Re: [Vo]:October is here
yes, after collaboration with Kresenn, he is working with LENR Cars CTO (Antoine Guillemin) for a replication under Fleishmann Memorial open replication project... If it succeed in a replicable toy experiment, it can convince. I'm jusr afraid that it failed like Spawar replication kit... working but ignored. 2012/10/2 Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com Jouni Valkonen jounivalko...@gmail.com wrote: The most worrisome thing is that indeed Celani's quantum reactor does resemble that of Rossi's, because he too refuses any independent confirmation or replication of his technology . . . That is incorrect. He is assisting other people who are testing and independently replicating. He allowed the people at NI to replace all of his equipment with their own. They kept only the cell itself. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:A New Spin on Solar Cells
On Oct 3, 2012, at 6:22 AM, mix...@bigpond.com wrote: I can't guess what effect the lenses would have, but I'm guessing it would be minimal, since they only appear to cover a fraction of the total area. Focusing the light with lenses will increase the efficiency of the PV-cell by 20 to 75 folds. So 75 fold increase in efficiency of PV-cell is by no means minimal improvement. The problem with PV-cells is that without effective cooling they will overheat in southern latitudes if they are facing midday sun directly for prolonged time ― even without lensing. And when PV-cells are overheating, it will reduce not only the efficiency, but also the lifetime of PV-cell is compromised. So lensing with conventional flat panels is pretty much out of the question, because effective cooling is too expensive to organise. However this cone architecture of solar cell does solve the cooling problem quite creative way, without increasing too much the total cost. Therefore, don't you ever use the common sense, because it is always misleading you! It is better to use scientific sense. ;-) It is interesting that the total cost of the electricity with this technology could be as low as $90 per MWh. This means that it is almost cheaper than conventional coal power. ―Jouni
Re: [Vo]:A New Spin on Solar Cells
On Tue, Oct 2, 2012 at 11:22 PM, mix...@bigpond.com wrote: This makes no sense to me. It seems that at any given instant only some of the cells are exposed to direct sunlight, the other half to indirect sunlight (unless the sun is directly overhead). Therefore if anything, one would need 75% more cells, not less. Didn't you watch the vid? In direct sunlight all the time, the cells get clogged with electrons. Being in less sun for a while allows them to flow better. Seriously, that is what they claim.
Re: [Vo]:October is here
On 2012-10-03 08:50, Alain Sepeda wrote: yes, after collaboration with Kresenn, he is working with LENR Cars CTO (Antoine Guillemin) for a replication under Fleishmann Memorial open replication project... Interesting; do you know more information or are you in contact with Guillemin or Chauvin from LENR-Cars? As far as I know they should have obtained all the necessary materials to make such replication. If it succeed in a replicable toy experiment, it can convince. I'm jusr afraid that it failed like Spawar replication kit... working but ignored. We're talking, if correctly replicated, of a few dozen watts of excess heat significantly greater than the input energy (with a single wire). I imagine that since Celani's constantan material shows an anomalous heat behavior even just when merely heated, that increasing the amount of active wires inside the reactor would make the effect even more noticeable. If this is confirmed and validated by reputable third parties, it cannot be ignored. It's too big. Cheers, S.A.
Re: [Vo]:October is here
all I have is from the video of discussion of N Chauvin with a student on you tube, and people commenting it. 2012/10/3 Akira Shirakawa shirakawa.ak...@gmail.com On 2012-10-03 08:50, Alain Sepeda wrote: yes, after collaboration with Kresenn, he is working with LENR Cars CTO (Antoine Guillemin) for a replication under Fleishmann Memorial open replication project... Interesting; do you know more information or are you in contact with Guillemin or Chauvin from LENR-Cars? As far as I know they should have obtained all the necessary materials to make such replication. If it succeed in a replicable toy experiment, it can convince. I'm jusr afraid that it failed like Spawar replication kit... working but ignored. We're talking, if correctly replicated, of a few dozen watts of excess heat significantly greater than the input energy (with a single wire). I imagine that since Celani's constantan material shows an anomalous heat behavior even just when merely heated, that increasing the amount of active wires inside the reactor would make the effect even more noticeable. If this is confirmed and validated by reputable third parties, it cannot be ignored. It's too big. Cheers, S.A.
Re: [Vo]:WLT Disproof
At 09:02 AM 10/2/2012, Daniel Rocha wrote: It doesn't rule out. They just find lower neutron production rates, which are merely 200x smaller. That's an error plus it's misleading. They find 300x smaller as a rate, *using an optimistic value of the mass renormalization factor.* Essentially, they are pointing out what appears to them as a serious oversight in the W-L calculations. I do not consider myself competent to judge the predictive math. If there were specific evidence for the neutron production, it would be reasonable to look for other errors, and to consider the W-L conjecture as being possibly valid in spite of possible errors, but the elephant in the living room for W-L theory is that the consequences it would seem to predict are not observed. Slow neutrons have high capture cross-sections, ultra-low-momentum neutrons will simply have very high capture cross-sections. They will be efficient at producing transmutations (neutron activation). The behavior of neutrons is well-known. W-L wave away the missing gamma rays by suggesting that the heavy electron patches that allow neutron production also heavily absorb gamma rays, but this effect, which should be easy to confirm, has not been confirmed, and we haven't even seen primary experimental evidence for it. Years ago, asked about such evidence by Richard Garwin, Larsen responded, proprietary. Familiar? Even if somehow the gammas are absorbed, so efficiently that none escape, the transmutations produced would follow patterns that are not observed. Direct, single-neutron transmutations are not observed at high rate in PdD experiments. (High means anywhere near the rate at which helium is produced The evidence could allow very-low-rate transmutations.) W-L explain the production of helium by proposing multiple transmutations, but if X is the rate at which single transmutations are produced, the rate for double transmutations would be approximately X^2. Since X is low, for all known LENR, the single transmutation product would be found in much greater abundance than a double product. This is the opposite of what is seen. Helium is the *only* significant ash from palladium deuteride LENR. No other product has been found to be quantitatively correlated with excess heat. W-L theory is a hoax. It is presented as if it explains the experimental evidence, but it doesn't. It is a set of wild conjectures that explain only one piece of experimental evidence, and the conflict with the rest of the evidence is ignored by Widom and Larsen. It is promulgated because it allows some to say, it isn't fusion!, thus proposing to some set of skeptics that, after all, they were right. Fusion was impossible. Unfortunately, the evidence is strong that the Fleischmann-Pons Heat Effect does result from some form of deuterium fusion. It's still rebuttable, but this rough theory (fusion by unspecified mechanism) is so well established that the community stopped attempting to measure the reaction Q more accurately than has been done, which would further nail down the fusion conclusion. Most researchers don't have access to accurate measurement of helium, and measuring total helium produced is quite difficult. It's possible to criticize the single accurate measurement attempt by McKubre at SRI, that gave a value very close to the 23.8 MeV/He-4 predicted from deuterium fusion, hence there is room for further confirmation/disconfirmation, but ... researchers have moved on and are more interested in other things, most notably in bringing reactions under control, in making LENR more reliable. The Fusion Conclusion does not specify mechanism. Fusion, in this, refers to the relationship between fuel and ash, which determines the energy released, assuming that no energy escapes from the calorimetric environment as uncaptured radiation. Fusion does *not* mean d-d fusion, because there are other possible reaction paths. And deuterium - helium for palladium deuteride experiments does not necessarily tell us anything about what is happening with nickel hydride. 2012/10/2 Gigi DiMarco mailto:gdmgdms...@gmail.comgdmgdms...@gmail.com The following paper: Low Energy Neutron Production by Inverse-beta decay in Metallic Hydride Surfaces http://arxiv.org/find/nucl-th/1/au:+Ciuchi_S/0/1/0/all/0/1S. Ciuchi, http://arxiv.org/find/nucl-th/1/au:+Maiani_L/0/1/0/all/0/1L. Maiani, http://arxiv.org/find/nucl-th/1/au:+Polosa_A/0/1/0/all/0/1A. D. Polosa, http://arxiv.org/find/nucl-th/1/au:+Riquer_V/0/1/0/all/0/1V. Riquer, http://arxiv.org/find/nucl-th/1/au:+Ruocco_G/0/1/0/all/0/1G. Ruocco, http://arxiv.org/find/nucl-th/1/au:+Vignati_M/0/1/0/all/0/1M. Vignati has just been uploaded to ArXiv http://arxiv.org/abs/1209.6501http://arxiv.org/abs/1209.6501 The paper addresses the WLT as presented by Widom, Larsen and Srivastava in peer-reviewed journals and presents very strong objections to the theory that can be
Re: [Vo]:October is here
At 09:57 AM 10/2/2012, fznidar...@aol.com wrote: It has now been one year since Rossi's big demonstration. Products were to come out at the end of last year, then in the Summer of 2012. Now its one year later and there is nothing. No products, no independent tests by a reputable group. I predict that even Jed will give up within the next five years. My operating hypothesis with Rossi, aside from the minor possibility of Total Fraud, is that he actually did find significant heat, sometimes. He might even have had some cells that produced significant heat for a long time, but that he had not actually learned to control the reaction to make it reliable, and reliability is crucial for a commercial product. Inventors tend to believe that they can solve any problem. Some inventors have been known to jump the gun, so to speak, to announce a product before the last details are worked out. And then, needing to demonstrate it, some inventors have been known to create exaggerated demonstrations. (After all, we'll have it fixed by next month.) That there is some level of legitimacy to a need to keep the exact invention secret provides a ready excuse. What I've written here is only conjecture. It was, however, behind my advice to the LENR community, when Rossi first made his big splash in early 2011, to not endorse Rossi's work without independent confirmation, because any failure to complete a commercial product would then reflect poorly on the cold fusion community. I would prefer to have been wrong. I also warned that for Rossi to depend on secrecy to maintain his intellectual property was foolish, it wouldn't work. Rossi may have tacked onto this a deliberate creation of an appearance of fraud, in an attempt to suppress independent attempts to find strong NiH effects. Time will tell. A lot of people are now working openly on NiH. The field has promise, though it is not scientifically established: with anything like the power of PdD LENR. It remains possible, at this point, that some unidentified artifacts are creating an appearance of excess heat. On the other hand, if Storms is correct and the NiH product is deuterium, I predict that the ash will be identified soon, within a year or two. Demonstrating deuterium as ash could be as simple as using seriously deuterium-depleted light water in the experiments, and finding a correlation between heat and deuterium abundance, as was done with heat and helium production in PdD experiments.
RE: [Vo]:WLT Disproof
-Original Message- From: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax Slow neutrons have high capture cross-sections, ultra-low-momentum neutrons will simply have very high capture cross-sections. They will be efficient at producing transmutations (neutron activation). That appears to be incorrect, as a general rule. Apparently you are thinking that the response of thermal neutrons to Uranium is typical. Fissile materials are not typical, and nickel is different. Do you have a reference for nickel being more efficient for ultracold neutrons ? If not, you simply cannot make that generalization. The target atom is more important than the momentum, and even though low momentum (temperature) often has much higher cross-section, this is not true with some elements - in fact the opposite can be true. Read the Wiki article: For a given target and reaction, the cross section is strongly dependent on the neutron speed. In the extreme case, the cross section can be, at low energies, either null or, on the contrary, much larger than the cross section at high energies. I cannot find a reference to nickel to ultracold neutrons, but for thermal neutrons (cool, not cold) Ni is does not have a particularly high cross cross-section, so it is arguable that transmutations will NOT be more efficient in the case of WL. attachment: winmail.dat
[Vo]:Brillouin's presentation to Sunrise Securities
I don't think this has been posted before. Pardon if it was. The a link at the URL below leads to the Brillouin presentation (Slideshare) which won them $20M second round funding. http://nextbigfuture.com/2012/09/brillouin-energy-has-conditional.html
Re: [Vo]:Designer of 3-D Printable Gun Has His 3-D Printer Seized
Because there is alot more to steal, and therefore great motivation to steal it. They come here from all around the globe to try to get their hand on this Countries wealth in one way or another. I mean, look what has slimed it's way into the ill-faded White House. The way I see it is, If you don't vote for Romney, then you empower a Dictator. You might as well stick a fork is us, cause were done IF this Illegal imposter fraud is allowed to walk all over us. Now, of course, this is what we get for being generous, compassionate, thoughtful, kind, and/or too giving Give'm an inch, and they'll take a mile. A fool and their money are soon departed. And my favorite, you don't know what you got, till its gone. To me, Obama in the White House can only mean that we the true people of this country and/or any other one, have a very valueable lesson to learn about Freedom. The only thing BO actually cares about is himself, and the legitimate true people of this Country are simply to be worked played by BO's thugly band of mental midget supporters until we are walked over like a stampede of animals. Anyone oppossing him, will have to be silenced and/or eliminated. So, everyone out there who has negative anti-sentiments or pure hatred for our means of government, democracy, establishment, judicial or political system, and everything else that was keeping the animals from taking over the zoo. While crony capitalism has lead to the current crony communism now falsely occupying the IL-faded White House, *We* must view it as a serious lesson to learn from, and make sure it doean't happen again. There are many currently walking among US that would like to get their grubby mitts on everything you own and/or would enjoy seeing this Country fail or be destroyed. That way, the Dictators thruout the world can once again begin implementation of their plans to militarily controll everyone thing. Obama *IS* nothing more than an illegal, and everything he has done since illegally obtaining the Presidency, is null, void, and needs to be thrown-out, with him. No matter how many umpteen times a minute, whenever you turn on a radio, Tv, or online, and see or hear Obama being referred to as The President, he ISN'T, CAN'T and NEVER will be. IF he is, then *We* the True Free People of this Country and/or the World will be no more. So please whatever you do in the final vote count of the upcoming election... DO NOT empower this wannabe Thug Of A Dictator, because it cannot work to anyones advantage, except BOs... and that IS the Mentality which We have enabled to literally walk right in this Country and seize controll of our lives... Fools!!! Sucka's!!! and don't forget to donate to your local humane society! Please, I would like to hear your explanation why the US has more criminals than the Philippines (on a per capita basis). Jojo /HTML
Re: [Vo]:Brillouin's presentation to Sunrise Securities
Slide 17 shows their Power Plant Retrofit Model showing a 5-10 MW power plant. Most coal-fired plants are at least 100 x that size.
Re: [Vo]: Experimental Results with Nickel and Sodium Carbonate
I have increased the current in my setup to 200 milliamps. It has been running at that current level for more than 12 hours now and no anomalous heat has shown up yet. - Has anybody been able to replicate Chuck Sites results? I have not seen any claims to that yet. - Paul
Re: [Vo]:October is here
On Tue, Oct 2, 2012 at 2:08 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: Alan J Fletcher a...@well.com wrote: e) There are multiple reports of NiH generating excess energy (So Rossi must be faking something real?) That's the point I was trying to make when I noted there have been many other Ni-H reports. Rossi's claims seem similar to many others, especially Celani. Adjusting for the mass of material and the temperature they are in the same ball park. If Celani is right, it seems likely to me that Rossi is too. I doubt that Rossi is faking anything. I thought you said he employs lies as part of his business stragetgy? Frankly if he does lie in that respect, I don't trust anything he _says_ about his devices. harry Harry
Re: [Vo]:WLT Disproof
At 10:09 AM 10/2/2012, Daniel Rocha wrote: I am actually surprised that they found a high neutron rate. I thought they'd find nothing. Those are conventional nuclear physicists, as you can see in their publication list. Read the paper itself. They found that the W-L estimates were high by a factor of 300, *given an optimistic assumption.* They were not asserting a high rate, rather that an optimistic assumption was necessary for even a low rate. What's important about this paper is that the W-L claims are taken seriously and actually investigated, though this investigation was minimal and purely theoretical; it did not address the most serious problems with W-L theory, only the specific claim of neutron generation in the first place.
Re: [Vo]:Designer of 3-D Printable Gun Has His 3-D Printer Seized
How does one measure hard work? How much harder does Bill Gates work in comparison to someone who works two jobs at minimum wage? Do you seriously he imagine he works 100 times harder if his income is 100 times greater? Do you believe a man with backhoe works 100 times harder than a man with shovel? Harry On Tue, Oct 2, 2012 at 10:42 PM, Jojo Jaro jth...@hotmail.com wrote: This idea that poverty is the root cause of criminality is at best naive and at worst moronic. This can only come from the liberal minds of socialistic/communistic people who think that Income Redistribution is the panacea for all societal ills. My friend, stealing from people who work hard for their income and redistribute it to lazy bums will not cure sociatal ills. You are smarter than to believe in that solution. Let's take a real life example. The United States has more felons and criminals on a per capita basis than any other country in the world, including such 4th world countries like the Philippines who are poverty stricken to the core. The United States is flushed in food and resources and conveniences, and yet manage to produce more criminals and felons than any other country. Please, I would like to hear your explanation why the US has more criminals than the Philippines (on a per capita basis). Jojo PS. The root cause of crime is not poverty. but rather the inherent sin and rebellion in the hearts of a glutonous, rebellious and lazy society. - Original Message - From: Jouni Valkonen To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2012 9:50 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Designer of 3-D Printable Gun Has His 3-D Printer Seized I would think that only way to combat this problem is to eliminate poverty from the society. About 95% of the criminality is due to unjust distribution of wealth. This is not that individual humans would resort into criminality if they fail to find job due to high unemployment rates, but because children are crown in the conditions where no children should be allowed to live. Best way to eliminate poverty is to set zero income level for each individuals into 1000-2000 dollars per month. This can be done quite easily by distributing income more justly. When there is no scarcity of the basic needs, there won't be breeding grounds for violent gangs and violent larger scale religions, because every child will get a proper and free education.
Re: [Vo]:WLT Disproof
At 10:27 AM 10/2/2012, Moab Moab wrote: mainstream scientists reading LENR papers and replying to them ? What happened, did LENR become noticeable overnight ? No, it took something like fifteen years of steady decay of the totally skeptical position, with accumulation of evidence and understanding of the possibility -- and reality -- of cold fusion. Many physicists are now recognizing the anomaly: excess heat in PdD, and a few recognize this as a fact, not mere unidentified artifact, but the mystery of what is actually happening remains, and physicists are starting to recognise that this is naturally *their problem*, not the obligation of the chemists who discovered cold fusion. It was the chemists' job to find and characterize the heat, to identify the ash, which could all be done with the tools of chemistry. Figuring out how fusion takes place is a task for quantum field theory, most likely. Chemists are not trained in this, generally. Some physicists are. And they are starting to recognize the challenge. The long-standing problem is that those who believed in some unidentified artifact never actually faced *that challenge,* i.e., identifying it and demonstrating it through controlled experiment. That was where the whole skeptical community fell on its face. The artifact was demonstrated with N-rays and polywater, which physicists often compared to cold fusion, but they didn't follow the precedent. Too difficult. They wanted the chemists to present them with a single, simple, reliable experiment, which wasn't available. In fact, by the mid-1990s, the experiment existed, but it still required some serious chemistry. (Measure heat/helium with PdD experiments, at least some of which are showing excess heat.) Kits could have been designed and made by chemists, but ... they weren't. (I think there was one kit, but I'm not sure what happened with it. It may be that it wasn't sufficiently reliable. A kit would have to work, ideally, at least, I'd say, 30% of the time. (The higher the number, the fewer kits would need to be run to be reasonably sure of seeing the effect that then could be demonstrated as real or as artifact through controls.) (A kit would be made to be run with a very clear protocol, and would be designed to be relatively idiot-proof. Lots of replication efforts were torpedoed because people made up, themselves, what they thought should work better. And which didn't. Included in a kit protocol would be how long it was necessary to run the thing to see results; again, not waiting long enough was a problem with many replications. Some object to this type of replication, because it is not fully independent. I.e., the kit designers and builders supply all the materials, everything, for a turnkey demonstration. However, it is still independent because experimenters are free to modify the protocol to create controlled experiments that, if there are some kit shenanigans, identify them. They have full control over the operation of the kit. Until they have seen some substantial success, in their own lab, they would wisely not alter the protocol at all. They would basically plug the thing in as instructed, and watch what happens. Then they have, in their hands, a demonstration of the effect, which they can then investigate in a traditional manner.) (How kit construction would be financed is a separate issue. It could have been done, I'm sure, if the cold fusion community had recognized the need and had organized to handle it. There would be, indeed, many issues to be faced, but ... it could have been done. It could still be done, though I'm not totally convinced that it is now necessary.) (My SPAWAR neutron replication, which has been run once now, is not designed for definitive results, if results are negative, because it has no independent measure of verifying *any* reaction, it just looks for neutron evidence.) (At this point, looking at the LR-115 detectors themselves, in isolation, from a single experimental run, I see no apparent evidence for neutron production, with a gold wire cathode and what should theoretically be the same as the Galileo protocol, as to electrochemistry. However, the experiment was designed with LR-115 in layers, and detector analysis is proceeding, to see if evidence for proton tracks crossing LR-115 layers can be seen. I will also need, especially if results remain negative, to see control exposure of LR-115 to known neutron radiation. There are *many* ways to get this wrong.)
Re: [Vo]:October is here
Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com wrote: Time will tell. A lot of people are now working openly on NiH. Yup. I think Rossi deserves a lot of the credit for that. Not all of it. As far as I am concerned, Rossi has done no harm and plenty of good for this field. He is a rascal at times but harmless. Our reputation in the mass media is already so low he can't make it any worse. He rubs people the wrong way. He has a big mouth and he can be annoying but I do not think he has done anything wrong. Even if he is faking it, which I do not believe, he would mainly hurt himself, plus people such as Levi and EK. He would have no effect on the reputation of other researchers such as Fleischmann or McKubre. - Jed
Re: [Vo]: Experimental Results with Nickel and Sodium Carbonate
I had a lot of heat, whether it is anomalous or not, I don't know. I think it is somehow resistance heating through the borax or chemistry with creating boric acid. Just a speculation. I had heat 130F (I say it this way because my thermometer was electroplated or something causing it to register 20F too high. It read 158 or so at the max). To get more heat, you need an anode with as much surface area as your nickel. I used 12V at 1 amp. On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 11:17 AM, Paul Stout paulst...@att.net wrote: I have increased the current in my setup to 200 milliamps. It has been running at that current level for more than 12 hours now and no anomalous heat has shown up yet. - Has anybody been able to replicate Chuck Sites results? I have not seen any claims to that yet. - Paul
Re: [Vo]:Brillouin's presentation to Sunrise Securities
The mention of the 10MW plant is a proof of concept on which some additional funding is contingent. It does not appear to be a product proposal. Jeff On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 8:58 AM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote: Slide 17 shows their Power Plant Retrofit Model showing a 5-10 MW power plant. Most coal-fired plants are at least 100 x that size.
Re: [Vo]:October is here
At 12:49 PM 10/2/2012, Alan J Fletcher wrote: At 07:57 AM 10/2/2012, fznidar...@aol.com wrote: It has now been one year since Rossi's big demonstration. Products were to come out at the end of last year, then in the Summer of 2012. Now its one year later and there is nothing. No products, no independent tests by a reputable group. From: Akira Shirakawa shirakawa.ak...@gmail.com Apparently [1], by hearsay [2], something along those lines should come out at around mid-October but I'm personally not expecting much, or that this is even related to Rossi. Well, at least it costs nothing to keep following the latest news and developments. It's still wait and see time. a) The warm 1MW IS still listed for sale. b) The warm 1MW now has SOME kind of safety certification c) Something is happening on the hot eCat front d) We all said Rossi was nuts to sell directly to consumers without a UL (or equivalent) certification, which would take a long time e) There are multiple reports of NiH generating excess energy (So Rossi must be faking something real?) My responses: a. Means nothing. It takes nothing to list something for sale. b. Safety certification can be obtained with a nonfunctional product. c. Something is happening means more of the same old same old. d. Sure, in a way. But direct to consumers is not the first place to sell a product, plus it's possible to sell investigational products to consumers who are willing to accept risks. Selling directly to consumers would not mean, without safety certification, mass-marketing of a product. The consumers would really be the adventurous. And a sane seller would make sure that all risks were documented, that there was adequate provision for safety, even if that might be expensive. e. Yes. Rossi might be faking something real. Excess energy from NiH was reported long ago. That someone saw real or imagined excess energy tells us *nothing* about whether Rossi is getting excess energy. Rossi's claims, it should be recognized, were outliers, he was reporting far more energy than ever before seen, and implying that it was reliable. I do not think that Rossi is pure fraud, though it remains possible. Rather, more likely, it would explain much of his behavior, and the delays, he has exaggerated what he has, in some ways at least (saying that such and such will be ready on such and such a date is a form of exaggeration if that's not actually reasonable), and perhaps even to the extent of sometimes faking results. It's important to get this: that NiH might be real is no indicator at all of Rossi's honesty. None. Rossi has successfully created the appearance of being a con artist. Some of his defenders think that he is doing this deliberately, to throw off would--be snakes who might otherwise try to imitate his work and steal his rights. And those of us who don't have solid inside information, from independent sources, must consider that sometimes appearances are real. I can't tell the difference between a fake con artist and a real one, and, in fact, both are fakes, that's all I can tell. *Something* is fake here. (Or Rossi is totally stupid and unaware of how he's making himself look. Possible, perhaps, but not likely.) Rossi could quickly bypass all this by simply allowing independent verification of his claims. He hasn't done it. No, Rossi, at this point, stands exposed as someone who has no credibility. He did announce that it would all be over last October, that there would be no more room for doubt. He stood on this as an argument and a defense. You will all know. We don't know, except that we know nothing. We know that his prediction was false. He could easily recover, but doesn't, he just keeps on with the same bluster and confidence. As in confidence game, or con game. Con artists are those who design ways of gaining confidence, and people are con artists because it works. And this has practically nothing to do with science. Rossi has not provided or allowed the gathering of the necessary scientific data to understand the effect behind his heat claims. We have little, if anything, more from Defkalion, though Defkalion *looks* more credible. From Brillouin, we have even more information, though still not enough. NiH is far from an established, accepted phenomenon, compared to PdD. PdD may never be commercially practical as an approach, but we can be confident that fusion is actually taking place with PdD, the heavily-confirmed data leads to a *practical* certainty. NiH is clearly a promising approach, worthy of continued investigation. But we should not shut down PdD research, because of the scientific implications. Knowing and understanding what is happening in PdD remains a crucial research goal, and it might apply to or elucidate what happens with NiH.
Re: [Vo]: Experimental Results with Nickel and Sodium Carbonate
Jack, can you make a voltage measurement across the electrode you have connected to the positive supply terminal? Place your probe as close to the electrode as possible without touching it on the side that is opposite to the location of the negative connected electrode. The other probe is should be connected to the same electrode in a location out of the bath. I used my supply terminal as the drop was minimal. I noticed a large voltage drop earlier which suggested that joule heating was occurring within the coating on the electrode. Good luck, Dave -Original Message- From: Jack Cole jcol...@gmail.com To: paul42 pau...@earthlink.net Cc: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Wed, Oct 3, 2012 2:57 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]: Experimental Results with Nickel and Sodium Carbonate I had a lot of heat, whether it is anomalous or not, I don't know. I think it is somehow resistance heating through the borax or chemistry with creating boric acid. Just a speculation. I had heat 130F (I say it this way because my thermometer was electroplated or something causing it to register 20F too high. It read 158 or so at the max). To get more heat, you need an anode with as much surface area as your nickel. I used 12V at 1 amp. On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 11:17 AM, Paul Stout paulst...@att.net wrote: I have increased the current in my setup to 200 milliamps. It has been running at that current level for more than 12 hours now and no anomalous heat has shown up yet. - Has anybody been able to replicate Chuck Sites results? I have not seen any claims to that yet. - Paul
Re: [Vo]:Brillouin's presentation to Sunrise Securities
I would think that a modest sized test facility would be an ideal way to evaluate their device. Hopefully it can be scaled up in the near future if operation within the power grid is the desired outcome. Dave -Original Message- From: Jeff Berkowitz pdx...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Wed, Oct 3, 2012 2:58 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Brillouin's presentation to Sunrise Securities The mention of the 10MW plant is a proof of concept on which some additional funding is contingent. It does not appear to be a product proposal. Jeff On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 8:58 AM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote: Slide 17 shows their Power Plant Retrofit Model showing a 5-10 MW power plant. Most coal-fired plants are at least 100 x that size.
Re: [Vo]:October is here
Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com wrote: b. Safety certification can be obtained with a nonfunctional product. Are you sure about that? I doubt it. Rossi has successfully created the appearance of being a con artist. Some of his defenders think that he is doing this deliberately, to throw off would--be snakes who might otherwise try to imitate his work and steal his rights. I think he is doing it deliberately, but that does not make me his defender. I think it is a stupid strategy. I think it will fail. Patterson had a similar strategy, for similar reasons. He deliberately made an unimpressive, crude demonstration. It failed to convince Motorola. I predicted it would fail when I saw it, and when he told me why it was so poorly constructed. Rossi could quickly bypass all this by simply allowing independent verification of his claims. He hasn't done it. He does not want to. That's what he says. I see no reason to doubt he means it. Patterson said exactly the same thing, for similar reasons. If Rossi sticks to this strategy I predict he will take his technology to the grave the way Patterson did. I see no way this strategy can succeed. If it begins to succeed the strategy will backfire and destroy any chance of success. That is what happened with Patterson, and I see it happening now with Rossi. NiH is clearly a promising approach, worthy of continued investigation. But we should not shut down PdD research, because of the scientific implications. Knowing and understanding what is happening in PdD remains a crucial research goal, and it might apply to or elucidate what happens with NiH. I agree. I think most researchers who continue to work with PdD would also agree. - Jed
Re: [Vo]: Experimental Results with Nickel and Sodium Carbonate
My anode is a motor brush so its surface area is larger than that of the nickel coin. I have increased the current to 400 milliamps. With the active and control beakers in series, the power supply is at 30 volts to drive that current. - I was hoping to avoid the higher currents, which could mask any anomalous heat being generated. Paul On 10/3/2012 1:57 PM, Jack Cole wrote: I had a lot of heat, whether it is anomalous or not, I don't know. I think it is somehow resistance heating through the borax or chemistry with creating boric acid. Just a speculation. I had heat 130F (I say it this way because my thermometer was electroplated or something causing it to register 20F too high. It read 158 or so at the max). To get more heat, you need an anode with as much surface area as your nickel. I used 12V at 1 amp. On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 11:17 AM, Paul Stout paulst...@att.net mailto:paulst...@att.net wrote: I have increased the current in my setup to 200 milliamps. It has been running at that current level for more than 12 hours now and no anomalous heat has shown up yet. - Has anybody been able to replicate Chuck Sites results? I have not seen any claims to that yet. - Paul
[Vo]:OT: The 23 Enigma
There is a meme out there about cycles of 23 years. It is the so-called 23 Enigma and refers to the belief popularized by Robert Anton Wilson and others that meaningful incidents and events are connected to the number 23 (and alternatively by the rule of fives 2+3=5). Some of this is found in the widely misunderstood Illuminatus Trilogy. There are strange coincidences of 23-year cycles popping up in modern history and personal anecdote that make it seem more than random, but the connection to this year is probably bogus; yet... as of today... more provocative. 2012 is 80% gone now - yet going back - there is little doubt that 1989 was a red-letter year for many who read this list. We cannot overlook the implications of a ~23 year gap ... if something should turn up in LENR in the next few months, and we can blame the 23 Enigma (or the Illuminati) on the delay. Also, for those who live in the SF Bay area of California, as did Wilson - 1989 was the year of the devastating Loma Prieta Earthquake. A big-one is overdue here, and October is looming ominous. If a Big-one does happen this year, 23 years later, then it will probably be during the Series. 1989 was the year of another oddity in the Bay area - in Baseball of all things. That year both the local ball clubs won their respective pennants and appeared is what was called the Bay Bridge World Series. The big quake was seen on National TV during one of the games and the Goodyear Blimp caught the resulting fires for a large audience. The ball-parks are across the Bay from one another, and having two local teams in a World Series is extremely rare, but that rare event could happen again this year. IOW - that coincidence of Big Quake, Baseball oddity, LENR discovery, and so on - would not even be worth a passing mention - if the Oakland Club had not done something today that has never been done in Baseball before, preserving a chance to be in the 2012 World Series later this month - and the SF Giants are also in the playoffs. And if Brillouin and SRI/EPRI are listening, then they might consider that they are destined to be integral to the final part of this revised RAW 23 year Trilogy (since Rossi and DGT seem to have defaulted). Or maybe an unknown inventor, quien sabe? Wilson wrote about QM in the Schrödinger's Cat Trilogy, and Prometheus Rising and some tales which are predictive of future energy including The Final Secret of the Illuminati which I should probably reread - to see if they offer further insight. Many consider Wilson to have been a real prophet, but in the Trickster disguise - often leading the reader to an opposite conclusion to what the actual words suggest. Others think the Illuminati stuff too far-out or if anything, closer to metaphor, than real ... (even before the doomsday cults picked up on it, inappropriately). There is a way that they, the Illuminati could be both benign and real to some extent; and it is not just as a meme, or as aliens, in the Philip Dick tradition ... or modern-day Greek gods, or even satanic - but all of that is as real as anything else in your brain, on the bottom line. Ah... the 23 Enigma... bring it on. Jones attachment: winmail.dat
Re: [Vo]: Experimental Results with Nickel and Sodium Carbonate
It seems like from the experiments I've run that if you want heat, put enough borax in so that it settles to the bottom. Then put your electrodes down into the borax powder in the bottom. Eventually, the borax powder disappears leaving yellowish nearly transparent crystals on the electrodes and in the bottom of the cell. It is easy to get 120+F temps with an air temperature of 60F using 12V @ 1amp. On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 5:55 PM, Paul Stout paulst...@att.net wrote: My anode is a motor brush so its surface area is larger than that of the nickel coin. I have increased the current to 400 milliamps. With the active and control beakers in series, the power supply is at 30 volts to drive that current. - I was hoping to avoid the higher currents, which could mask any anomalous heat being generated. Paul On 10/3/2012 1:57 PM, Jack Cole wrote: I had a lot of heat, whether it is anomalous or not, I don't know. I think it is somehow resistance heating through the borax or chemistry with creating boric acid. Just a speculation. I had heat 130F (I say it this way because my thermometer was electroplated or something causing it to register 20F too high. It read 158 or so at the max). To get more heat, you need an anode with as much surface area as your nickel. I used 12V at 1 amp. On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 11:17 AM, Paul Stout paulst...@att.net wrote: I have increased the current in my setup to 200 milliamps. It has been running at that current level for more than 12 hours now and no anomalous heat has shown up yet. - Has anybody been able to replicate Chuck Sites results? I have not seen any claims to that yet. - Paul
Re: [Vo]:October is here
At 03:20 PM 10/3/2012, Jed Rothwell wrote: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax mailto:a...@lomaxdesign.coma...@lomaxdesign.com wrote: b. Safety certification can be obtained with a nonfunctional product. Are you sure about that? I doubt it. Safety certification is according to codes that cover design. I very much doubt that specific safety codes exist for LENR devices; the certification obtained is very likely for the control systems. Will they burn up? Will the power short to the case? Stuff like that. Rossi has successfully created the appearance of being a con artist. Some of his defenders think that he is doing this deliberately, to throw off would--be snakes who might otherwise try to imitate his work and steal his rights. I think he is doing it deliberately, but that does not make me his defender. Okay, some random commentators think that. I've classified you as a defender because you think that he's not a fraud, per se. In the universe of relationships to Rossi, that's a defender. I think it is a stupid strategy. I think it will fail. Patterson had a similar strategy, for similar reasons. He deliberately made an unimpressive, crude demonstration. It failed to convince Motorola. I predicted it would fail when I saw it, and when he told me why it was so poorly constructed. Rossi could quickly bypass all this by simply allowing independent verification of his claims. He hasn't done it. He does not want to. That's what he says. I see no reason to doubt he means it. Patterson said exactly the same thing, for similar reasons. I don't doubt you. If Rossi sticks to this strategy I predict he will take his technology to the grave the way Patterson did. I see no way this strategy can succeed. If it begins to succeed the strategy will backfire and destroy any chance of success. That is what happened with Patterson, and I see it happening now with Rossi. Perhaps. Perhaps not. The problem is that if you make yourself look like a fraud, that's how the world might end up viewing you. It's a weird sort of dishonesty, but it's still dishonest. NiH is clearly a promising approach, worthy of continued investigation. But we should not shut down PdD research, because of the scientific implications. Knowing and understanding what is happening in PdD remains a crucial research goal, and it might apply to or elucidate what happens with NiH. I agree. I think most researchers who continue to work with PdD would also agree. Indeed. I can understand it if people want to focus on NiH. It's tempting. However, myself, I have a cabinet full of wire and other materials for SPAWAR type replications, heavy water, palladium chloride, etc. All dressed up with no place to go. So I'm going to use it. Still, I also have some stainless steel yarn (12 micron wire, 2x275 strands) and it would be fun to use a nickel cathode with the stainless as an anode and see what it does to some LR-115 radiation detectors. Cheap experiment. I've having some suspicions how about some hot deuterons?
Re: [Vo]:October is here
Still, I also have some stainless steel yarn (12 micron wire, 2x275 strands) and it would be fun to use a nickel cathode with the stainless as an anode and see what it does to some LR-115 radiation detectors. I have done this with several solvents, potash, sodium hydroxide, and weak acid (vinegar ect.). What I got was no radiation, no excess energy, and a red slop of ferric hydroxide. In the caustic solution the red slop from the stainless still anode does not form as quickly. (I.E. drain o does not hurt pipes) I have also done this under RF stimulation 3 t0 500 mega hertz) . The result is the same. I have tried it with titanium anodes. A film forms on the anode and tends to cut off the current. Copper anodes make a green slop. You have a choice, Do you want no energy with a red or a green slop. I still have more ideas to try but I have lost interest and motivation. Frank Znidarsic
Re: [Vo]:A New Spin on Solar Cells
In reply to Terry Blanton's message of Wed, 3 Oct 2012 07:28:25 -0400: Hi, [snip] On Tue, Oct 2, 2012 at 11:22 PM, mix...@bigpond.com wrote: This makes no sense to me. It seems that at any given instant only some of the cells are exposed to direct sunlight, the other half to indirect sunlight (unless the sun is directly overhead). Therefore if anything, one would need 75% more cells, not less. Didn't you watch the vid? In direct sunlight all the time, the cells get clogged with electrons. Being in less sun for a while allows them to flow better. Seriously, that is what they claim. Yes, I did watch the vid, and that's one of things that seem like non-sense to me. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
Re: [Vo]: Experimental Results with Nickel and Sodium Carbonate
The temperature the bath reaches depends upon the input power you deliver to the system as well as any excess heat that may be generated by the electrodes and the ability of your system to trap heat. If you are delivering 12 watts to your device and getting a temperature rise of 60 F from ambient then you must have relatively low heat loss unless of course you are seeing lots of heat being generated. The maximum temperature seen thus far with my present experimental setup was 130 F with an ambient of 74 F. I had 28.7 watts of drive at that time. I am using a large electrolyte bath that is open to the air and one benefit is that I can dissipate a large amount of power before my electrolyte reaches boiling. This allows me to increase the current density significantly. It is currently within the bounds of the successful level for the palladium deuterium systems. Dave -Original Message- From: Jack Cole jcol...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Wed, Oct 3, 2012 10:00 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]: Experimental Results with Nickel and Sodium Carbonate It seems like from the experiments I've run that if you want heat, put enough borax in so that it settles to the bottom. Then put your electrodes down into the borax powder in the bottom. Eventually, the borax powder disappears leaving yellowish nearly transparent crystals on the electrodes and in the bottom of the cell. It is easy to get 120+F temps with an air temperature of 60F using 12V @ 1amp. On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 5:55 PM, Paul Stout paulst...@att.net wrote: My anode is a motor brush so its surface area is larger than that of the nickel coin. I have increased the current to 400 milliamps. With the active and control beakers in series, the power supply is at 30 volts to drive that current. - I was hoping to avoid the higher currents, which could mask any anomalous heat being generated. Paul On 10/3/2012 1:57 PM, Jack Cole wrote: I had a lot of heat, whether it is anomalous or not, I don't know. I think it is somehow resistance heating through the borax or chemistry with creating boric acid. Just a speculation. I had heat 130F (I say it this way because my thermometer was electroplated or something causing it to register 20F too high. It read 158 or so at the max). To get more heat, you need an anode with as much surface area as your nickel. I used 12V at 1 amp. On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 11:17 AM, PaulStout paulst...@att.net wrote: I have increased the current in my setup to 200 milliamps. It has been running at that current level for more than 12 hours now and no anomalous heat has shown up yet. - Has anybody been able to replicate Chuck Sites results? I have not seen any claims to that yet. - Paul
Re: [Vo]: Experimental Results with Nickel and Sodium Carbonate
You have read what Ed Storms theories about how cracks are the source of LENR activity, but you haven’t applied this lessen to your experiments. In order to produce crack, the area were nuclear active sites are formed, the metal used in the cathode needs to be pre-stressed enough to produce these surface cracks before the metal is used in your experiment. The way to do this to this metal is by subjecting it to mechanically created metal fatigue. Fatigue is the progressive and localized structural damage that occurs when a material is subjected to cyclic loading. Fatigue occurs when a material is subjected to repeated loading and unloading. If the loads are above a certain threshold, microscopic cracks will begin to form at the surface. Eventually a crack will reach a critical size were LENR activity will begin. The easiest way to fatigue metal for the LENR hobbyist is to subject a wire to repeated torsional stress. If you have a microscope available, verify that the surface of the cathode you plan to use in your experiments show cracks on its surface. Cheers:Axil On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 11:32 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: The temperature the bath reaches depends upon the input power you deliver to the system as well as any excess heat that may be generated by the electrodes and the ability of your system to trap heat. If you are delivering 12 watts to your device and getting a temperature rise of 60 F from ambient then you must have relatively low heat loss unless of course you are seeing lots of heat being generated. The maximum temperature seen thus far with my present experimental setup was 130 F with an ambient of 74 F. I had 28.7 watts of drive at that time. I am using a large electrolyte bath that is open to the air and one benefit is that I can dissipate a large amount of power before my electrolyte reaches boiling. This allows me to increase the current density significantly. It is currently within the bounds of the successful level for the palladium deuterium systems. Dave -Original Message- From: Jack Cole jcol...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Wed, Oct 3, 2012 10:00 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]: Experimental Results with Nickel and Sodium Carbonate It seems like from the experiments I've run that if you want heat, put enough borax in so that it settles to the bottom. Then put your electrodes down into the borax powder in the bottom. Eventually, the borax powder disappears leaving yellowish nearly transparent crystals on the electrodes and in the bottom of the cell. It is easy to get 120+F temps with an air temperature of 60F using 12V @ 1amp. On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 5:55 PM, Paul Stout paulst...@att.net wrote: My anode is a motor brush so its surface area is larger than that of the nickel coin. I have increased the current to 400 milliamps. With the active and control beakers in series, the power supply is at 30 volts to drive that current. - I was hoping to avoid the higher currents, which could mask any anomalous heat being generated. Paul On 10/3/2012 1:57 PM, Jack Cole wrote: I had a lot of heat, whether it is anomalous or not, I don't know. I think it is somehow resistance heating through the borax or chemistry with creating boric acid. Just a speculation. I had heat 130F (I say it this way because my thermometer was electroplated or something causing it to register 20F too high. It read 158 or so at the max). To get more heat, you need an anode with as much surface area as your nickel. I used 12V at 1 amp. On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 11:17 AM, Paul Stout paulst...@att.net wrote: I have increased the current in my setup to 200 milliamps. It has been running at that current level for more than 12 hours now and no anomalous heat has shown up yet. - Has anybody been able to replicate Chuck Sites results? I have not seen any claims to that yet. - Paul
Re: [Vo]: Experimental Results with Nickel and Sodium Carbonate
Do you recall whether or not PF made cracks in their material? I have been assuming that the high pressure of the hydrogen due to electrolysis would cause the nickel - copper material to generate internal dislocations as the hydrogen forces its way in. I understand that hydrogen makes metals brittle by this process. Yes, I understand what Ed was speaking of and plan to subject new test pieces to stresses such as torch heating and water quenching. I also will try mechanical stresses and scratches as with a grinder and hammer, etc. It takes time to generate confidence in a test system and test samples so I need to work with this one for a while before I abandon it. Today I am seeing clearly positive results which must be verified or disproved.I must use my calibration sample to determine if the results are real. The sample I am testing has been loading with hydrogen for around 36 hours. Keep your fingers crossed. Dave -Original Message- From: Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Wed, Oct 3, 2012 11:40 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]: Experimental Results with Nickel and Sodium Carbonate You have read what Ed Storms theories about how cracks are the source of LENR activity, but you haven’t applied this lessen to your experiments. In order to produce crack, the area were nuclear active sites are formed, the metal used in the cathode needs to be pre-stressed enough to produce these surface cracks before the metal is used in your experiment. The way to do this to this metal is by subjecting it to mechanically created metal fatigue. Fatigue is the progressive and localized structural damage that occurs when a material is subjected to cyclic loading. Fatigue occurs when a material is subjected to repeated loading and unloading. If the loads are above a certain threshold, microscopic cracks will begin to form at the surface. Eventually a crack will reach a critical size were LENR activity will begin. The easiest way to fatigue metal for the LENR hobbyist is to subject a wire to repeated torsional stress. If you have a microscope available, verify that the surface of the cathode you plan to use in your experiments show cracks on its surface. Cheers:Axil On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 11:32 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: The temperature the bath reaches depends upon the input power you deliver to the system as well as any excess heat that may be generated by the electrodes and the ability of your system to trap heat. If you are delivering 12 watts to your device and getting a temperature rise of 60 F from ambient then you must have relatively low heat loss unless of course you are seeing lots of heat being generated. The maximum temperature seen thus far with my present experimental setup was 130 F with an ambient of 74 F. I had 28.7 watts of drive at that time. I am using a large electrolyte bath that is open to the air and one benefit is that I can dissipate a large amount of power before my electrolyte reaches boiling. This allows me to increase the current density significantly. It is currently within the bounds of the successful level for the palladium deuterium systems. Dave -Original Message- From: Jack Cole jcol...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Wed, Oct 3, 2012 10:00 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]: Experimental Results with Nickel and Sodium Carbonate It seems like from the experiments I've run that if you want heat, put enough borax in so that it settles to the bottom. Then put your electrodes down into the borax powder in the bottom. Eventually, the borax powder disappears leaving yellowish nearly transparent crystals on the electrodes and in the bottom of the cell. It is easy to get 120+F temps with an air temperature of 60F using 12V @ 1amp. On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 5:55 PM, Paul Stout paulst...@att.net wrote: My anode is a motor brush so its surface area is larger than that of the nickel coin. I have increased the current to 400 milliamps. With the active and control beakers in series, the power supply is at 30 volts to drive that current. - I was hoping to avoid the higher currents, which could mask any anomalous heat being generated. Paul On 10/3/2012 1:57 PM, Jack Cole wrote: I had a lot of heat, whether it is anomalous or not, I don't know. I think it is somehow resistance heating through the borax or chemistry with creating boric acid. Just a speculation. I had heat 130F (I say it this way because my thermometer was electroplated or something causing it to register 20F too high. It read 158 or so at the max). To get more heat, you need an anode with as much surface area as your nickel. I used 12V at 1 amp. On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 11:17 AM, PaulStout paulst...@att.net wrote:
[Vo]:Nov.14 LENR Panel Session at Am. Nucl. Soc. Nat'l Meeting
Steve Krivit has posted a note of about the Nov-14 upcoming event: --- LENR Panel Session at American Nuclear Society National Meeting On Wednesday, Nov. 14, from 8:30 a.m. to noon, the American Nuclear Society will hold a panel session on low-energy nuclear reaction research at its winter national meeting at the Town and Country hotel and resort in San Diego, Calif. The last LENR session at an ANS meeting took place in June 1998. The session will explore the surprising possibility that highly energetic nuclear reactions and elemental transmutations result from LENRs. Although the term was not used a century ago, examples of LENRs go back that far. LENRs are weak interactions and neutron-capture processes that occur in nanometer- to micron-scale regions on surfaces in condensed matter at room temperature. Although nuclear, LENRs are not based on fission or any kind of fusion, both of which primarily involve the strong interaction. The speakers and topics for the panel session are: Steven B. Krivit, publisher and senior editor of New Energy Times, from San Rafael, Calif.: The Big Picture of Low-Energy Nuclear Reaction Research Yasuhiro Iwamura, a LENR experimentalist with Mitsubishi Heavy Industries in Japan: Transmutation Reactions Induced by Deuterium Permeation Through Nano-Structured Pd Multilayer Thin Film, co-authors Takehiko Itoh (Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Ltd.), Yasuko Terada (Japan Synchrotron Radiation Research Institute), Tetsuya Ishikawa (Coherent X-Ray Optics Laboratory, SPring-8/RIKEN) Domenico Cirillo, a LENR experimentalist with Cirillo Labs in Caserta, Italy: Slow Neutron Generation by Plasma Excitation in Electrolytic Cell Lewis G. Larsen, a LENR theorist and chief executive officer of Lattice Energy LLC, from Chicago, Ill: Electroweak Neutron Production via e + p n + v and Capture During Lightning Discharges --- See - http://news.newenergytimes.net/2012/10/03/lenr-panel-session-at-american-nuclear-society-national-meeting/ If you look at the following paper (p.1 preview): Experimental Evidence of a Neutron Flux Generation in a Plasma Discharge Electrolytic Cell http://www.scientific.net/KEM.495.104 - it appears that some of the neutrons generated in the plasma do escape and are detectable. Transmutations are also present with isotopic distributions that do not appear in nature. One of Cirillo's earlier papers is at- Transmutation of metal at low energy in a confined plasma in water http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/CirilloDtransmutat.pdf Some abstracts of papers by the authors are at - http://newenergytimes.com/v2/conferences/2011/IC-MAST/IC-MAST-2011Absracts.pdf Since the discharge occurs in H2O, is it possibly related to sonofusion? - Lou Pagnucco
Re: [Vo]:Nov.14 LENR Panel Session at Am. Nucl. Soc. Nat'l Meeting
It's great to hear about this. On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 9:46 PM, pagnu...@htdconnect.com wrote: LENRs are weak interactions and neutron-capture processes that occur in nanometer- to micron-scale regions on surfaces in condensed matter at room temperature. Although nuclear, LENRs are not based on fission or any kind of fusion, both of which primarily involve the strong interaction. With all due respect to Steven Krivit, and to those who entertain the possibility of WL, I wish Krivit would not go into this level of detail when presenting LENR to a general audience. It seems unnecessary and likely to be distracting. Eric
