Re: [Vo]:Superconductors up to 77 Celsius (170F, 350K)
the difference is that it needed no instrument to be observed (levitation), and that physicist have replicated it, and not only chemist... The tragedy of LENr is that is chemistry experiment, indirectly measured through invisible characteristic needing confidence in instruments and computation (balance), and that physicist thinks it is their business because it is nuclear. since they say it is not nuclear, they should let the chemist decide. most chemist decided that their funding and career did not deserve to be ruined for that and they kept silent (because they were not enough incompetent and crook to support the deliria of taubes/Huizenga/Parks/Lewis/hansen/Morrison and their parrots)... except few irrational=honest chemist ruined their career ands lost their funding. 2014-06-15 6:45 GMT+02:00 Kevin O'Malley kevmol...@gmail.com: And yet, there is still no established HTSC theory. Using the reasoning that has been applied to LENR... therefore, HTSC must not exist. On Sat, Jun 14, 2014 at 9:37 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: http://www.superconductors.org/News.htm I am please to be the first to post that Superconductors.ORG reports high Tc has been advanced to 77 Celsius (170F, 350K)
Re: [Vo]:Superconductors up to 77 Celsius (170F, 350K)
The man difference: HTSC was discovered too early in the good place.; CF was discovered also too early but in the worst place wet electrochemical system- where it is inherently unmanageable irreproducible and can not grow up. A scientific tragedy. Peter On Sun, Jun 15, 2014 at 11:40 AM, Alain Sepeda alain.sep...@gmail.com wrote: the difference is that it needed no instrument to be observed (levitation), and that physicist have replicated it, and not only chemist... The tragedy of LENr is that is chemistry experiment, indirectly measured through invisible characteristic needing confidence in instruments and computation (balance), and that physicist thinks it is their business because it is nuclear. since they say it is not nuclear, they should let the chemist decide. most chemist decided that their funding and career did not deserve to be ruined for that and they kept silent (because they were not enough incompetent and crook to support the deliria of taubes/Huizenga/Parks/Lewis/hansen/Morrison and their parrots)... except few irrational=honest chemist ruined their career ands lost their funding. 2014-06-15 6:45 GMT+02:00 Kevin O'Malley kevmol...@gmail.com: And yet, there is still no established HTSC theory. Using the reasoning that has been applied to LENR... therefore, HTSC must not exist. On Sat, Jun 14, 2014 at 9:37 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: http://www.superconductors.org/News.htm I am please to be the first to post that Superconductors.ORG reports high Tc has been advanced to 77 Celsius (170F, 350K) -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
RE: [Vo]:Superconductors up to 77 Celsius (170F, 350K)
There is a pre-theory of formative hypothesis which explains some of the mechanism of HTSC from physical observations. Joe Eck, who is the Jed Rothwell of HTSC - has this theory listed on his site as “PWD theory”. http://www.superconductors.org/pwtheory.htm Notably - the superconductivity originates in the oxygen layers. Never mind that oxygen is not a conductor – what is needed at the early stage is not conductivity per se, but “paired electrons” or at least a heavy electron. These odd electrons must form in the interfacial region. This oddity may also imply that the active electrons are not valence electrons ! (meaning that they derive from “somewhere else”). Could the Cooper pair be two electrons in 3-space, held together by a positron in reciprocal space (1-space)? Which becomes the detail which could invoke Dirac and his “sea”. That is important to know, since oxides normally form dielectrics, except when they are in a resonant compressive mode. QUOTE: Ergo, there absolutely MUST be a difference in mass on opposite sides of the oxygen layer for superconductivity to occur. No periodic compression = no superconductivity. If there is a lesson here for LENR (which there could be since there are some similarities between the two in the appearance of heavy electrons, which could be paired in LENR or simply heavy), it would be that the active material needs to be nanostructured with planar oxygen layers, having two oscillators of different frequencies on either side of an oxide layer. There is a semi-precedent here - in the work of Arata, Ahern and others - with specialty material in which there is a micron-sized sphere of oxide material, such as zirconia, in which nanoparticles of active metal are embedded like the raisins in Panettone. It is possible that the oxygen from zirconia forms into layers in the spin-casting and that layer provides heavy electrons and perhaps positrons. Very interesting…. From: Kevin O'Malley And yet, there is still no established HTSC theory. Using the reasoning that has been applied to LENR... therefore, HTSC must not exist. Axil Axil wrote: http://www.superconductors.org/News.htm http://www.superconductors.org/News.htm I am please to be the first to post that Superconductors.ORG reports high Tc has been advanced to 77 Celsius (170F, 350K)
Re: [Vo]:Superconductors up to 77 Celsius (170F, 350K)
On Sun, Jun 15, 2014 at 7:02 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: Joe Eck, who is the Jed Rothwell of HTSC - has this theory listed on his site as “PWD theory”. http://www.superconductors.org/pwtheory.htm I suspect he's not the Jed Rothwell of HTSC, but instead perhaps the John Rohner of HTSC. Eric
Re: [Vo]:Superconductors up to 77 Celsius (170F, 350K)
Yes, a major difference was that LENR was discovered when there was an established, entrenched group which stood to lose out of their public feeding trough if it were true. That was not the case with HTSC. No one lost their funding or ruined their career when they investigated HTSC. On Sun, Jun 15, 2014 at 1:40 AM, Alain Sepeda alain.sep...@gmail.com wrote: the difference is that it needed no instrument to be observed (levitation), and that physicist have replicated it, and not only chemist... The tragedy of LENr is that is chemistry experiment, indirectly measured through invisible characteristic needing confidence in instruments and computation (balance), and that physicist thinks it is their business because it is nuclear. since they say it is not nuclear, they should let the chemist decide. most chemist decided that their funding and career did not deserve to be ruined for that and they kept silent (because they were not enough incompetent and crook to support the deliria of taubes/Huizenga/Parks/Lewis/hansen/Morrison and their parrots)... except few irrational=honest chemist ruined their career ands lost their funding. 2014-06-15 6:45 GMT+02:00 Kevin O'Malley kevmol...@gmail.com: And yet, there is still no established HTSC theory. Using the reasoning that has been applied to LENR... therefore, HTSC must not exist. On Sat, Jun 14, 2014 at 9:37 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: http://www.superconductors.org/News.htm I am please to be the first to post that Superconductors.ORG reports high Tc has been advanced to 77 Celsius (170F, 350K)
Re: [Vo]:Superconductors up to 77 Celsius (170F, 350K)
It is impossible to resist the intuition that HTSC and LENR are closely related. In both cases a mechanism that makes bosons from fermion pairs remains to be theoretically explained. It is very thrilling, because the existing model of matter has been exhausted of explanatory power. --- I write a little. I erase a lot. - Chopin From: Kevin O'Malley kevmol...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Sunday, June 15, 2014 12:33 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Superconductors up to 77 Celsius (170F, 350K) Yes, a major difference was that LENR was discovered when there was an established, entrenched group which stood to lose out of their public feeding trough if it were true. That was not the case with HTSC. No one lost their funding or ruined their career when they investigated HTSC. On Sun, Jun 15, 2014 at 1:40 AM, Alain Sepeda alain.sep...@gmail.com wrote: the difference is that it needed no instrument to be observed (levitation), and that physicist have replicated it, and not only chemist... The tragedy of LENr is that is chemistry experiment, indirectly measured through invisible characteristic needing confidence in instruments and computation (balance), and that physicist thinks it is their business because it is nuclear. since they say it is not nuclear, they should let the chemist decide. most chemist decided that their funding and career did not deserve to be ruined for that and they kept silent (because they were not enough incompetent and crook to support the deliria of taubes/Huizenga/Parks/Lewis/hansen/Morrison and their parrots)... except few irrational=honest chemist ruined their career ands lost their funding. 2014-06-15 6:45 GMT+02:00 Kevin O'Malley kevmol...@gmail.com: And yet, there is still no established HTSC theory. Using the reasoning that has been applied to LENR... therefore, HTSC must not exist. On Sat, Jun 14, 2014 at 9:37 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: http://www.superconductors.org/News.htm I am please to be the first to post that Superconductors.ORG reports high Tc has been advanced to 77 Celsius (170F, 350K)
[Vo]:Superconductors up to 77 Celsius (170F, 350K)
http://www.superconductors.org/News.htm I am please to be the first to post that Superconductors.ORG reports high Tc has been advanced to 77 Celsius (170F, 350K)
Re: [Vo]:Superconductors up to 77 Celsius (170F, 350K)
And yet, there is still no established HTSC theory. Using the reasoning that has been applied to LENR... therefore, HTSC must not exist. On Sat, Jun 14, 2014 at 9:37 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: http://www.superconductors.org/News.htm I am please to be the first to post that Superconductors.ORG reports high Tc has been advanced to 77 Celsius (170F, 350K)
Re: [Vo]:Superconductors up to 77 Celsius (170F, 350K)
On Sat, Jun 14, 2014 at 9:37 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: http://www.superconductors.org/News.htm I am please to be the first to post that Superconductors.ORG reports high Tc has been advanced to 77 Celsius (170F, 350K) Who are Superconductors.ORG? It seems that they have made this discovery all on their own, or in their great haste to make their announcement, they did not have time to include any references. https://www.google.com/search?sourceid=chrome-psyapi2ion=1espv=2ie=UTF-8q=77c%20superconductor Eric
