Re: LENR-CANR editorial policy
At 10:45 AM 8/23/2004, Jed Rothwell admits to censoring, but then purports it is for political reasons, such as not to upset some of his critics (ROTFLOL) so he will not get hit with by a baseball bat (given) to Robert Park. Rothwell: I will not hand a baseball bat to Robert Park and ask him to please hit me over the head with it! It is a shame that CF is so political, but it is, and we must pay attention to politics, image and public relations. The claim that we are censoring is ridiculous. Given that Rothwell has brought this up again, it is important to correct his flawed arguments. The claim of censorship was correct. Also, Dr. Mallove was correct about the censorship. Also, those who posted me after this began, and those who discussed what happened to them at ICCF-10 have been also correct. There HAS been censoring at (the misnamed) LENR-CANR web site. It his their choice. However, removing cold fusion articles, or any article, for political reasons, -- or for any reason whatsoever-- is by definition censoring. This is quite consistent when compared to the definition, after Webster: censor - to subject to censorship; an official who reads communications and deletes forbidden material. Q.E.D. Hence, Dr. Mallove, Mr. Webster, and the other were all correct, and in fact it would not matters if the reason was the purest of motives. However, in this case, as stated previously, given that it is admittedly at least political, Subject: Storms/Rothwell censorship This is known as science by politics -- it is disgusting. Storms doesn't have leg to stand on and he knows it. - - Gene
Re: LENR-CANR editorial policy
What are you trying to accomplish, Mitchell? How is applying a pejorative word to the reason your papers are not on the site going to get your papers on the site? You might argue that some work is being censored but your work is not being censored. We will never agree as to why your previous attempts at sending copies did not work so your complaining just makes you look ridiculous and wastes time. All you need to do is send the papers you want in full text and be done with it. Ed Mitchell Swartz wrote: At 10:45 AM 8/23/2004, Jed Rothwell admits to censoring, but then purports it is for "political reasons", such as not to upset some of his "critics" (ROTFLOL) so he will not get hit with by "a baseball bat (given) to Robert Park". Rothwell: "I will not hand a baseball bat to Robert Park and ask him to please hit me over the head with it! It is a shame that CF is so political, but it is, and we must pay attention to politics, image and public relations. The claim that we are "censoring" is ridiculous." Given that Rothwell has brought this up again, it is important to correct his flawed arguments. The claim of censorship was correct. Also, Dr. Mallove was correct about the censorship. Also, those who posted me after this began, and those who discussed what happened to them at ICCF-10 have been also correct. There HAS been censoring at (the misnamed) LENR-CANR web site. It his their choice. However, removing cold fusion articles, or any article, for "political" reasons, -- or for any reason whatsoever-- is by definition censoring. This is quite consistent when compared to the definition, after Webster: "censor - to subject to censorship; an official who reads communications and deletes forbidden material." Q.E.D. Hence, Dr. Mallove, Mr. Webster, and the other were all correct, and in fact it would not matters if the reason was the purest of motives. However, in this case, as stated previously, given that it is admittedly at least "political", Subject: Storms/Rothwell censorship "This is known as science by politics -- it is disgusting. Storms doesn't have leg to stand on and he knows it." - - Gene
Laser stimulated fusion
Jones Beene replied If you read the experiment carefully, and understand that it is not just a laser, but a laser tuned to an exact frequency which coincides with a *quantum state,* and I attempted to start a thread several weeks ago. Two physicists claim that they have developed a laser stimulation method which is isotope specific. The particular frequency charges the atoms. When two solutions of charged atoms are combined, the atoms combine. By selecting the proper atoms, one should be able to produce what ever element you want. I can think of one particular element, the production of which would allow me to finance what ever research tickled my fancy. Given the life time of this thread, I decided to try again, www.miracle2wholesale.org/research.htm I was hoping to get some of you to read the article and tell me what you think of what they say. I'm wondering how quantum state, which I assume corresponds to the charge on the electrons correlates with a specific isotope. Which, once irradiated with a laser(s) of precise frequency will stimulate BEC-like fusion and allow the energy of charged particles to be converted directly into electricity at 60-80% efficiency. That is a pretty huge jump over heat output ! What is BEC-like fusion? Given the 35% efficiency of conventional electric generating plants, that's very good. I noted with interest that this technology appears to produces 10 times the input energy which is also good. This kind of thing will eliminate all the vagueness inherent in calorimetry, even There's nothing like electrical production to give a no B S indication of energy output.
Re: New light on LENR
Earlier I wrote with regard to the Letts-Cravens experiment: Also of interest is the fact that the target itself may be sensitive to the polarization direction of the beam, irrespective of the direction of the magnetic field placed across it in a radial direction. There are thus three things that should be mutally rotated with respect to each other, the magnets, the polarization direction, and the target itself, the crystaline structure of which may have polarising characteristics which may or may not be affected by an imposed magnetic field. The magnetic field could possibly be irrelevant. Alternatively, its effect might be primarily on the structure of the loaded lattice and not directly on the LENR process itself. For maximum effect, the lattice and magnetic field may have to be at a specific angle in addition to the polarization having a specific angle to those things. I would like to further expand on the above by saying that the direction and strength of the magnetic field at the time of surface deposition may be important, especially in the case of codeposition. Codeposition, the laying down of metal on the cathode along with the adsorbtion of hydrogen, in a sense, happens in all electrolysis, whether by design or not. A layer of *some* kind of material is always deposited on the cathode as electrolysis prodceeds. No electrolytic cell or anode is perfectly clean. The longer the electrolysis runs, the more the cathodic surface is changed. This was well known early on. For example, there was much discussion regarding the effect of dendrite formation on the cathode surface. Also noted was the fact that heat events seemed to occur at seemingly random durations following full loading. It was thus well known that the degree of loading was not the only important variable. There was debate as to whether CF was a surface or volume event, or even a volume event triggered by surface interactions and geometry. The then (and even now?) popular use of platinum anodes may have further complicated and cloaked the importance, nature and effects of the cathode surface fabrication during electrolysis. It has been sometimes noted, however, that used or pre-conditioned cathodes seem to be effective more quickly than new cathodes. It is possibly ironic that electrochemists sometimes went to extremes (though not extreme for electrochemists) in preparing clean cathodes by cleaning with solvents, acids, and then further cleaning the electrodes by using them as anodes in clean electrolytic cells prior to use in experiments. The role of a magnetic field may be important in the construction (and maintenance throughout the period of electrolysis) of a specific polarized cathode lattice structure or surface structure. A powerful magnetic field may play a useful role in building the right lattice structures and yet not be significantly involved in the LENR transactions themselves. Simply experimenting with the nearly instantaneous mutual angles and orientations of laser beam polarization, cathode, and magnetic field is not enough. The effect of magnetic field through time, especially during cathode preparation, may be important. It is also unfortunately true that a magnetic field, through polarization of the cathode surface, could thereby be involved in causing erroneous calorimetry. For this reason the use of improved calorimetry, especially dual calorimetric methods, is clearly indicated. Regards, Horace Heffner
RE: New light on LENR
Hi Horace. I have tried this in the past, using a nickle based electrolyte. I was hoping that the magnetic field would cause some obvious morphological changes, or that I would see some remanent magnetism/polarization in the deposited metal after electroplating on the cathode. Sadly, the simple experiments I did showed no such effect. I may return to this in the future; for reasons wholy unrelated to the subject at hand. But if you have any suggestions for things to look for, I'd like to hear them. That said, I suppose with a strong enough field I could effect the pH at certain areas on the cathode. Not what I intend though K. -Original Message- From: Horace Heffner [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, August 23, 2004 3:24 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: New light on LENR Earlier I wrote with regard to the Letts-Cravens experiment: Also of interest is the fact that the target itself may be sensitive to the polarization direction of the beam, irrespective of the direction of the magnetic field placed across it in a radial direction. There are thus three things that should be mutally rotated with respect to each other, the magnets, the polarization direction, and the target itself, the crystaline structure of which may have polarising characteristics which may or may not be affected by an imposed magnetic field. The magnetic field could possibly be irrelevant. Alternatively, its effect might be primarily on the structure of the loaded lattice and not directly on the LENR process itself. For maximum effect, the lattice and magnetic field may have to be at a specific angle in addition to the polarization having a specific angle to those things. I would like to further expand on the above by saying that the direction and strength of the magnetic field at the time of surface deposition may be important, especially in the case of codeposition. Codeposition, the laying down of metal on the cathode along with the adsorbtion of hydrogen, in a sense, happens in all electrolysis, whether by design or not. A layer of *some* kind of material is always deposited on the cathode as electrolysis prodceeds. No electrolytic cell or anode is perfectly clean. The longer the electrolysis runs, the more the cathodic surface is changed. This was well known early on. For example, there was much discussion regarding the effect of dendrite formation on the cathode surface. Also noted was the fact that heat events seemed to occur at seemingly random durations following full loading. It was thus well known that the degree of loading was not the only important variable. There was debate as to whether CF was a surface or volume event, or even a volume event triggered by surface interactions and geometry. The then (and even now?) popular use of platinum anodes may have further complicated and cloaked the importance, nature and effects of the cathode surface fabrication during electrolysis. It has been sometimes noted, however, that used or pre-conditioned cathodes seem to be effective more quickly than new cathodes. It is possibly ironic that electrochemists sometimes went to extremes (though not extreme for electrochemists) in preparing clean cathodes by cleaning with solvents, acids, and then further cleaning the electrodes by using them as anodes in clean electrolytic cells prior to use in experiments. The role of a magnetic field may be important in the construction (and maintenance throughout the period of electrolysis) of a specific polarized cathode lattice structure or surface structure. A powerful magnetic field may play a useful role in building the right lattice structures and yet not be significantly involved in the LENR transactions themselves. Simply experimenting with the nearly instantaneous mutual angles and orientations of laser beam polarization, cathode, and magnetic field is not enough. The effect of magnetic field through time, especially during cathode preparation, may be important. It is also unfortunately true that a magnetic field, through polarization of the cathode surface, could thereby be involved in causing erroneous calorimetry. For this reason the use of improved calorimetry, especially dual calorimetric methods, is clearly indicated. Regards, Horace Heffner
Terry Blanton Killed by Spoofers
I am having to use this account because those who have spoofed my other addresses have resulted in my being blocked by Eskimo.com I don't blame Eskimo. Soon we will see mail filters which will verify the sending IP address really matches the sender's email address. Terry __ Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
