Re: [Vo]:Patterson and Letts experiment
2009/10/3, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax : > One of the interesting SPAWAR > results is IR imaging of the cathode, showing that the cathode > temperature is substantially higher than that of the electrolyte. I don't think this proves anything, I doubt IR imaging can distinguish between temperature of the cathode and temperature of the ~1nm interface layer where most of the voltage drop and thus most of the power dissipation occurs in any electrolytic cell. BTW, this highly concentrated heat near the cathode surface may be one of the reasons why LENRs occur on the surface rather than in the bulk. Michel
Re: [Vo]:Following up on a Heffner idea
On Oct 3, 2009, at 9:18 AM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
At 01:52 AM 10/3/2009, Horace Heffner wrote:
I suggested a possible means to beat this co-location problem (and
thus cause fusion) here in 1996. It is described here:
http://mtaonline.net/~hheffner/BoseHyp.pdf
Once we have simple, cheap, standard cells operating and available
and being produced in quantity, it becomes possible to efficiently
test lots of ideas. Adding some radioisotope that might co-deposit
with the palladium and deuterium could be pretty simple to do. And
if we can develop sensors and sensor analysis that show in real
time the level of nuclear activity, we might get very quick
results. Thus even long shots might be tested. Has the idea of
seeding the palladium deuteride with alpha or beta emitters been
tried?
Partially. I know Dennis Cravens has done some of this. There
certainly have been some tests using radiated cathodes, both with
charged particles and with neutrons some of which showed moderately
positive results, but not attributed to 3rd particle triggered BEC
collapse. Actually every CF experiment, except those done deep in
mines, are stimulated experiments, due to cosmic rays. However,
irradiating electrodes, or including isotopes in the cathodes, can
not assist the reactions (under this model) if BEC creating
conditions are not established.
What has been lacking is testing a (3rd particle) seeding concept as
an augmentation to a protocol that has already been shown to work for
CF fairly reliably, such as SPAWAR's codeposition methods.
I think one of the most useful experimental techniques, not so much
for generating energy, but for diagnostic purposes, might be light
tritium doping. Consider the SPAWAR article:
http://www.springerlink.com/content/022501181p3h764l/
"The presence of three alpha-particle tracks outgoing from a single
point is diagnostic of the 12C(n,n′)3alpha carbon breakup reaction
and suggests that DT reactions that produce ≥9.6 MeV neutrons are
occurring inside the Pd lattice. To our knowledge, this is the first
report of the production of energetic (≥9.6 MeV) neutrons in the
Pd–D system."
This is a peer reviewed article by credible researchers. Their data
and conclusion should be taken seriously.
There in fact is experimental data corroborating the lattice DT
hypothesis feasibility. Here is an article relating to T2O + D2O
electrolysis with some rare (8 +-4 counts per second) 10 MeV plus
neutrons found: Quote:
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Rusov VD, Zelentsova TN, Semenov MYu, Radin IV, Babikova
YuF Kruglyak YuA;
Pis'ma Zh. Tekh. Fiz. 15(#19) (1989) 9--13 {In Russian}
"Fast neutron recording by dielectric track detectors in a palladium-
deuterated -tritiated water system in an electrolytic cell".
** Experimental, alloy, electrolysis, neutrons, res0
Used a 50:50 mix of D2O and T2O, a "corrugated" alloy
(Pd 72, Ag 25, Au 3) electrode, 10 mA/cm**2 and
"200 V" cell voltage (no electrolyte!). A polymer
track detector (CR-39) (1-5 E-04 track/n sensitivity)
was used to detect the integrated neutron flux from
possible cold fusion of light nuclei. Some rare
high-energy (>10 MeV) neutrons (8+-4/s) were found.
071989|101989
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
End quote.
The above summary was taken from Dieter Britz's site:
http://www.chem.au.dk/~db/fusion/alpha_R
The above experiment provides a solid indication of a nominal amount
of D-T fusion even though there is no indication whatsoever that
proper lattice conditions for cold fusion were established. If
repeatable, that is a landmark achievement because it proves fusion
from chemical conditions. Hopefully with what is known today the
results can be greatly improved.
The SPAWAR data does indeed suggest high energy neutrons from a DT
reaction. The source of the tritium in SPAWAR experiments logically
can be expected to be DD fusion, and thus of a low probability
because the concentration of tritium (or possibly some form of
tritium precursor) is very low. It should be no surprise that tritium
can be produced in small quantities via cold fusion reactions.
The conclusion of the Boss et al article implies the need for
repeating exactly the same experiment using D2O + T2O (actually just
a trace amount of TDO) instead of just D2O. If the flux of high
energy neutrons does not increase, then the conclusion is suspect.
Otherwise, this will provide some confirmation of the Boss et al
conclusion. More importantly, if high energy neutrons can be
reliably produced using the more sophisticated, successful, and
controlled protocol as used by Boss et al, this could provide a solid
starting point for narrowing down the underlying physics. A tritium
atom does not differ significantly from a deuterium atom with respect
to the Coulomb barrier. Whatever mechanism permits deuterium to
de
RE: [Vo]:megalith levitation
[snip] It will be much better (and clear) to talk about (radial) changes of velocity (accelerations). There's no need also to talk about Lorentz contraction, because that arises between reference frames, [end snip] Mauro, I think radial acceleration of H1 inside a cavity is relativistic creating reference frames without the need for spatial displacement approaching C. I suggest however the acceleration is invisible from within the frame where the orbital wavelength and velocity remain Bohr and C. I am proposing that the spatial confinement and equivalent acceleration caused by a relativistic "up conversion" of vacuum flux means the confined monatomic hydrogen has a huge relativistic radial acceleration from our perspective. I am not talking linear acceleration where the Pythagorean concept of spatial axis at 90 degrees to temporal requires acceleration while at high fractions of C to start diverging on the time axis. I believe the Casimir cavity allows for a huge discount in the normal speeds required for relativistic effects. The spatial confinement combined with the equivalence boundary suggests the 10E-14 newtons of acceleration calculated by DiFiore et all is a vector wholly on the time axis -no trig portions of the spatial axis, the force was ignored as inconsequential but I suggest the confinement allows heat energy to contribute to the vector and without a relief valve of combustion could lead to a thermal runaway where H1 and H2 states oscillate by virtue of a Pd like opposition to diatomic formation but here in the cavity a high velocity version of this property that immediately tears apart H2 restoring monatomic energy levels. The outside and inside of the cavity are spatially stationary to each other, the gravitational isotropy is broken by the plates meaning the fast moving field outside is slowed inside making the flux twist from our perspective appearing faster because we no longer see a direct view of a waveform but instead view it from a turned profile which appears to get smaller going away and faster as the cycles continue to contract into the distance. This is a difference in relative motion where g outside is faster than g' inside which means the spatial coordinates are basically unchanged and the H1 is predominantly accelerating on the time axis, it might appear to contract as the flux twist further and further but it would stay centered on its original spatial coordinates and if a ruler could be extended to the seemingly evacuated space from which it contracted the ruler itself would also contract to prove all the original spatial coordinates are still occupied and the contraction is the effect of curved space-time on the light emanating from the object. Curiously I don't think it matters if we are accelerating or decelerating -if you picture vacuum flux as a waveform on a scope as a direct perspective (our inertial frame) and then "twist" it on its' center in either direction it will turn its' profile to us and appear smaller and faster for up-conversion or down conversion. Regards Fran -Original Message- From: Mauro Lacy [mailto:ma...@lacy.com.ar] Sent: Friday, October 02, 2009 8:38 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:megalith levitation It will be much better (and clear) to talk about (radial) changes of velocity (accelerations). There's no need also to talk about Lorentz contraction, because that arises between reference frames, and is a consequence(if I understand it correctly), of our suppositions regarding the nature of light, and of light's velocity. Regarding light: we have no right to talk about the velocity of light, because velocity is a classical mechanical concept, that is applied to discrete material entities. And light is not a material entity. Material entities are characterized by their discreteness, i.e. when a material object is moving, it leaves no part of it behind. It moves completely, leaving the space behind it completely vacant. But light leaves a trace behind, so we cannot apply simple mechanical formulas to light. Regarding the velocity of light, we can only talk about the velocity of the front propagation of light. And we would not be saying anything regarding the true nature of light with that. That is, the underlying phenomena is almost completely overlooked when we do that.
[Vo]:STEM+IC=MIND'sHologram=Quantum-Infinity/Quantum-Mind
* * * * * * * * STEM+IC=MIND'sHologram=Quantum-Infinity/Quantum-Mind * * * * * * * *STEM+IC Physics identifies a 'source-first-energy dimension' as First-Mind/MIND+IC *STEM+IC stands for 'Space Time Energy Mass plus Information-Computation as Prime-Mind' as the physics source of simply every dimension &/or alternate dimension which may exist in virtually all Quantum-Infinity as Quantum-Mind-STEM+IC. *Premise: The 'prime-energy-dimensional-density estate is MIND-STEM+IC:' And this MIND/first-energy-plateau renders the ALL and every manifestation of the physics that we can detect 'and' the laws of physics that we cannot as yet perceive. And as such this STEM+IC/MIND-FirstEnergy is the defacto 'Holographic Projector' of All-Energy/Everything. Then also as that Prime Energy Plateau as being the First-Estate of Energy, then all subsequent spectrum gradients radiating-develope-progress-evolve outward/beyondward from the Centre-Point-Region of 'First-Mind.' Even though we say 'first' as in 'first in time,' this is probably misleading in that 'time' is non-componential-fiction relative to the better said physics-location of 'central nexial/axial region' of STEM+IC/FirstMind/MIND. INFORMATION-COMPUTATION: IC would then provide the intial & ubiqitously interconnected/permeating 'Push/PrimeMomentum' of every other omni-dimensional energy construct. In short STEM+IC/FirstMind-IC is the 'source' of everything. Living within an essentially 'dead-inanimate cosmos' searching for rare & accidental 'life' vs living within a cosmos-kaleidoscopic-infinitude of hyper-dynamic energy/sentience will tend to skew discoveries dramatically one way or the other. This indicates that FirstMindIC/STEM+IC isthe profound physical-actual energy attachment and prime-motive influence of the 'entirety.' This is 'not' a metaphysical exegesis; far from it. 'Metaphysics' as a term means that 'we can barely detect that 'something' is going on, but we are yet a long way off from having good understanding. The best point here is that we are a 'greater/much larger awareness' than our bio-empirical senses are usually-currently able to process &/or articulate. But we grow inexorably which is heartening. And the bioplanetary chapter of this 'growth-process' is one hell of a ride methinks. To the paranoid it's hell; but to ambitious & hungry & inspiratorially-eager it's the ambrosia of agony-ecstacy; painfully exquisite, terrible & brilliant and the very 'breath of life.' * * *A STEM+IC/Premise: All Space Time Energy Mass plus Information-Computation is the very formative-projection of MIND as the First-estate/level/PrimeMotiveEnergy level of the infinite gradient energy spectrum of the known Univere and also of the not-quite-known Aexoverse. (The Bubble-Universii infini-myriad array likely has us as one of many low-density universe-bubbles within a more dynamic & dense super-energy 'space'). It would follow that 'Time' is merely the perceived-difference/friction between the proximally-contacting of differing-contrasting &/or opposing speeds&densities of adjacent energy levels. These adjacent currents & mass gradients are all staged upon an energy-whole-cloth of ultimately sourced & connected to the Origins Prime-Energy Spectrum Region of First-Mind. "Time" is a notion & perception of proximal energy-phenomenonal relative speed-density. And as such is but a local-regional & temporary perceptual 'allusion.' Outside our low-density bubble-universe "Time does not Exist" because 'time' is merely a low-density relative 'difference guage & marker' of temporary usefulness within the bubble. And linear-'time's' very existence has much to do from how the 'relative/contrasting motions within our bubble universe' merely appear to our limited empirical vantage point. And with us stuck here for the moment upon our planet we are a one-speed-puppy with not a very good overall viewpoint. And so this linear-'Time' allusion depends completely on our 'postion' and lack of sensory/empirical/awareness skills/tools that we use to determine/decide upon how to interpret the 'data' that at present only 'seems' that we 'know/understand.' This is what we call 'knowledge' and is much more temporary-&-tenuous than we care to admit; and which is our only deficient tool/'rule' to determine just where we 'stand' at the moment within our lesser abilities to directly perceive a larger contiguous-schema. *STEM+IC: All subsequent gestalts-centres of IC-Information-Computational aware-ness would perforce also have ubiquitous transdimensional energy-connection-access to Every Coordinate within our Space-Time Bubble universe. And as well this connects flow-dynamically to every energy coodinate within the aexo-infinitude beyond. Conservation of Energy alludes even stronger that we as gestalt-connectedness of First-Mind-IC have virtually infinite potential to project holog
Re: [Vo]:Patterson and Letts experiment
At 02:22 PM 10/3/2009, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote: > At 09:46 AM 10/3/2009, Horace Heffner wrote: >> I don't think controlling thermal instabilities is important, it is >> eliminating their effect on the calorimetry. This is of course why >> Seebeck calorimetry is useful. Whatever directions the heat flows, >> it is measured. > > It occurs to me that, while there is a very important role for precise > calorimetry to play in cold fusion research, from an engineering > perspective it might be a bit of a red herring. From an engineering perspective it's irrelevant. What I said, essentially. As long as you need precise calorimetry to tell if anything's happening, there's nothing going on which can be "engineered". Well, more accurately, the engineering is way too difficult. Note that there may be an assumption Stephen is making, that substantial excess heat is the goal. That's not my goal, the goal of my "engineering" is to demonstrate nuclear effects and to find associated effects that are characteristic of the nuclear reactions even if, by themselves, they do not prove "nuclear." When enough heat is generated reliably enough to be useful for "engineering" rather than "science" you won't need a calorimeter to detect it. That's right. Do you need a calorimeter to tell whether the fire in your fireplace is lit or not? To tell if your car motor has caught? To determine whether a space heater is doing its job? Obviously not. Yup. Now, will a Galileo project cell generate enough heat to be a demonstration of excess heat? I don't know any numbers. It's not critical for my work. I do not expect that actual calorimetry will be a part of the kits, though someone could put a kit cell in a calorimeter, and I do expect to include temperature sensing, which can lead to rough calorimetry if calibrated. Not the kind of calorimetry to prove anything, but to be associated with other effects.
[Vo]:MIMS and BAE
The Bae Institute in SoCal (Tustin) is a curious R&D center. Maybe 'laughable' is more apt, if you happen to be Bob Park or a mainstream fusion guru from MIT. It is named for Dr. Young K. Bae - and it does indeed do high-tech experimental work - but is also advertised as a technical school in the sense of ITT, not MIT. They even have a cooking school. There have been some grants from NASA, but nothing to compare with what is now being claimed. The two key technologies are pure photonic propulsion and micro-fusion. The Bae Institute would also rather announce their finding by PR News release, than by peer reviewed journal (not that they have a choice). You almost get the sense that 99% of this work has been and will continue to be ignored by the mainstream of physics. That is until they reach a tipping point. Friedwardt Winterberg is a great scientist who has also been largely ignored by the mainstream. His spoken English is poor, and he teaches at a third rate University, and most of his voluminous publications have been in German Language Journals - but he is nevertheless a true genius in my eyes and in the eyes of a few mainstream physicists who have followed his work. It is no surprise to anyone, however, that he has teamed up with the Bae Institute - since he is given the cold shoulder by almost everyone else. Winterberg has been working with the Bae Institute on MIMS - or "metastable inner-shell molecular states". This is really another name for ballotechnics and so-called "red mercury". In the past, a few of us have also called it "supra-chemistry" since it deals with inner orbitals. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ballotechnics MIMS, like the infamous red-mercury (which may be fictional or not) is the basis for a conjectured super non-nuclear explosive, or better still - for a peaceful "warm-fusion" breakthrough. I would classify soft x-ray ignited IC-fusion as warm, as opposed to hot (keV and above) but it is much hotter than combustion. Normal chemistry can produce UV photons, but MIMS (like fractional hydrogen) can take the energy level into the soft x-ray range. Coupling to "targets" is still very good in this range, unlike x-rays. Too bad for R. Mills that he did not consider (concurrently with his other work) this hybridized route to fusion as a possibility, since it will probably mean billions in funding, eventually (when the mainstream gets hold of it). Of course, Mills thinks he will be successful without it, and time will tell on that. And as I notice George is saying in another post - Mills wants to totally distance himself from anything nuclear. The Bae Institute indicates that they have now experimentally confirmed MIMS and Winterberg's theory. The result will eventually be that MIMS will make a super-explosive trigger in the form of x-rays for a target - in a way similar to the LLNL laser fusion does now - but with a tiny fraction of the cost of lasers and without the burden of their inefficiency. http://nextbigfuture.com/2009/09/conjectured-metastable-super-explosives.htm l In fact, it appears that MIMS will employ hypervelocity (v > 100 km/s) impact nanoparticles. How they push "powder" to that velocity is not clear. MIMS testing with these nanoparticles resulted in the observed intense soft x-rays in the range of 75-100 eV - which is in agreement with Winterberg's prediction - but - with unprecedented conversion efficiency. The efficiency from kinetic-energy to x-ray energy is over 40%. Typically laser beam lines are 1-2% efficient for the same intensity level. Intense soft x-ray beams, like lasers, can ignite deuterium targets in ICF schemes - inertial confinement fusion, and make it efficient and economically viable. It is that simple. And if the overpaid and overhyped geniuses at LLNL, who have burned through about $5 billion in taxpayer funding in the past decade with almost nothing to show for it --- have been caught with their intellectual pants down, by an hourly-worker training institute - then all the better (for the cynics amongst us). BTW - few details on the nanoparticles composition, or the acceleration method which is being used by Bae, have been released AFIK - but given that palladium nanoparticles (filled with deuterium) would probably make an excellent choice - this makes me think that this niche could evolve into kind of hybrid with LENR - and result in less velocity being required. What to call it? How about "powder-burn fusion" ?
RE: [Vo]:The source of the disagreement over cold fusion
George Holz's message of Saturday, October 03, 2009 1:50 PM [snip] Yes, it is reasonable to feel almost alone in considering non lattice based cold fusion, but there are a few of us out there quietly considering the relationship of Mills experiments to cold fusion experiments. It is interesting to consider that Mills' gas phase experiments are clearly overunity and apparently easy to replicate compared to solid state cold fusion experiments. The simplicity of H2 + He in a microwave plasma certainly requires new physics for an explanation. [end snip] George, could this be 2 sides of the same coin where the lattice structure of Casimir plates concentrate vacuum fluctuations while the narrow reservoir formed between the plates become equally depleted? The isotropy is broken in agreement with cavity QED but the overall structure appears balanced to the outside world. I know Casimir force requires conductive plates which don't necessarily have to be metallic lattices but the less conductive the plates the less catalytic action and so far Mills' and Arata findings seem to support metallic materials are always present. I think diatomic formations at high acceleration are torn apart in rigid Casimir cavities in the same way that the lattice in a Pd membrane breaks normal diatomic compounds. My point is that the lattices do seem to be a key ingredient in either scenario. I don't think Rayney Nickel or Pd nano materials could form cavities of sufficient strength except when intimately surrounded by lattices. Regards Fran
[Vo]:STEM+IC=MIND'sHologram
-best edit- *Premise: The 'prime-energy-dimensional-density estate is MIND:' And this MIND/first-energy-plateau renders the ALL and every manifestation of the physics that we can detect 'and' the laws of physics that we cannot as yet perceive. And as such this STEM+IC/MIND-FirstEnergy is the defacto 'Holographic Projector' of All-Energy/Everything. Then also as that Prime Energy Plateau as being the First-Estate of Energy, then all subsequent spectrum gradients radiating-develope-progress-evolve outward/beyondward from the Centre-Point of 'First-Mind.' Even though we say 'first' as in 'first in time,' this is probably misleading in that 'time' is non-componential-fiction relative to the better said physical location of 'central nexial/axial region' of STEM+IC/FirstMind/MIND. INFORMATION-COMPUTATION: IC would then provide the intial & ubiqitously interconnected/permeating 'Push/PrimeMomentum' of every other omni-dimensional energy construct. In short STEM+IC/FirstMind-IC is the 'source' of everything. This indicates that FirstMindIC/STEM+IC isthe profound physical-actual energy attachment and prime-motive influence of the 'entirety.' This is 'not' a metaphysical exegesis. 'Metaphysics' as a term means that 'we can barely detect that 'something' is going on, but we are yet a long way off from having good understanding.' The best point here is that we are a 'greater/much larger awareness' than our bio-empirical senses are usually-currently able to process &/or articulate. But we grow inexorably which is heartening. And the bioplanetary chapter of this 'growth-process' is one hell of a ride methinks. To the paranoid it's hell; but to ambitious & hungry & inspiratorially-eager it's the ambrosia of agony-ecstacy; painfully exquisite, terrible & brilliant and the very 'breath of life.' * * *A STEM+IC/Premise: All Space Time Energy Mass plus Information-Computation is the very formative-projection of MIND as the First-estate/level/PrimeMotiveEnergy level of the infinite gradient energy spectrum of the known Univere and also of the not-quite-known Aexoverse. (The Bubble-Universe infini-myriad array likely has us as one of many low-density universe-bubbles within a more dynamic & dense super-energy 'space'). It would follow that 'Time' is merely the perceived-difference/friction between the proximally-contacting of differing &/or opposing speeds&densities of adjacent energy levels. These adjacent currents & mass gradients are all staged upon an energy-whole-cloth of ultimately sourced & connected to the Origins Prime-Energy Spectrum Region of First-Mind. "Time" is a notion & perception of proximal energy-phenomenonal relative speed-density, and as such is but a local-regional & tempory perceptual 'allusion.' Outside our low-density bubble-universe "Time does not Exist" because 'time' is merely a low-density relative 'difference guage & marker' of temporary usefulness within the bubble. And linear-'time's' very existence has much to do from how the 'relative/contrasting motions within our bubble universe' merely appear to our limited empirical vantage point, stuck here for the moment upon our planet we are a one-speed-puppy with not a very good overall viewpoint. And so this linear-'Time' allusion depends completely on our 'postion' and lack of sensory/empirical/awareness skills/tools that we use to determine/decide upon how to interpret the 'data' that at present only 'seem' that we 'know/understand.' This is what we call 'knowledge' and is much more temporary-&-tenuous than we care to admit; and which is our only deficient tool/'rule' to determine just where we 'stand' at the moment within our lesser abilities to directly perceive a larger schema. *STEM+IC: All subsequent gestalts-centres of IC-Information-Computational aware-ness would perforce also have ubiquitous transdimensional energy-connection access to Every Coodernate within our Space-Time Bubble universe and as well to every energy coodinate within the aexo-infinitude beyond. Conservation of Energy alludes even stronger that we as gestalt-connectedness of First-Mind-IC have virtually infinite potential to project holographic-formative impress upon all aspects of STEM+IC within the power of the centre of our minds which are mini-models of the greater STEM+IC whole. The 'Mind' is potential the very-real 'Time-Machine' including physical-temporal displacement as well as perceptual cross-time direct awareness-travel. Remote Viewing emerging science begins to point us to this reality as the Prime-Postulate that will open us to the horizon of STEM+IC physics that is defusing the light of dawn to us as we speak. And thus rightly did Albert Einstein state; "The Imagination is more important than Knowledge." And I might add; that the 'Imagination=First Mind/Prime Mind-IC projective-creative holographic is our source-origin-connection that will avai
Re: [Vo]:Patterson and Letts experiment
Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote: > At 09:46 AM 10/3/2009, Horace Heffner wrote: >> I don't think controlling thermal instabilities is important, it is >> eliminating their effect on the calorimetry. This is of course why >> Seebeck calorimetry is useful. Whatever directions the heat flows, >> it is measured. > > It occurs to me that, while there is a very important role for precise > calorimetry to play in cold fusion research, from an engineering > perspective it might be a bit of a red herring. >From an engineering perspective it's irrelevant. As long as you need precise calorimetry to tell if anything's happening, there's nothing going on which can be "engineered". When enough heat is generated reliably enough to be useful for "engineering" rather than "science" you won't need a calorimeter to detect it. Do you need a calorimeter to tell whether the fire in your fireplace is lit or not? To tell if your car motor has caught? To determine whether a space heater is doing its job? Obviously not.
RE: [Vo]:The source of the disagreement over cold fusion
Robin van Spaandonk's message of October 02, 2009 , Hi Robin and Jed, Robin wrote: >Let me give a concrete example. Muon catalyzed fusion clearly meets the >definition of a Low Energy Nuclear Reaction, and hence papers on it could find a >place in your library, but I suspect you wouldn't even consider including them. >I understand how this has happened. It's because CF started with lattice based >reactions, and all the work since has also been lattice based (AFAIK)- in fact I >doubt that anyone other than me has even considered that it might not need to be >lattice based. I can think of at least 5 people other than you that have seriously considered, based on Mills' gas phase experiments, that there may well be a significant possibility of gas based cold fusion reactions. There was even an "unofficial" poster paper at ICCF 14 describing replications of Mills' gas phase experiments by a former Mills' associate. Mills does not want to be associated with cold fusion for political reasons and will not submit papers to LENR-CANR. Yes, it is reasonable to feel almost alone in considering non lattice based cold fusion, but there are a few of us out there quietly considering the relationship of Mills experiments to cold fusion experiments. It is interesting to consider that Mills' gas phase experiments are clearly overunity and apparently easy to replicate compared to solid state cold fusion experiments. The simplicity of H2 + He in a microwave plasma certainly requires new physics for an explanation. >My point Jed, is that neither LENR nor CANR specifically implies the presence of >a lattice, hence I think restricting the content to papers based only on lattice >based LENR-CANR is too severe a restriction. It may as yet turn out that it >really does only occur in a lattice, but I don't think we are that far along yet >in our understanding of the phenomenon (or perhaps phenomena if it turns out >that there are actually several different mechanisms capable of producing >LENR-CANR). Unfortunately the new name for the conference and journal, CMNS - Condensed Matter Nuclear Science seems to exclude gas phase reactions. A very unfortunate choice in my opinion. Fortunately, it will probably not be used as a reason for rejecting interesting papers. Now, if only people outside BLP would do some Mills experiments and submit them to CMNS / ICCF conferences it might provide some needed communition between the fields which we believe to be potentially related. George Holz Varitronics Systems geo...@varisys.com
[Vo]:Dr. Nathan Hoffman, may he rest in peace.
http://www.ijn.com/obituaries/obituaries/282-dr-nathan-hoffman
[Vo]:All=STEM+IC=MIND'sHologram=Energy's1stEstate
All=STEM+IC=MIND's Hologram=Energy's 1st-Estate//{STEM+IC=Space Time Energy
Mass+Information-Computation}
*Premise: The 'prime-energy-dimensional-density estate is MIND:' And this
MIND/first-energy plateau renders the ALL and every manifestation of the
physics that we can detect 'and' the laws of physics that we cannot as yet
perceive. And as such this STEM+IC/MIND-FirstEnergy being the 'Holographic
Projector.' And also as that Prime Energy Plateau as being the First-Estate of
Energy, then all subsequent spectrum gradients
radiating-developing-progressing-evolve outward/beyondward from the
Centre-Point of 'First-Mind.' Even though we say 'first' as in 'first in
time,' this is probably misleading in that 'time' is non-componential relative
to the better said 'central nexial/axial region' of STEM+IC/FirstMind/MIND.
INFORMATION-COMPUTATION: IC would then provide the intial & ubiqitously
interconnected/permeating 'Push/PrimeMomentum' of every other omni-dimensional
energy construct.
This means profound physical-actual energy attachment and prime-motive
influence. This is 'not' a metaphysical exegesis. 'Metaphysics' as a term
means that 'we can barely detect that 'something' is going on, but we are yet a
long way off from having good understanding.' The best point here is that we
are a 'greater/much larger awareness' than our bio-empirical senses are usually
currently able to process &/or articulate. But we grow inexorably which is
heartening. And the bioplanetary chapter of this 'growth-process' is one hell
of a ride methinks. To the paranoid it's hell; but to ambitious & hungry &
inspiratorially-eager it's the ambrosia of agony-ecstacy; painfully exquisite,
terrible & brilliant and the very 'breath of life.'
* * *A STEM+IC/Premise: All Space Time Energy Mass plus
Information-Computation is as the formative-projection of MIND as the
First-estate/level/PrimeMotiveEnergy level of the infinite gradient energy
spectrum of the known Univere and not-quite-known Aexoverse. (The
Bubble-Universe infini-myriad array likely has us as one of many low-density
universe-bubbles within a more dynamic & dense super-energy 'space).
It would follow that 'Time' is merely the perceived-difference/friction between
proximal-contact of differing &/or opposing speeds&densities of adjacent energy
levels which are all staged upon an energy-whole-cothe ultimately source &
connected to the Origins Prime-Energy Spectrum Region of First-Mind. "Time" is
a notion & perception of proximal energy phenomenonal relative speed-density,
and as such is but a local-regional & tempory perceptual 'allusion.' And this
linear-'Time' allusion depends completely on our 'postion' and lack of
sensory/empiracal/awareness skills/tools that we use to determine/decide upon
how to intrepret the 'data' that it at present only 'seem' that we 'know.'
This is what we call 'knowledge' an is much more temporary&tenuous than we care
to admit which is our only deficient tool/'rule' to determine just where we
'stand' at the moment within our lesser abilities to directly perceive a larger
schema.
*STEM+IC: All subsequent gestalts-centres of IC-Information-Computational
aware-ness would perforce also have ubiquitous transdimensional
energy-connected access to Every Coodernate within our Space-Time Bubble
universe and to every energy coodinate within the infinitude beyond.
Conservation of Energy alludes even stronger that as gestalt-connectedness of
First-Mind-IC we have virtually infinite potential to project
holographic-formative impress of all aspects of STEM+IC within the power of the
centre of our minds which are mini-models of the greater STEM+IC whole. Remote
Viewing emerging science begins to point us to this reality as the
Prime-Postulate that will open us to horizons of STEM+IC physics that is
defusing the light of dawn to us as we speak.
And thus rightly did Albert Einstein state; "The Imagination is more important
than Knowledge." And I might add; that the 'Imagination=First Mind/Prime
Mind-IC projective-creative holographic abilities to virtually 'create'
knowledge. And thusly we are motive-agents of 'real' ongoing
creative-expansion-evolution within the Universe/Aexoverse fluid dynamic
systemic infinity-unity. In this light the very 'nature' of
'Empirical-Analysis' needs massive revisions that were begun with Werner
Heisenburgs Uncertainty & Schrodinger's Cat & Spooky Action at a Distance
apparent-but-real paradox's. The Japanese use paradoxical-Koans as mental
exercises to expand their thought processes as also the Tao Te Ching is
designed to do. Maybe the 'East' has the jump on us here.
This starts to sound like 'religion;' but this is First-Physics/Ultimate
Physics.
Aside: 'Time' conjecture has become a 'Gordion Knot' grounding shunt for much
MIND-gestalt creative energy in physics these days. 'Time' is a convenient
'transitory-perceptual-sym
[Vo]:Following up on a Heffner idea
At 01:52 AM 10/3/2009, Horace Heffner wrote: I suggested a possible means to beat this co-location problem (and thus cause fusion) here in 1996. It is described here: http://mtaonline.net/~hheffner/BoseHyp.pdf Once we have simple, cheap, standard cells operating and available and being produced in quantity, it becomes possible to efficiently test lots of ideas. Adding some radioisotope that might co-deposit with the palladium and deuterium could be pretty simple to do. And if we can develop sensors and sensor analysis that show in real time the level of nuclear activity, we might get very quick results. Thus even long shots might be tested. Has the idea of seeding the palladium deuteride with alpha or beta emitters been tried?
Re: [Vo]:Patterson and Letts experiment
At 09:46 AM 10/3/2009, Horace Heffner wrote: I don't think controlling thermal instabilities is important, it is eliminating their effect on the calorimetry. This is of course why Seebeck calorimetry is useful. Whatever directions the heat flows, it is measured. It occurs to me that, while there is a very important role for precise calorimetry to play in cold fusion research, from an engineering perspective it might be a bit of a red herring. I'd prefer to be able to estimate the instantaneous power generation as well as the volume that this is being generated within, i.e., the full thermal pattern inside the cell. One of the interesting SPAWAR results is IR imaging of the cathode, showing that the cathode temperature is substantially higher than that of the electrolyte. Then studying whatever effects accompany that temperature increase could be quite fruitful. Many of these effects, it appears, haven't been examined so closely, perhaps because they were proof of "nuclear." For example, as I've been asking, are there visible light emissions that accompany the heat generation? There are acoustical phenomena, and not just the bubbling, I'd think. The sharp pressure spikes shown in the SPAWAR presentations lead me to wonder what would happen if a cell was instrumented with multiple piezo detectors, with the arrival time of the spikes being used to locate the source, that might be done quite accurately, so one might be able to construct a 3-D image of the underlying activity. I should do some calculations The rise time of the spike is such and such, the speed of sound in the electrolyte is such and such, leading to a spatial resolution of such and such. Controlling the instabilities of fairies, sprites, elves, pixies, leprechauns, or other magical beings is outside my experience. 8^) There is probably a reason why a belief in unseen forces is culturally common across the planet. The reality is that, as the movie title glossed it, we don't know bleep. (We also know a great deal, to be sure, but another useful trait is a tolerance for contradiction, an ability to suspend a requirement that concepts be consistent. That's why they say that consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds.) If we can ascribe what we don't understand to unseen forces, it allows us to pursue causation without requiring consistency. In other words, it's possible that an "unscientific attitude" can facilitate a scientific one, but what passes, too often, for a scientific attitude, can lead, as we saw over the last twenty years, to attachment to established understandings of what is possible and what is impossible. An ability to tolerate the unknown seems to be an important trait of those who extend the boundaries of science. There is other work, also important, to be done by those who need established paradigms.
Re: [Vo]:Patterson and Letts experiment
At 08:20 AM 10/3/2009, Horace Heffner wrote: Fairies, sprites, elves, pixies, leprechauns, or other magical beings are hopefully not essential factors in cold fusion experiments. Damn! I was hoping that living in Northampton, Massachusetts, and having good relationships with the "alternative community" here, would improve my chances for success. I'll have to resort to incantations, writing nuclear reaction formulas in ink, dissolving the ink, and drinking it, before mixing the electrolyte, the homeopathic approach of sitting a helium balloon next to the cell, and other more probable methods of increasing fusion cross-section. That way, if I get no reaction, I can always blame my pronunciation, that I used black ink, when the jinn would have preferred blue, or that the balloon was too large, for any failures. Smaller balloon next time, or just a photo of a balloon might do.
Re: [Vo]:Patterson and Letts experiment
On Oct 3, 2009, at 4:28 AM, Dr. Mitchell Swartz wrote: At 08:20 AM 10/3/2009, you wrote: I wrote: "It strikes me as fairy easy to control for gravitational thermal instabilities in flow calorimeters.". That should be: "It strikes me as fairly easy to control for gravitational thermal instabilities in flow calorimeters.". Fairies, sprites, elves, pixies, leprechauns, or other magical beings are hopefully not essential factors in cold fusion experiments. Best regards, Horace Heffner http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/ You cannot control these instabilities in your cup of coffee. Especially since I drink tea due to blood pressure problems. I don't think controlling thermal instabilities is important, it is eliminating their effect on the calorimetry. This is of course why Seebeck calorimetry is useful. Whatever directions the heat flows, it is measured. Controlling the instabilities of fairies, sprites, elves, pixies, leprechauns, or other magical beings is outside my experience. 8^) Best regards, Horace Heffner http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
Re: [Vo]:Patterson and Letts experiment
At 08:20 AM 10/3/2009, you wrote: I wrote: "It strikes me as fairy easy to control for gravitational thermal instabilities in flow calorimeters.". That should be: "It strikes me as fairly easy to control for gravitational thermal instabilities in flow calorimeters.". Fairies, sprites, elves, pixies, leprechauns, or other magical beings are hopefully not essential factors in cold fusion experiments. Best regards, Horace Heffner http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/ You cannot control these instabilities in your cup of coffee.
Re: [Vo]:Patterson and Letts experiment
I wrote: "It strikes me as fairy easy to control for gravitational thermal instabilities in flow calorimeters.". That should be: "It strikes me as fairly easy to control for gravitational thermal instabilities in flow calorimeters.". Fairies, sprites, elves, pixies, leprechauns, or other magical beings are hopefully not essential factors in cold fusion experiments. Best regards, Horace Heffner http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
Re: [Vo]:Patterson and Letts experiment
On Oct 2, 2009, at 11:32 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote: I wrote: As far as I know, Swartz has never actually attempted to turn a flow calorimeter cell sideways to see if the performance changes. Cravens and I have actually tested this hypothesis by experiment. We tried turning cells sideways. It makes no measurable difference. I forgot to mention the most obvious reason this hypothesis is wrong. Many people -- thousands of people, actually -- run flow calorimeters in the vertical configuration. They do this in cold fusion and many other fields. McKubre and Storms, for example. When they calibrate with a joule heater or run a non-working cathode, their input equals output to within 10 ~ 100 mW. Their input power and flow rates are comparable to the Patterson and Letts experiment I observed. Therefore, if this configuration produces a 1 kW artifact, as Swartz claimed, McKubre, Storms and thousands of other people would see that artifact. Some of them would turn their cells sideways (or rearrange the inlet and outlet flow) and they would see the artifact go away. This does not happen. I suppose there might be a very small artifact, at the milliwatt scale, caused by the effect Swartz specifies. I wouldn't know. I have never heard of anything like that. But I am certain there are no heretofore unknown artifacts 100,000 times above McKubre's error bars. - Jed It strikes me as fairy easy to control for gravitational thermal instabilities in flow calorimeters. Just reverse the flow direction. Also, dual method calorimeters, like those used at Earthtech, overcome such problems by producing consistent simultaneous data using isoperibolic methods. Some experiments used the electrolyte for flow calorimetry. Doing this just created fodder for debate. I think one way around this problem is to use a heat exchanger inside the insulating envelope for the flow calorimetry. This provides the advantages of up close heat removal and bubble control, if that is necessary, with the advantages of flow calorimetry using a pure medium, like water. Best regards, Horace Heffner http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
