 
It there is anything to the claim of excess heat, SJ will probablyfind it. 
 
 

From:David Roberson 

 
Does this device operate with standard tap water that hasimpurities?  The 
mention of an RF resonator in the video has interestingimplications if this 
device actually works.  The spherical shape of theunit suggests that it would 
have resonances at radio frequencies within andsome might be closely coupled to 
the water molecules or atoms to which they arecomposed.  The heating energy 
must arise from some mechanism since thedevice appears to warm up at a rate 
that far exceeds the possible output powerof the 9 volt battery. 

 

My opinion is that there is some kind of trick being displayedhere although 
there is no proof.  Perhaps the 'water' is not really waterbut some mixture 
that self heats when triggered by the battery input.  Theinvention needs to be 
tested with fresh water applied and controlled by theexperimenter without 
interference of the inventor.  This test should berun several times in a row to 
ensure that the metal enclosure does notcontribute to the heating as well.  I 
would further carefully measure thetime required to heat the fresh tap water 
during each warm up period to ensurethat this is the same while using fresh 
batteries for each run.

 

One can never be positive that a demonstration such as this is nota magic trick 
since there are many ways to confuse people.  I guess thatRossi has determined 
that the only way to prove his ECAT to the world is tosell them and he might be 
correct is that assumption.  This device mightbe another case where that 
concept is valid.

 

Dave

-OriginalMessage-
From: Jones Beene 

Actually, I think that this is one of the better slide presentations out
there this year - in the entire field - despite a few controversial
statements and being in need of massive editing. Hats off to Steven Jones to
support the Davey device, even though that inventor was nutty - and the
prior claims were heavy on anecdote. Both the Davey and Timothy Thrapp
spherical hot water heaters have been demonstrated to be way overunity, and
operate on what could be a similar principal, and also are the product of
inventors who are their own worst enemies. Both tried to hide the role of
nickel alloys, but there is also a geometry factor is the sphere or
hemisphere, along with recombination (chemical asymmetry). Here is a Thrapp
video, and you can probably see note that this inventor suffers from the
same Messiah complex as Joseph Newman.
 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=06iCfowinUM
 
 


 

Re: [Vo]:Steven Jones: Excess heat is real, but probably not nuclear

[Peter Gluck]

Steven E. Jones was very active in emitting conspiracy theories re 9/11. I
have forgot the details but they are on the Web.
Peter

On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 9:57 PM, Jed Rothwell  wrote:

> Jones can tell a bigger, bolder lie than anyone else I know. His chutzpah
> is unbounded. He does not even bother to make the lie believable  He has
> such contempt for you, the audience, that he does not bother to make the
> lie seem credible. He reminds me of Soviet Era judges who would send people
> to Siberia for the crime of destroying a bridge -- a bridge which stands
> outside the courtroom, undamaged, in plain view through the window. Their
> real message was: "I can say or do anything I like, no matter how absurd,
> and you are powerless to stop me. You can't even object."
>
> Here is one example of what Jones does; just one example of many --
>
> Year after year, in lectures, papers and conversation he asserted that all
> cold fusion excess heat results are artifacts of recombination. He said
> that even when when McKubre and Storms used closed cells with recombiners;
> even when the total output far exceeded I*V input; and even (I recall) of
> heat after death. He was challenged again and again to explain that, in
> person and in e-mail. He never responded.
>
> This was not a smooth lie. It was not the least bit convincing to anyone
> who understands what "recombination" means. He wasn't being serious,
> because he does understand elementary science, after all. He said this only
> to flummox rubes and reporters.
>
> He and others also conducted absurd "experiments" to prove there might be
> recombination in Miles' experiments. He reduced input power by a factor of
> a thousand and used a cell of the wrong shape. Miles commented that Jones
> might as well throw some platinum powder into the electrolyte while he is
> at it.
>
> This paper has several other brazen lies:
>
> http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/JonesSEchasingano.pdf
>
> Jones should have been a politician.
>
> I would not trust him as far as I can throw him.
>
> - Jed
>
>


-- 
Dr. Peter Gluck
Cluj, Romania
http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com

Re: [Vo]:Steven Jones: Excess heat is real, but probably not nuclear

[Jed Rothwell]

Jones can tell a bigger, bolder lie than anyone else I know. His chutzpah
is unbounded. He does not even bother to make the lie believable  He has
such contempt for you, the audience, that he does not bother to make the
lie seem credible. He reminds me of Soviet Era judges who would send people
to Siberia for the crime of destroying a bridge -- a bridge which stands
outside the courtroom, undamaged, in plain view through the window. Their
real message was: "I can say or do anything I like, no matter how absurd,
and you are powerless to stop me. You can't even object."

Here is one example of what Jones does; just one example of many --

Year after year, in lectures, papers and conversation he asserted that all
cold fusion excess heat results are artifacts of recombination. He said
that even when when McKubre and Storms used closed cells with recombiners;
even when the total output far exceeded I*V input; and even (I recall) of
heat after death. He was challenged again and again to explain that, in
person and in e-mail. He never responded.

This was not a smooth lie. It was not the least bit convincing to anyone
who understands what "recombination" means. He wasn't being serious,
because he does understand elementary science, after all. He said this only
to flummox rubes and reporters.

He and others also conducted absurd "experiments" to prove there might be
recombination in Miles' experiments. He reduced input power by a factor of
a thousand and used a cell of the wrong shape. Miles commented that Jones
might as well throw some platinum powder into the electrolyte while he is
at it.

This paper has several other brazen lies:

http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/JonesSEchasingano.pdf

Jones should have been a politician.

I would not trust him as far as I can throw him.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Steven Jones: Excess heat is real, but probably not nuclear

[Axil Axil]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0DtvKnZk9iM

Video by Steven Jones 

http://www.youtube.com/user/TheProfJones

List of all videos

Cheers:   Axil
On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 11:39 PM,  wrote:

> Courtesy of pesn.com -
>
> Steven Jones replica: Pons & Fleischmann XS Heat not from fusion
>
> Jones is experimenting with a bell electrode setup that strongly evidences
> excess (xs) energy and has similarities to the cell presented by Pons and
> Fleischmann. He says that there are at least two distinct phenomena in
> these experiments and that "fusion" is not what most of these "CF" or
> "LENR" types of arrangements exhibit
>
>
> http://pesn.com/2012/11/19/9602225_Steven_Jones_replica--Pons_and_Fleischmann_XS_Heat_not_from_fusion/
>
>
>
>

RE: [Vo]:Steven Jones: Excess heat is real, but probably not nuclear

[Jones Beene]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LTV85J2QHj0
 &feature=plcp

 

contrast this one with the Thrapp video as it is a bit more believable -
there are differences and similarities - however, can there be any doubt
that geometry and resonance are involved as much, or more so than Ohmic
heating or direct water-splitting? 

 

 

Dave,

 

You are exactly right - the video is suspicious, and that suspicion is not
mitigated by the inventor's demeanor, nor the fact that he is supposedly a
Christian minister. But I prefer this Thrapp scenario - to the Rossi's
credentials anytime. 

 

The biggest problem with Thrapp/Davey is that here we are 4 years later and
there is no commercial unit, BUT this situation is little different to
Rossi's delay - since AR claimed to be in full production over a year ago.

 

I would not even have mentioned Thrapp - had not the Davey device, with its
undeniable similarity, been investigated by Steven Jones with what appear to
be positive results.

 

It there is anything to the claim of excess heat, SJ will probably find it. 

 

 

From: David Roberson 

 

Does this device operate with standard tap water that has impurities?  The
mention of an RF resonator in the video has interesting implications if this
device actually works.  The spherical shape of the unit suggests that it
would have resonances at radio frequencies within and some might be closely
coupled to the water molecules or atoms to which they are composed.  The
heating energy must arise from some mechanism since the device appears to
warm up at a rate that far exceeds the possible output power of the 9 volt
battery. 

 

My opinion is that there is some kind of trick being displayed here although
there is no proof.  Perhaps the 'water' is not really water but some mixture
that self heats when triggered by the battery input.  The invention needs to
be tested with fresh water applied and controlled by the experimenter
without interference of the inventor.  This test should be run several times
in a row to ensure that the metal enclosure does not contribute to the
heating as well.  I would further carefully measure the time required to
heat the fresh tap water during each warm up period to ensure that this is
the same while using fresh batteries for each run.

 

One can never be positive that a demonstration such as this is not a magic
trick since there are many ways to confuse people.  I guess that Rossi has
determined that the only way to prove his ECAT to the world is to sell them
and he might be correct is that assumption.  This device might be another
case where that concept is valid.

 

Dave

-Original Message-
From: Jones Beene 

Actually, I think that this is one of the better slide presentations out
there this year - in the entire field - despite a few controversial
statements and being in need of massive editing. Hats off to Steven Jones to
support the Davey device, even though that inventor was nutty - and the
prior claims were heavy on anecdote. Both the Davey and Timothy Thrapp
spherical hot water heaters have been demonstrated to be way overunity, and
operate on what could be a similar principal, and also are the product of
inventors who are their own worst enemies. Both tried to hide the role of
nickel alloys, but there is also a geometry factor is the sphere or
hemisphere, along with recombination (chemical asymmetry). Here is a Thrapp
video, and you can probably see note that this inventor suffers from the
same Messiah complex as Joseph Newman.
 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=06iCfowinUM
 
 

RE: [Vo]:Steven Jones: Excess heat is real, but probably not nuclear

[Jones Beene]

Dave,

 

You are exactly right - the video is suspicious, and that suspicion is not
mitigated by the inventor's demeanor, nor the fact that he is supposedly a
Christian minister. But I prefer this Thrapp scenario - to the Rossi's
credentials anytime. 

 

The biggest problem with Thrapp/Davey is that here we are 4 years later and
there is no commercial unit, BUT this situation is little different to
Rossi's delay - since AR claimed to be in full production over a year ago.

 

I would not even have mentioned Thrapp - had not the Davey device, with its
undeniable similarity, been investigated by Steven Jones with what appear to
be positive results.

 

It there is anything to the claim of excess heat, SJ will probably find it. 

 

 

From: David Roberson 

 

Does this device operate with standard tap water that has impurities?  The
mention of an RF resonator in the video has interesting implications if this
device actually works.  The spherical shape of the unit suggests that it
would have resonances at radio frequencies within and some might be closely
coupled to the water molecules or atoms to which they are composed.  The
heating energy must arise from some mechanism since the device appears to
warm up at a rate that far exceeds the possible output power of the 9 volt
battery. 

 

My opinion is that there is some kind of trick being displayed here although
there is no proof.  Perhaps the 'water' is not really water but some mixture
that self heats when triggered by the battery input.  The invention needs to
be tested with fresh water applied and controlled by the experimenter
without interference of the inventor.  This test should be run several times
in a row to ensure that the metal enclosure does not contribute to the
heating as well.  I would further carefully measure the time required to
heat the fresh tap water during each warm up period to ensure that this is
the same while using fresh batteries for each run.

 

One can never be positive that a demonstration such as this is not a magic
trick since there are many ways to confuse people.  I guess that Rossi has
determined that the only way to prove his ECAT to the world is to sell them
and he might be correct is that assumption.  This device might be another
case where that concept is valid.

 

Dave



-Original Message-
From: Jones Beene 
To: vortex-l 
Sent: Tue, Nov 20, 2012 12:11 pm
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Steven Jones: Excess heat is real, but probably not
nuclear

Actually, I think that this is one of the better slide presentations out
there this year - in the entire field - despite a few controversial
statements and being in need of massive editing. Hats off to Steven Jones to
support the Davey device, even though that inventor was nutty - and the
prior claims were heavy on anecdote. Both the Davey and Timothy Thrapp
spherical hot water heaters have been demonstrated to be way overunity, and
operate on what could be a similar principal, and also are the product of
inventors who are their own worst enemies. Both tried to hide the role of
nickel alloys, but there is also a geometry factor is the sphere or
hemisphere, along with recombination (chemical asymmetry). Here is a Thrapp
video, and you can probably see note that this inventor suffers from the
same Messiah complex as Joseph Newman.
 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=06iCfowinUM
 
This paper could be improved considerably and trimmed down to a couple of
relevant issues but focusing on this device. Steven Jones does not go far
enough in noting that there is more than one completely distinct phenomenon
at work in gainful devices which are lumped as LENR. And there is too much
emphasis early-on in the slides with muons - which appears to be
dead-in-the-water, despite the Star claims (Australia-
http://www.starscientific.com.au/). There is no practical way to make muons
work IMO ... unless of course. a charged sphere collects them :) 
 
In fact, there are at least 5 pathways to gain, some nuclear some not - or
more if one includes muons as separate from other catalysis. In the end, it
is all about repeatability, and that is THE major problem, even for Celani.
The proof for the Davey device is actually stronger than most of LENR, and
should not be overlooked because of the eccentricities of an inventor. But
it still lacks repeatability, with a number of failed attempts. We can only
hope that SJ, who is a thorough and careful experimenter, can dig deeper on
this simple device, since it is simple 'like electrolysis', but much more
robust (for some important but unknown reason.)
 
Of special interest is slide 17 et al. (NRL from ICCF 17) where he shows the
spectacular episodes of 40x gain with alloy electrodes and tell-tale RF
emission. It should be noted that Miles found nothing with Rhenium alone
(Miles-Co-Deposition-of-Palladium-Paper-ICCF17). 
 
In fact, it seems to me now - in retrospect - that there was a strong
sub-theme at ICCF-17 on Rheniu

RE: [Vo]:Steven Jones: Excess heat is real, but probably not nuclear

[Jones Beene]

In fact, it seems to me now - in retrospect - that there was a strong
sub-theme at ICCF-17 on Rhenium. Why? Well, it is group 7 and has massive
valence electron flexibility, and is a Mills catalyst - but note that in
contrast to Miles we have the results of an Re alloy with Pd that is
spectacular, and most of all gives us an RF signature. I think the emphasis
on Rhenium in many of these papers is misplaced - and instead manganese
should perform better, as both are group 7 - and Re is rarer than palladium
where as Mn is cheap ... but anyway - these NRL results are important and
beg to be expanded on.



Of course, it should be noted that  almost 2/3 of natural Re is 187Re which
is a radioactive beta emitter with a multi-billion year half-life. 

In a way this also ties into the thread yesterday on a possible connection
to Ed Storms suggestion of a mysterious radiation associated with LENR which
can alter decay rates. This could be similar to what is seen in solar
astronomy.

As noted yesterday - the solar neutrino rate does not vary noticeably due to
massive solar flares. Instead another kind of radiation precedes flares, and
is measureable on earth as accelerated decay rates. That unexplained kind of
radiation could possibly correspond to what Storms describes. 

Curiously the same radiation could also be involved in other anomalies - and
excess heat with rhenium alloys could be one of them.

The mystery radiation itself would not need to be measureable in its own
right - only its effect on the neutrino flux. Thus, the close analogy to the
Aharonov-Bohm effect (if one needs a close analogy, and I think it helps in
this case).

Jones
<>

Re: [Vo]:Steven Jones: Excess heat is real, but probably not nuclear

[David Roberson]

Does this device operate with standard tap water that has impurities?  The 
mention of an RF resonator in the video has interesting implications if this 
device actually works.  The spherical shape of the unit suggests that it would 
have resonances at radio frequencies within and some might be closely coupled 
to the water molecules or atoms to which they are composed.  The heating energy 
must arise from some mechanism since the device appears to warm up at a rate 
that far exceeds the possible output power of the 9 volt battery.


My opinion is that there is some kind of trick being displayed here although 
there is no proof.  Perhaps the 'water' is not really water but some mixture 
that self heats when triggered by the battery input.  The invention needs to be 
tested with fresh water applied and controlled by the experimenter without 
interference of the inventor.  This test should be run several times in a row 
to ensure that the metal enclosure does not contribute to the heating as well.  
I would further carefully measure the time required to heat the fresh tap water 
during each warm up period to ensure that this is the same while using fresh 
batteries for each run.


One can never be positive that a demonstration such as this is not a magic 
trick since there are many ways to confuse people.  I guess that Rossi has 
determined that the only way to prove his ECAT to the world is to sell them and 
he might be correct is that assumption.  This device might be another case 
where that concept is valid.


Dave



-Original Message-
From: Jones Beene 
To: vortex-l 
Sent: Tue, Nov 20, 2012 12:11 pm
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Steven Jones: Excess heat is real, but probably not nuclear


Actually, I think that this is one of the better slide presentations out
there this year - in the entire field - despite a few controversial
statements and being in need of massive editing. Hats off to Steven Jones to
support the Davey device, even though that inventor was nutty - and the
prior claims were heavy on anecdote. Both the Davey and Timothy Thrapp
spherical hot water heaters have been demonstrated to be way overunity, and
operate on what could be a similar principal, and also are the product of
inventors who are their own worst enemies. Both tried to hide the role of
nickel alloys, but there is also a geometry factor is the sphere or
hemisphere, along with recombination (chemical asymmetry). Here is a Thrapp
video, and you can probably see note that this inventor suffers from the
same Messiah complex as Joseph Newman.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=06iCfowinUM

This paper could be improved considerably and trimmed down to a couple of
relevant issues but focusing on this device. Steven Jones does not go far
enough in noting that there is more than one completely distinct phenomenon
at work in gainful devices which are lumped as LENR. And there is too much
emphasis early-on in the slides with muons - which appears to be
dead-in-the-water, despite the Star claims (Australia-
http://www.starscientific.com.au/). There is no practical way to make muons
work IMO ... unless of course. a charged sphere collects them :) 

In fact, there are at least 5 pathways to gain, some nuclear some not - or
more if one includes muons as separate from other catalysis. In the end, it
is all about repeatability, and that is THE major problem, even for Celani.
The proof for the Davey device is actually stronger than most of LENR, and
should not be overlooked because of the eccentricities of an inventor. But
it still lacks repeatability, with a number of failed attempts. We can only
hope that SJ, who is a thorough and careful experimenter, can dig deeper on
this simple device, since it is simple 'like electrolysis', but much more
robust (for some important but unknown reason.)

Of special interest is slide 17 et al. (NRL from ICCF 17) where he shows the
spectacular episodes of 40x gain with alloy electrodes and tell-tale RF
emission. It should be noted that Miles found nothing with Rhenium alone
(Miles-Co-Deposition-of-Palladium-Paper-ICCF17). 

In fact, it seems to me now - in retrospect - that there was a strong
sub-theme at ICCF-17 on Rhenium. Why? Well, it is group 7 and has massive
valence electron flexibility, and is a Mills catalyst - but note that in
contrast to Miles we have the results of an Re alloy with Pd that is
spectacular, and most of all gives us an RF signature. I think the emphasis
on Rhenium in many of these papers is misplaced - and instead manganese
should perform better, as both are group 7 - and Re is rarer than palladium
where as Mn is cheap ... but anyway - these NRL results are important and
beg to be expanded on.

Note to Steven Jones, if you monitor this group - try manganese or Ni-Mn
alloy on one of the hemispheres and use RF as input.


-Original Message-
From: pagnu...@htdconnect.com 

Steven Jones replica: Pons & Fleischmann XS Heat not from fusion

Jones is experimenti

Re: [Vo]:Steven Jones: Excess heat is real, but probably not nuclear

[Abd ul-Rahman Lomax]

Just responding to this because travelling. 

Sent from my iPhone

On Nov 19, 2012, at 9:56 PM, Eric Walker  wrote:

> Here is my exegesis of Sterling Allan's presentation of Steven Jones's recent 
> research:
> 
> 1. There is piezonuclear fusion.  Fleischmann's and Pons's discovery was not 
> this.

Definitely not this. Piezo fusion is hot fusion.

> 2. There is metal-assisted d-d fusion.  Fleischmann's and Pons's discovery 
> was also not this.

That's nuts. Maybe Jones is using some special definition. The article said 
lots that made no sense without other information, and it looks like Jones 
wasn't asked. 

> 3. There is anamalous xs heat, or "Freedom Energy," which is what Fleischmann 
> and Pons investigated.  They did not discover it.  Peter Davey, in the 1940s, 
> also researched it.  People do not know what goes into anomalous xs heat, but 
> to call it "fusion" 

Beating dead horse. P&F claimed two things. Heat and neutrons at a low level. 
If not for the neutron artifact, they wouldn't have said "fusion." It was clear 
from the levels that what they found was an "unknown nuclear reaction," and 
that's what they wrote in the original paper. They made a tentative claim of 
fusion to explain the "neutrons."

However, from what we now know, it's almost certainly *some kind of fusion.* 
And Jones should know this.

But for some strange reason, the power of correlation is neglected.

> 3a. confuses the issue, because people want to see radiation if there is 
> fusion.

Unfortunately, what people expected with fusion was an unnecessary constraint.  
Conservation of momentum is a basic principle, and this generally requires that 
there be two  or more products of any nuclear reaction. However, there exist 
exceptions, at least transiently.

Because it *might* turn out to resemble the reaction, here is a theoretical   
possibility:

molecular fusion through a Bose-Einstein Condensate, 2 D2 -> Be-8*.

Notice: single product. However, no energy has been released yet, it is 
entirely a nuclear excited state. So then, two things happen:

Be-8* -> Be-8 + photons (23.7 MeV) (a series of transitions at relatively low 
energy, this might be Mossbauer recoil- suppressed.)

Be-8 -> 2 He-4 + electrons (from the original molecules)

However, this proposal is incomplete. My point is only that we cannot predict 
the behavior of an "unknown reaction."

In any case, the radiation expectation massively confused the issues.

> 3b. is incorrect.
> 
> I couldn't tell whether Jones insisted on (3b) or was just emphasizing (3a)

The interview was poor. The obvious questions were not asked.

From the fuel and heat/ash relationship,  though, the FP Heat Effect is fusion 
by an unknown mechanism. Get over it, if you can't provide a better fit to the 
experimental evidence.

> 
> Eric
> 
> 
> On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 9:45 PM, Jeff Berkowitz  wrote:
>> 
>> It's a really weird article. It starts off with this title:
>> Steven Jones replica: Pons & Fleischmann XS Heat not from fusion

RE: [Vo]:Steven Jones: Excess heat is real, but probably not nuclear

[Jones Beene]

Actually, I think that this is one of the better slide presentations out
there this year - in the entire field - despite a few controversial
statements and being in need of massive editing. Hats off to Steven Jones to
support the Davey device, even though that inventor was nutty - and the
prior claims were heavy on anecdote. Both the Davey and Timothy Thrapp
spherical hot water heaters have been demonstrated to be way overunity, and
operate on what could be a similar principal, and also are the product of
inventors who are their own worst enemies. Both tried to hide the role of
nickel alloys, but there is also a geometry factor is the sphere or
hemisphere, along with recombination (chemical asymmetry). Here is a Thrapp
video, and you can probably see note that this inventor suffers from the
same Messiah complex as Joseph Newman.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=06iCfowinUM

This paper could be improved considerably and trimmed down to a couple of
relevant issues but focusing on this device. Steven Jones does not go far
enough in noting that there is more than one completely distinct phenomenon
at work in gainful devices which are lumped as LENR. And there is too much
emphasis early-on in the slides with muons - which appears to be
dead-in-the-water, despite the Star claims (Australia-
http://www.starscientific.com.au/). There is no practical way to make muons
work IMO ... unless of course. a charged sphere collects them :) 

In fact, there are at least 5 pathways to gain, some nuclear some not - or
more if one includes muons as separate from other catalysis. In the end, it
is all about repeatability, and that is THE major problem, even for Celani.
The proof for the Davey device is actually stronger than most of LENR, and
should not be overlooked because of the eccentricities of an inventor. But
it still lacks repeatability, with a number of failed attempts. We can only
hope that SJ, who is a thorough and careful experimenter, can dig deeper on
this simple device, since it is simple 'like electrolysis', but much more
robust (for some important but unknown reason.)

Of special interest is slide 17 et al. (NRL from ICCF 17) where he shows the
spectacular episodes of 40x gain with alloy electrodes and tell-tale RF
emission. It should be noted that Miles found nothing with Rhenium alone
(Miles-Co-Deposition-of-Palladium-Paper-ICCF17). 

In fact, it seems to me now - in retrospect - that there was a strong
sub-theme at ICCF-17 on Rhenium. Why? Well, it is group 7 and has massive
valence electron flexibility, and is a Mills catalyst - but note that in
contrast to Miles we have the results of an Re alloy with Pd that is
spectacular, and most of all gives us an RF signature. I think the emphasis
on Rhenium in many of these papers is misplaced - and instead manganese
should perform better, as both are group 7 - and Re is rarer than palladium
where as Mn is cheap ... but anyway - these NRL results are important and
beg to be expanded on.

Note to Steven Jones, if you monitor this group - try manganese or Ni-Mn
alloy on one of the hemispheres and use RF as input.


-Original Message-
From: pagnu...@htdconnect.com 

Steven Jones replica: Pons & Fleischmann XS Heat not from fusion

Jones is experimenting with a bell electrode setup that strongly evidences
excess (xs) energy and has similarities to the cell presented by Pons and
Fleischmann. He says that there are at least two distinct phenomena in
these experiments and that "fusion" is not what most of these "CF" or
"LENR" types of arrangements exhibit

http://pesn.com/2012/11/19/9602225_Steven_Jones_replica--Pons_and_Fleischman
n_XS_Heat_not_from_fusion/

Re: [Vo]:Steven Jones: Excess heat is real, but probably not nuclear

[Axil Axil]

http://www.totalizm.nazwa.pl/boiler.htm

This reference contains technical details of the boiler invented by Mr
Peter Daysh Davey which is the basis of the design discussed in this thread.


Cheers:   Axil

On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 11:39 PM,  wrote:

> Courtesy of pesn.com -
>
> Steven Jones replica: Pons & Fleischmann XS Heat not from fusion
>
> Jones is experimenting with a bell electrode setup that strongly evidences
> excess (xs) energy and has similarities to the cell presented by Pons and
> Fleischmann. He says that there are at least two distinct phenomena in
> these experiments and that "fusion" is not what most of these "CF" or
> "LENR" types of arrangements exhibit
>
>
> http://pesn.com/2012/11/19/9602225_Steven_Jones_replica--Pons_and_Fleischmann_XS_Heat_not_from_fusion/
>
>
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Steven Jones: Excess heat is real, but probably not nuclear

[Jeff Berkowitz]

I thought the article was incoherent enough that I'd be afraid to guess
what the author really thinks his own point is. Ymmv.
Jeff


On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 9:56 PM, Eric Walker  wrote:

> Here is my exegesis of Sterling Allan's presentation of Steven Jones's
> recent research:
>
> 1. There is piezonuclear fusion.  Fleischmann's and Pons's discovery was
> not this.
> 2. There is metal-assisted d-d fusion.  Fleischmann's and Pons's discovery
> was also not this.
> 3. There is anamalous xs heat, or "Freedom Energy," which is what
> Fleischmann and Pons investigated.  They did not discover it.  Peter Davey,
> in the 1940s, also researched it.  People do not know what goes
> into anomalous xs heat, but to call it "fusion"
> 3a. confuses the issue, because people want to see radiation if there is
> fusion.
> 3b. is incorrect.
>
> I couldn't tell whether Jones insisted on (3b) or was just emphasizing
> (3a).
>
> Eric
>
>
> On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 9:45 PM, Jeff Berkowitz  wrote:
>
>>
>> It's a really weird article. It starts off with this title:
>> Steven Jones replica: Pons & Fleischmann XS Heat not from fusion
>>
>

Re: [Vo]:Steven Jones: Excess heat is real, but probably not nuclear

[Eric Walker]

Here is my exegesis of Sterling Allan's presentation of Steven Jones's
recent research:

1. There is piezonuclear fusion.  Fleischmann's and Pons's discovery was
not this.
2. There is metal-assisted d-d fusion.  Fleischmann's and Pons's discovery
was also not this.
3. There is anamalous xs heat, or "Freedom Energy," which is what
Fleischmann and Pons investigated.  They did not discover it.  Peter Davey,
in the 1940s, also researched it.  People do not know what goes
into anomalous xs heat, but to call it "fusion"
3a. confuses the issue, because people want to see radiation if there is
fusion.
3b. is incorrect.

I couldn't tell whether Jones insisted on (3b) or was just emphasizing (3a).

Eric


On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 9:45 PM, Jeff Berkowitz  wrote:

>
> It's a really weird article. It starts off with this title:
> Steven Jones replica: Pons & Fleischmann XS Heat not from fusion
>

Re: [Vo]:Steven Jones: Excess heat is real, but probably not nuclear

[Jeff Berkowitz]

It's a really weird article. It starts off with this title:
Steven Jones replica: Pons & Fleischmann XS Heat not from fusion
Then the author (Allen) goes on to quote Jones as follows:

"... there is a confirmed and published effect showing products of d-d
[deuterium-deuterium] fusion at low levels. This is true 'cold fusion' ..."

But then author Allen goes on to summarize:

"Jones has adamantly stated that the P&F reactions, while producing excess
heat, are not due to fusion."

(wtf!?) and

"The problem with calling it "fusion" when it is not ..."

(wtf again!?)

So it seems to me the larger problem here is that Allen's article is
incoherent, quoting Jones as saying one thing and then summarizing him (and
titling the article!) by saying exactly the opposite.

Jeff

On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 8:48 PM, Jed Rothwell  wrote:

> Gad. What a jerk. Was, is, remains.
>
> - Jed
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Steven Jones: Excess heat is real, but probably not nuclear

[Jed Rothwell]

Gad. What a jerk. Was, is, remains.

- Jed

[Vo]:Steven Jones: Excess heat is real, but probably not nuclear

[pagnucco]

Courtesy of pesn.com -

Steven Jones replica: Pons & Fleischmann XS Heat not from fusion

Jones is experimenting with a bell electrode setup that strongly evidences
excess (xs) energy and has similarities to the cell presented by Pons and
Fleischmann. He says that there are at least two distinct phenomena in
these experiments and that "fusion" is not what most of these "CF" or
"LENR" types of arrangements exhibit

http://pesn.com/2012/11/19/9602225_Steven_Jones_replica--Pons_and_Fleischmann_XS_Heat_not_from_fusion/