Re: [Vo]:Zawodny on LENR in a recently uploaded NASA LaRC YouTube video
Not LENR. If what was reported by LeClair actually happened, which is substantially in doubt, no independent account has come to light, and LeClair's reports are full of unsupported and wild theoretical interpretations shallow on actual experimental evidence, this would not be LENR at all, but bubble fusion. Bubble fusion is hot fusion, and would produce the normal hot fusion radiation. Indeed, neutron production has been the alleged sign of it, in what reports we have. It should be easy to scale the LeClair effect down in order to avoid danger. LeClair reportedly creates bubbles using a laser and focuses the collapse energy on a target, so he can readily control the number of reaction opportunities. From the Nanospire reports of energy release, massive radiation would be expected. If he exposed himself and his partner to such radiation, as he claims, it was quite foolish. I.e., they were unprepared for success, while trying to demonstrate it. Even less can be concluded from the Nanospire reports than from the reports from Rossi and Defkalion. In the latter case, at least, there were independent witnesses to alleged power generation, though no independent confirmation (i.e., fraud or puffery remain possible). And it would be LENR, if real. At 03:49 PM 5/25/2012, Alan J Fletcher wrote: At 12:41 PM 5/25/2012, Jed Rothwell wrote: Alan J Fletcher mailto:a...@well.coma...@well.com wrote: Any other links to labs blowing up and window melting ? I don't know about windows melting. There's also : Re: [Vo]:the desktop supernova - The Mail Archive http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg64497.html Points to : http://pieeconomics.blogspot.com/p/cold-fusion-comedy.html UPDATES: 2/22/12: A new NanoSprire http://www.nanotech-now.com/news.cgi?story_id=44551press release http://www.nanotech-now.com/news.cgi?story_id=44551 states: Nanospire has announced that its investigative study on fusion created by cavitation in water has come to an end. It's good that they have stopped testing for now. During the nuclear fusion reaction that occurred when they did their test, Hundreds of wave trains and vortices appeared everywhere and are permanently burned into walls, objects and trees surrounding the lab. [ All references to that quote come back to this pieeconomics blog ]
Re: [Vo]:Zawodny on LENR in a recently uploaded NASA LaRC YouTube video
At 04:04 PM 5/25/2012, Alan J Fletcher wrote: At 01:49 PM 5/25/2012, Alan J Fletcher wrote: Hundreds of wave trains and vortices appeared everywhere and are permanently burned into walls, objects and trees surrounding the lab. Came from Le Clair himself, in response to Krivit http://blog.newenergytimes.com/2011/01/31/new-energy-times-issue-36-letters/http://blog.newenergytimes.com/2011/01/31/new-energy-times-issue-36-letters/ There is an exchange of comments between LeClerc and Krivit at that page. Krivit states: Based on what you described and have shown to me, I believe you have accomplished a clear demonstration of low-energy nuclear reactions. Your work appears worthy of much credit and support, though your claim of fusion at room temperature does not. That's an unfortunate comment, because if LeClair's reports are accurate at all, this would definitely not be LENR. It is not room-temperature fusion, and LeClair doesn't claim that it is. The effects reported by LeClair are exotic, not resembling reports of LENRs, which tend to show very low levels of radiation, if any. Krivit is promoting, it's clear, Widom-Larsen theory, which has, as its principal appeal, that it is allegedly not fusion. It's a semantic issue, for if an effect converts deuterium to helium, by whatever mechanism and through whatever intemediates, it has *accomplished* fusion. LeClair's work would have nothing to do with W-L theory, which requires a surface catalyzing slow neutron formation. It is common to see bubble fusion confused with cold fusion. It would be a bit like claiming that tokamak fusion is at room temperature, because, after all, the tokamak is at room temperature (or close). I've also seen those little neutron generators, that use a piezoelectric effect to fuse deuterium, called cold fusion. Not. Hot, very hot, but the device is nice and cool. Bubble collapse is known to generate extremely high temperatures at the point of collapse, and the controversy over bubble fusion centers on whether or not the temperatures are *high enough* for fusion. There is also some controversy over whether or not the reports of bubble fusion are fusion as well, with some discussion of the possibility of a Zero Point Energy effect. But nobody with knowledge of the work and the issues is claiming that bubble fusion -- or the LeClair effect, in this case -- is LENR, except, here, for Krivit. And if it was clear, I wonder what he meant by clear. I'm not sure it matters now, but perhaps someone will ask Krivit. I did read the Wikipedia article on Bubble fusion. It leads with calling bubble fusion a now-discredited nuclear fusion reaction. The citation provided says nothing about bubble fusion being now discredited. If so, that is merely buzz. Taleyarkhan was stripped of his professorship in 2008, over what amount to technical administrative violations, having nothing to do with the quality of the research, *on the face.* The latest experimental work reported in the Wikipedia article was an independent *confirmation*. My own summary: bubble fusion is unlikely to result in commercial power generation, even if it's real, which it might be, and, as a result, there is no high motivation to confirm or conclusively reject it. It's an old story: a few negative replications means very little, because replications can fail for many reasons. What would be interesting would be *replication*, i.e., reporting what had been reported by, say, Taleyarkhan, followed by a clear *demonstration* that this was artifact. LeClair's work, which allegedly focuses a shock wave, produced by bubble collapse, on a target, could be something different. Quite some time ago, when LeClair's claims surfaced, I suggested that there were vast military implications, that LeClair's work was known to people with access to the military, and that it was likely there had been a military investigation (such as talking to the EMTs that allegedly responded, and the HazMat team that showed up, and a visit to LeClair's lab, examining the trees and walls allegedly having permanent markings), with the probable result being nothing to look at here. If the results had been real, it would have been likely that the whole thing would have been declared secret, LeClair would have been compensated, etc. Of course, perhaps, then, LeClair's apparent ravings are part of the plan, designed to discredit what might have leaked out there is no limit to the stories that can be made up
Re: [Vo]:Zawodny on LENR in a recently uploaded NASA LaRC YouTube video
At 04:17 PM 5/25/2012, Jed Rothwell wrote: Le Clair is quoted: The experiment gave off powerful crested cnoid de Broglie Matter wave soliton wave packages that were doubly periodic and followed the Jacobi Elliptic functions exactly, mostly in the form of large doubly-periodic vortices. Hundreds of wave trains and vortices appeared everywhere and are permanently burned into walls, objects and trees surrounding the lab. Good heavens. It is amazing they survived. Did they take photographs of these things? Did they preserve some of the hundreds of samples of damaged wood and other materials from the surroundings? If they did not take photos and samples, I doubt this account is accurate. Maybe I should not be so dismissive, since Fleischmann and Pons did not take photos or preserve samples from their explosion. It was very stupid of them not to. Very unprofessional. I said that to Martin, and he ruefully agreed. Sure. That makes sense. Beaudette reports an independent account of the shambles in the lab after that meltdown. One recent account of this had it as damaging the concrete floor of their garage, showing a kind of standing assumption that cold fusion research takes place in garages of wild-eyed high-functioning lunatics. However, with the LeClair reports, allegedly LeClair and his partner almost did not survive, they got very, very sick. But notice: these effects, described as wave traiins and vortices showing the intense interpretations of what was actually observed -- if anything was actually observed -- are also described as permanently burned into walls, objects and trees surrounding the lab. Okay, surely this could be independently verified. Still. Unless, of course, you cut the trees down and dispose of them, you raze the building or rebuild the walls, etc. Pons and Fleischmann, they just cleaned up the lab, replaced the lab table with the hole in it, and patched the concrete floor. That patch could probably still be found, unless the building has been razed. Perhaps some U of Utah student would like to recover a piece of history, that meltdown was very important as the first major sign to P and F that they had stumbled onto something far bigger than they had expected. Note: they then scaled down, for obvious reasons. When I first encountered the LeClair reports, I thought it was likely to be a practical joke, intended to see just how bloody gullible we all are. That remains a possibility, though some sort of psychopathology is more likely. I'd put reality of the effect way down the scale, but, pursuing that, the radiation may have left LeClair impaired. I was unable to pursue confirmation myself, travelling is currently difficult for me, but there were others who indicated they might take it on. I haven't heard of any results. Apparently Nanospire has recently announced they are ceasing research. Why? Not explained. The research would not be particularly dangerous, as long as reasonable precautions were followed, mostly by starting small. You don't wisely turn this thing on and get enough heat to measure, except maybe at the limits of sensitivity, if that, or if you are behind adequate shielding. This is hot fusion, very dangerous in large scale, but small-scale hot fusion is handled all the time by amateurs, with Farnsworth Fusors. If you want to scale up to heat generation, then you need to build the device to handle the expected radiation. Yet Nanospire was enthusiastically promoting this as something useful for home hot water heating a tad premature, eh?
Re: [Vo]:Zawodny on LENR in a recently uploaded NASA LaRC YouTube video
At 04:28 PM 5/25/2012, David Roberson wrote: The scenario that they mention is beyond frightening and anyone who remained in the vicinity of that experiment should be given a metal for bravery. I can imagine the description of damage being used as part of the plot to a wild science fiction movie. What a shame that the occurrence was not better documented! Are you sure this was not part of an April fools joke? Funny Dave should ask that. It was my first hit when the Nanospire story first broke. But I'd expect, by now, someone would have been observed giggling and running away from the window, as with Mr. Mischief in the Mr. series of children's books. LeClair is real, has talked with real people (such as Krivit and Storms). And that's about how far it's gone, as to anything verifiable.
Re: [Vo]:Zawodny on LENR in a recently uploaded NASA LaRC YouTube video
At 04:42 PM 5/25/2012, Chemical Engineer wrote: Reads like the catalyst may have been Lysergic acid diethylamide It does read that way. LeClair does not report the primary observational data, but, rather, his high-level abstract impressions, his *interpretations* of the data, and that is precisely what occurs in hallucinatory states, generally. It is the interpretation that is believed and remembered, and presented as fact, not the sensory information. I've been there, I know what this is like, at least partially. (Indeed, the collapse of interpretation with actual sensory experience is *normal,* almost all of us do this routinely, unless we are trained to do something different. Science, as a method, is designed to compensate for this. When it works.) (With schiziod breaks, the interpretation faculty becomes so active, so able to create interpretations, that only the most slender thread still connects interpretation with sensory evidence, almost any interpretation can be created from nothing or almost nothing.) But the title of this thread is Zawodny's video. Zawodny is apparently doing the kind of thing I've long been suggesting: massive parallel experimentation. I mostly thought of parallel identical cells, essentially manufactured, but his design of what appears to be experiments on a chip could be even more powerful. That all the cells are created by the same process is a powerful approach. However, he will still need to make and test multiple devices, i.e., many of these multi-cell chips. It's disappointing to see so much enthusiastic this could revolutionize energy generation (which has been obvious for more than twenty years) with so little detail on what the hell he's actually doing. The material on W-L theory is practically irrelevant. W-L theory is still awaiting some kind of experimental verification; the obvious expectations of what would happen with ULM neutron generation don't match experimental results, and that's waved away with *another* unobserved and unconfirmed phenomenon, 100% absorption of gammas by the heavy electron patches that are theorized to allow p-e combination to form the neutrons. The theory raises more questions than it resolves, obvious questions, and none of the (again enthusiastic) reports address those questions. We'd expect to see, for starters, leftover intermediate products, since there is no reason to think that the neutrons would react with high preference with the intermediate products, and the original (first) reaction rate is very low. Experimentally, the reaction series created must complete, but mechanism for that is ignored. Further, there must be no leakage of gammas from the expected neutron activation of elements present must not only be absorbed by the heavy electron patches, there must be no leakage (presumably from the edges). That gamma shield must be (1) thin, and (2) perfect. Yes, we understand why Larsen might not want to talk about it. Commercial interest, intellectual property, yatta yatta. But all this means that we *cannot* consider W-L theory to be anything like established, whereas Zawodny treats it as this amazing idea that finally explains cold fusion. Maybe he knows something we don't, that's always possible. But LENR was clearly established by the mid-1990s, and this does not depend on any theory at all, beyond what is most simple: *something* is converting deuterium to helium in P-F class experiments, as shown by Miles, confirming earlier, sketchier reports, and as confirmed by other research groups around the world, with there being extremely little contrary evidence. Strictly speaking, that it is deuterium being converted is only a reasonable, perhaps default, conjecture, reinforced by some work that shows that the ratio of helium to heat is close to the deuterium fusion value, and much more work on the reaction Q is seriously indicated. Which, by the way, was the unanimous position of the 2004 U.S. DoE review, more research is needed. If we want to talk about hallucinations, as a product of projecting personal beliefs back onto sensory evidence, the pseudoskeptics who imagine they represent science have read the 2004 review as continuing to reject cold fusion. Nope. The review, in fact, shows that the issue is very much alive, and needs further research, just as was the real conclusion in 1989. Not convincing is read as Thoroughly rejected, bogus, forget about it. Isn't that weird? But it's how people think when they have become nailed to what they believe. These pseudoskeptics, of late, have switched positions with the believers, imagining that the balance of publication in peer-reviewed journals is purely a result of bias. They don't notice that the balance switched drastically, and, in fact, switched long ago, sometime around 1991. But with difficulties getting funding, and, yes, difficulties getting research published, peer-reviewed papers on
Re: [Vo]:Zawodny on LENR in a recently uploaded NASA LaRC YouTube video
http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/files/Initiation%20of%20nuclear%20reactions.pdf A number of experiments that feature violent activity in water share the same characteristics that LeClair observed in his LENR experiments. I see the referenced experiment listed above demonstrating the production of Protonated Water Clusters in the plasma when a laser beam ionizes gold Nano particles in an aqueous solution of uranium salts. LeClair can also produce his reaction using a laser beam. The referenced experiment is less energetic than the LeClair experiment because no sacrificial attractive material is present. But in both experiments, collapsing cavatation bubbles are formed and Protonated Water Clusters are generated which catalyze proton based cold fusion reactions. What the other commenter miss in this type of reaction is that cavatation can provide a continuum of energy levels from weak to extreme. It is adjustable. LeClair has mentioned that he can adjust the energy level in his reaction to produce only heat without radiation to a full range of element transmutation which is accompanied by heavy radiation. Until the other evaluators of this reaction understand its true dynamics, they will continual to misunderstand what underlying processes are going on in the LeClair effect. To wit, if there is no attractive shock wave produced to provide added kinetic energy, then transmutation is gentle and well behaved. Yes the shock wave is optional with the addition of an attractive sacrificial metal within six bubble diameters of bubble formation. At its root, the LeClair effect is cold fusion. Cheers: Axil On Sun, May 27, 2012 at 1:42 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.comwrote: At 04:28 PM 5/25/2012, David Roberson wrote: The scenario that they mention is beyond frightening and anyone who remained in the vicinity of that experiment should be given a metal for bravery. I can imagine the description of damage being used as part of the plot to a wild science fiction movie. What a shame that the occurrence was not better documented! Are you sure this was not part of an April fools joke? Funny Dave should ask that. It was my first hit when the Nanospire story first broke. But I'd expect, by now, someone would have been observed giggling and running away from the window, as with Mr. Mischief in the Mr. series of children's books. LeClair is real, has talked with real people (such as Krivit and Storms). And that's about how far it's gone, as to anything verifiable.
Re: [Vo]:Zawodny on LENR in a recently uploaded NASA LaRC YouTube video
http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/0911/0911.5495.pdf Sorry. try this link. On Sun, May 27, 2012 at 1:41 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/files/Initiation%20of%20nuclear%20reactions.pdf A number of experiments that feature violent activity in water share the same characteristics that LeClair observed in his LENR experiments. I see the referenced experiment listed above demonstrating the production of Protonated Water Clusters in the plasma when a laser beam ionizes gold Nano particles in an aqueous solution of uranium salts. LeClair can also produce his reaction using a laser beam. The referenced experiment is less energetic than the LeClair experiment because no sacrificial attractive material is present. But in both experiments, collapsing cavatation bubbles are formed and Protonated Water Clusters are generated which catalyze proton based cold fusion reactions. What the other commenter miss in this type of reaction is that cavatation can provide a continuum of energy levels from weak to extreme. It is adjustable. LeClair has mentioned that he can adjust the energy level in his reaction to produce only heat without radiation to a full range of element transmutation which is accompanied by heavy radiation. Until the other evaluators of this reaction understand its true dynamics, they will continual to misunderstand what underlying processes are going on in the LeClair effect. To wit, if there is no attractive shock wave produced to provide added kinetic energy, then transmutation is gentle and well behaved. Yes the shock wave is optional with the addition of an attractive sacrificial metal within six bubble diameters of bubble formation. At its root, the LeClair effect is cold fusion. Cheers: Axil On Sun, May 27, 2012 at 1:42 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.comwrote: At 04:28 PM 5/25/2012, David Roberson wrote: The scenario that they mention is beyond frightening and anyone who remained in the vicinity of that experiment should be given a metal for bravery. I can imagine the description of damage being used as part of the plot to a wild science fiction movie. What a shame that the occurrence was not better documented! Are you sure this was not part of an April fools joke? Funny Dave should ask that. It was my first hit when the Nanospire story first broke. But I'd expect, by now, someone would have been observed giggling and running away from the window, as with Mr. Mischief in the Mr. series of children's books. LeClair is real, has talked with real people (such as Krivit and Storms). And that's about how far it's gone, as to anything verifiable.
Re: [Vo]:Zawodny on LENR in a recently uploaded NASA LaRC YouTube video
At 04:43 PM 5/25/2012, Jed Rothwell wrote: Axil Axil mailto:janap...@gmail.comjanap...@gmail.com wrote: http://pesn.com/2012/04/28/9602083_NanoSpire_Inc_on_Harnessing_Cavitation_Zero_Point_Energy_to_Produce_Fusion_and_Transmutation_in_Water/http://pesn.com/2012/04/28/9602083_NanoSpire_Inc_on_Harnessing_Cavitation_Zero_Point_Energy_to_Produce_Fusion_and_Transmutation_in_Water/ the pictures from LeClair are in the comments section of this blog. Thanks. Not many photos there. Only one, it seems. I do not know what to make of it. Ed Storms is quoted: I examined the material sent by NanoSpire and saw nothing unusual. I have no reason to doubt the experience they claim, but I have no reason to believe it either. As for the theory, it makes no sense based on my understanding of science. That is sensible. LeClair points to a comment previously by Ed Storms: Hi Mark, Just so that we are all clear about how to describe what you saw, let me explain some things *** does not understand. Two different types of nuclear reactions are now know; that which produces energetic radiation (1) and that which does not (2). Hot fusion and all nuclear reactions that are initiated by applying significant energy fall into the first category. This is the realm of normal physics. The one unique aspect of the other branch of nuclear physics is the absence of energetic radiation even though significant heat energy is generated. This branch includes cold fusion, which like hot fusion, results in fusion as well as transmutation. You triggered a reaction in the first branch by applying high energy. In addition, you triggered many kinds of very energetic nuclear reactions, not just fusion. Therefore, your reaction is not LENR or cold fusion. Nevertheless, the reaction you triggered is novel and unexpected. There is a rather obvious attempt here to claim contradiction in what Storms wrote. In fact, though, the prior comment from Storms was merely following a normal courtesy of assuming that what a writer claims as to their own experience is true. Storms' focus was on distinguishing hot fusion from cold fusion and LENR. What LeClair has reported is obviously not LENR. Sterling Allan, in reporting what LeClair claims, is demonstrating phenomenal naivete. He seems to think that an ability to string together pseudoscientific word-salad is equivalent to genius. Possibly. But LeClair clearly has a whole story he's invented to explain his results, including self-accelerated water crystals powered by Zero Point Energy, but LeClair has been asked about what the experimental basis is for his conclusions about mechanism. He's never answered, as far as I've seen. He just repeats his story, his theory. He made up the theory, that's clear. Brilliant? Well, if it is confirmed, we might conclude so. Allan seems to overlook that almost none of LeClair's story has been confirmed. If the LeClair Effect is confirmed, it will still be rather apparent that this genius is crazy. Crazy has no clear definition, it is a social concept, in fact. LeClair either does not know how to communicate with scientists, or he doesn't care to try. He does not communicate the observations on which his complex theoretical structure is based. What we know from his accounts is that he creates a bubble in a specific location with respect to a plate with holes in it, so that when the bubble collapses, the shock wave -- or other resulting effect -- is focused on a target on the other side of the plate. Or maybe he's, in the relevant experiments, doing something else. We have seen no sober experimental reports from him that give the specific details. To a non-scientist, LeClair's explanations may be appealing. However, this appeal seems to be based on Gee, he sounds like he knows what he's talking about, and I don't understand this at all, but, wow, this could be really important. Therefore he's a genius. Maybe he's a genius, it does take a certain kind of mind to be able to absorb those concepts (apparently LeClair did not originate the concept of ZPE being involved with sonoluminescence) and put them together into sentences But there is no evidence visible, even if we take every report from LeClair as representing what actually happened (i.e., what he and others would have *seen*), that connects his reports with the theories he liberally uses to describe what happened. For example, why does he describe a crystal? If you look at his full set of claims, those crystals are travelling at close to the velocity of light. Okay, how did he observe them? He'd see evidence of impact, say. How did he infer crystal from the evidence of impact? How did he infer self-acceleration, and the massive violation of conservation of momentum? How does he distinguish this from high energy at generation? LeClair does not know how to communicate to those who might actually understand him. He shows a
Re: [Vo]:Zawodny on LENR in a recently uploaded NASA LaRC YouTube video
Axil, In your opinion, is LeClair process the same mechanism as the Mitt Candy Hexane/Propane process? It seems LeClair is more Hot Fusion than LENR, and appears to be totally different from Rossi, DGT, both of which seems different from Mitt Candy. Any ideas/suggestions on what Mitt Candy's catalyst might be. Due primarily to your recent comments, I have had a change of heart regarding the Hexane/Propane process. I will be attempting a parallel replication attempt of Mitt Candy's process. Are you of the opinion that all these apparent LENR process are based on the acculumation of extreme charges on nanotubules or Rydberg Matter? Jojo - Original Message - From: Axil Axil To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Monday, May 28, 2012 1:41 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Zawodny on LENR in a recently uploaded NASA LaRC YouTube video http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/files/Initiation%20of%20nuclear%20reactions.pdf A number of experiments that feature violent activity in water share the same characteristics that LeClair observed in his LENR experiments. I see the referenced experiment listed above demonstrating the production of Protonated Water Clusters in the plasma when a laser beam ionizes gold Nano particles in an aqueous solution of uranium salts. LeClair can also produce his reaction using a laser beam. The referenced experiment is less energetic than the LeClair experiment because no sacrificial attractive material is present. But in both experiments, collapsing cavatation bubbles are formed and Protonated Water Clusters are generated which catalyze proton based cold fusion reactions. What the other commenter miss in this type of reaction is that cavatation can provide a continuum of energy levels from weak to extreme. It is adjustable. LeClair has mentioned that he can adjust the energy level in his reaction to produce only heat without radiation to a full range of element transmutation which is accompanied by heavy radiation. Until the other evaluators of this reaction understand its true dynamics, they will continual to misunderstand what underlying processes are going on in the LeClair effect. To wit, if there is no attractive shock wave produced to provide added kinetic energy, then transmutation is gentle and well behaved. Yes the shock wave is optional with the addition of an attractive sacrificial metal within six bubble diameters of bubble formation. At its root, the LeClair effect is cold fusion. Cheers: Axil On Sun, May 27, 2012 at 1:42 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com wrote: At 04:28 PM 5/25/2012, David Roberson wrote: The scenario that they mention is beyond frightening and anyone who remained in the vicinity of that experiment should be given a metal for bravery. I can imagine the description of damage being used as part of the plot to a wild science fiction movie. What a shame that the occurrence was not better documented! Are you sure this was not part of an April fools joke? Funny Dave should ask that. It was my first hit when the Nanospire story first broke. But I'd expect, by now, someone would have been observed giggling and running away from the window, as with Mr. Mischief in the Mr. series of children's books. LeClair is real, has talked with real people (such as Krivit and Storms). And that's about how far it's gone, as to anything verifiable.
Re: [Vo]:Zawodny on LENR in a recently uploaded NASA LaRC YouTube video
As I have posted before, it’s the shape of the crystal(AKA Rydberg matter, Clusters) that is important, not what the crystal is made of. In this regard, a nanowire can be made of carbon (Mint Candy – negative charge concentration), water (LeClair - positive charge concentration), alkali metals (Rossi, DGT - positive charge concentration), or cracks or voids (Storms - negative charge concentration). These crystals serve to concentrate charge of either polarity which lowers the coulomb barrier. As I have said before, the LeClair effect cannot be neutron based (aka-hot fusion) because he is still alive after exposure to his process. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R-process The R process is what LeClair says is going on in his reaction. LeClair has no clue to what he is talking about. The *r-process* is a nucleosynthesishttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nucleosynthesisprocess, occurring in core-collapse supernovae http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supernova (see also supernova nucleosynthesis http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supernova_nucleosynthesis) and in nuclear weapon http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_weaponexplosions, which is responsible for the creation of approximately half of the neutron http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutron-rich atomic nucleihttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atomic_nucleusthat are heavier than iron http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heavy_metals. The process entails a succession of *rapid* neutron captureshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutron_capture(hence the name *r-process*) on seed nuclei http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seed_nucleus, typically Ni-56. The other predominant mechanism for the production of heavy elements is the s-process http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S-process, which is nucleosynthesis by means of *slow* neutron captures, primarily occurring in AGB starshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asymptotic_giant_branch, and together these two processes account for a majority of galactic chemical evolution http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nucleosynthesis of elements heavier than iron. The LeClair process is a proton fusion process just like all the other ones mentioned above base on charge accumulation. I have no idea what catalyst mint Candy is using for a catalyst but I hope he posts his patent when he gets one. The Rossi catalyst concentrates positive charge by using heat. This is very hard to control. Direct negative charge accumulation from a spark plug is very controllable. Cheers and good luck: Axil On Sun, May 27, 2012 at 2:20 PM, Jojo Jaro jth...@hotmail.com wrote: ** Axil, In your opinion, is LeClair process the same mechanism as the Mitt Candy Hexane/Propane process? It seems LeClair is more Hot Fusion than LENR, and appears to be totally different from Rossi, DGT, both of which seems different from Mitt Candy. Any ideas/suggestions on what Mitt Candy's catalyst might be. Due primarily to your recent comments, I have had a change of heart regarding the Hexane/Propane process. I will be attempting a parallel replication attempt of Mitt Candy's process. Are you of the opinion that all these apparent LENR process are based on the acculumation of extreme charges on nanotubules or Rydberg Matter? Jojo - Original Message - *From:* Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com *Sent:* Monday, May 28, 2012 1:41 AM *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:Zawodny on LENR in a recently uploaded NASA LaRC YouTube video http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/files/Initiation%20of%20nuclear%20reactions.pdf A number of experiments that feature violent activity in water share the same characteristics that LeClair observed in his LENR experiments. I see the referenced experiment listed above demonstrating the production of Protonated Water Clusters in the plasma when a laser beam ionizes gold Nano particles in an aqueous solution of uranium salts. LeClair can also produce his reaction using a laser beam. The referenced experiment is less energetic than the LeClair experiment because no sacrificial attractive material is present. But in both experiments, collapsing cavatation bubbles are formed and Protonated Water Clusters are generated which catalyze proton based cold fusion reactions. What the other commenter miss in this type of reaction is that cavatation can provide a continuum of energy levels from weak to extreme. It is adjustable. LeClair has mentioned that he can adjust the energy level in his reaction to produce only heat without radiation to a full range of element transmutation which is accompanied by heavy radiation. Until the other evaluators of this reaction understand its true dynamics, they will continual to misunderstand what underlying processes are going on in the LeClair effect. To wit, if there is no attractive shock wave produced to provide added kinetic energy, then transmutation is gentle and well behaved. Yes the shock wave is optional with the addition of an attractive sacrificial metal
Re: [Vo]:Zawodny on LENR in a recently uploaded NASA LaRC YouTube video
From: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com Sent: Sunday, May 27, 2012 11:25:34 AM But the title of this thread is Zawodny's video. It was my fault bringing up Le Clair .. but I was following up on Bushnell's quote (linked in the original post) about Labs blown up and windows melted.
Re: [Vo]:Zawodny on LENR in a recently uploaded NASA LaRC YouTube video
On the nasa page http://futureinnovation.larc.nasa.gov/view/articles/futurism/bushnell/low-energy-nuclear-reactions.html Bushnell said However, several labs have blown up studying LENR and windows have melted, indicating when the conditions are right prodigious amounts of energy can be produced and released. I can only find http://lenr-canr.org/wordpress/?page_id=187#PhotosAccidents links to http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/BiberianJPunexplaine.pdf The light expanded to the solution and at the same instant the cell was shattered by the sharp increase of inner pressure. The explosion blew off the Plexiglas safety door and spread shards of Pyrex glass and electrolyte up to 5 ~ 6 m into the surrounding area. http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/MizunoTanomalouse.pdf On several occasions, experimentalists have endured explosions. Pons and Fleischmann [5] have told that in one case, the palladium melted and fell down, producing damage on the concrete floor of their garage, Zhang et al. [6] using a hollow tube palladium cathode observed three explosions in an open cell. On January 2, 1992, an unfortunate explosion also occurred at SRI in a closed cell [7,8] that killed a scientist. The explosion was attributed to an oxygen deuterium violent recombination. More recently, 13 years later on the same day on January 2, 2005, Mizuno [9] experienced an explosion in an open cell that wounded him and deafened him and co-workers for several days. Any other links to labs blowing up and window melting ?
Re: [Vo]:Zawodny on LENR in a recently uploaded NASA LaRC YouTube video
Alan J Fletcher a...@well.com wrote: Any other links to labs blowing up and window melting ? I don't know about windows melting. I listed 5 incidents in chapter 12 of my book. I have heard there have been other explosions but I have no specific information on them. I have heard that cold fusion experiments in China have often exploded. I think they are doing a lot of glow discharge, similar to the Mizuno's experiment that exploded. That is a very unstable reaction. The university ordered Mizuno to stop doing that experiment after the accident. One of the glass shards went deep into his neck, next to the carotid artery. I probably would have stopped that myself. His phenanthrene hydrogenation experiment seems dangerous to me. Several experts told me that given the temperatures and pressures he uses, his steel cells are on the verge of exploding. He is not doing that experiment either these days. The building he is in is not zoned for it. His old building, which he left upon retirement, was torn down because it was falling to pieces and also because it was nuclear waste hazard site, after years of unregulated academic experiments in nuclear engineering, by Mizuno and many others. There were 10 cm cracks in the walls, and lots of what looked like abandoned radwaste to me. These Japanese professors don't have much regard for safety. After I visited Takahashi, I showed a Japanese physicist friend of mine a video of the visit made by Russ George. A guy who works in industry, mainly microelectronics, where safety standards are better than academia. The video showed all kinds of rubbish lying around the linear accelerator building, including rusting steel motorbike engines and wheels, which you find in every building on a Japanese university campus. He paused, and said thoughtfully well, you have already had children . . . Here are quotes from chapter 12: 1. February 1985, Fleischmann and Pons, University of Utah, United States. One the early cells exploded in the campus laboratory. 2. September 1989, T. P. Radhakrishnan *et al.*, Bhabha Atomic Research Centre (BARC), India. The electrolyte temperature “shot up” from 71°C to 80°C and the cell exploded. [1]file:///C:/Fusion/Book/Cold%20Fusion%20and%20the%20Future.docx#_ftn1 3. April 1991, X. Zhang *et al.*, Institute of Southwest Nuclear Physics and Chemistry, China. [2]file:///C:/Fusion/Book/Cold%20Fusion%20and%20the%20Future.docx#_ftn2Three explosions occurred in cells with palladium tube cathodes. Two of these explosions destroyed the glass cells, blowing the tops 1 to 2 meters away. About a half hour after one event, the temperature of the bath surrounding the cell was found to be elevated 5°C. There was 33 ml of gas in the cell headspace, roughly 40 times less than it would take to cause these events. 4. September 2004, J-P. Biberian, Université d’Aix-Marseille II, France. A cell with a palladium tube cathode exploded. The cell had no more than 120 ml of gas in the headspace, which does not seem like enough to cause a chemical explosion of this magnitude. 5. January 2005. Mizuno *et al.*, Hokkaido University, Japan. In the first phase of a glow discharge experiment, before the plasma normally appears, the cell temperature suddenly rose to 80°C and a bright white flash surrounded the cathode. An instant later the cell was shattered, blowing off the Pyrex safety door of the cell container. Shards of glass were driven up to 6 meters away, and one of them injured Mizuno. The explosion produced roughly 132,000 joules, or 441 times more than the total input energy. [3]file:///C:/Fusion/Book/Cold%20Fusion%20and%20the%20Future.docx#_ftn3 -- [1]file:///C:/Fusion/Book/Cold%20Fusion%20and%20the%20Future.docx#_ftnref1Radhakrishnan, T.P., et al., *Tritium Generation during Electrolysis Experiment*, in *BARC Studies in Cold Fusion*, P.K. Iyengar and M. Srinivasan, Editors. 1989, Atomic Energy Commission: Bombay. p. A 6. http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/Radhakrishtritiumgen.pdf [2]file:///C:/Fusion/Book/Cold%20Fusion%20and%20the%20Future.docx#_ftnref2Zhang, X., et al. *On the Explosion in a Deuterium/Palladium Electrolytic System*. in *Third International Conference on Cold Fusion, Frontiers of Cold Fusion*. 1992. Nagoya Japan: Universal Academy Press, Inc., Tokyo, Japan. http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/ZhangXontheexplo.pdf [3]file:///C:/Fusion/Book/Cold%20Fusion%20and%20the%20Future.docx#_ftnref3Mizuno, T. and Y. Toriyabe. *Anomalous energy generation during conventional electrolysis*. in *The 12th International Conference on Condensed Matter Nuclear Science*. 2005. Yokohama, Japan. http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/MizunoTanomalouse.pdf
Re: [Vo]:Zawodny on LENR in a recently uploaded NASA LaRC YouTube video
At 12:41 PM 5/25/2012, Jed Rothwell wrote: Alan J Fletcher a...@well.com wrote: Any other links to labs blowing up and window melting ? I don't know about windows melting. There's also : Re: [Vo]:the desktop supernova - The Mail Archive http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg64497.html Points to : http://pieeconomics.blogspot.com/p/cold-fusion-comedy.html UPDATES: 2/22/12: A new NanoSprire press release http://www.nanotech-now.com/news.cgi?story_id=44551 states: Nanospire has announced that its investigative study on fusion created by cavitation in water has come to an end. It's good that they have stopped testing for now. During the nuclear fusion reaction that occurred when they did their test, Hundreds of wave trains and vortices appeared everywhere and are permanently burned into walls, objects and trees surrounding the lab. [ All references to that quote come back to this pieeconomics blog ]
Re: [Vo]:Zawodny on LENR in a recently uploaded NASA LaRC YouTube video
At 01:49 PM 5/25/2012, Alan J Fletcher wrote: Hundreds of wave trains and vortices appeared everywhere and are permanently burned into walls, objects and trees surrounding the lab. Came from Le Clair himself, in response to Krivit http://blog.newenergytimes.com/2011/01/31/new-energy-times-issue-36-letters/ I have just spoken with Steven Krivit and I accept his gracious and sincere apology. He points out that he feels we accomplished LENR, not fusion. Thats fine, it is semantics as far as Im concerned. I do stand by my claim of fusion being triggered by the zero point energy release in the experiment. It was supposed to be a hot water heater powered by cavitation designed to extract zero point energy, the fusion release was an unintended byproduct. I claim fusion because I observed nuclear tracks and mass transmutation of the elements, confirmed by SEM_EDAX. XPS and LA-ICP-MS (mass spec). We saw the presence of nearly every element in the periodic table imbedded into a diamond matrix covering the core of the experiment. The transmuted particles were so radioactive they cooked the clear plastic dishes they were placed in after the experiment. This stopped a week after the experiment, a clear sign of short-lived isotopes, the mass spec anaysis confirmed this. Mass spec is the gold standard and showed the transmuted particles followed supernova isotope ratios (All 80 or so ratios were close to one) and none resembled earthly abundances. All of this is hard to rationally explain as other than being generated by nuclear fusion. There were other many other profound effects we observed that were not subtle as well and equally hard to explain. The experiment gave off powerful crested cnoid de Broglie Matter wave soliton wave packages that were doubly periodic and followed the Jacobi Elliptic functions exactly, mostly in the form of large doubly-periodic vortices. Hundreds of wave trains and vortices appeared everywhere and are permanently burned into walls, objects and trees surrounding the lab. Mark LeClair, Nanospire
Re: [Vo]:Zawodny on LENR in a recently uploaded NASA LaRC YouTube video
Le Clair is quoted: The experiment gave off powerful crested cnoid de Broglie Matter wave soliton wave packages that were doubly periodic and followed the Jacobi Elliptic functions exactly, mostly in the form of large doubly-periodic vortices. Hundreds of wave trains and vortices appeared everywhere and are permanently burned into walls, objects and trees surrounding the lab. Good heavens. It is amazing they survived. Did they take photographs of these things? Did they preserve some of the hundreds of samples of damaged wood and other materials from the surroundings? If they did not take photos and samples, I doubt this account is accurate. Maybe I should not be so dismissive, since Fleischmann and Pons did not take photos or preserve samples from their explosion. It was very stupid of them not to. Very unprofessional. I said that to Martin, and he ruefully agreed. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Zawodny on LENR in a recently uploaded NASA LaRC YouTube video
Krivit elaborates on NASA and Larsen : NASA and Widom-Larsen Theory: Inside Story http://blog.newenergytimes.com/2012/05/24/nasa-and-widom-larsen-theory-inside-story/#more-2474
Re: [Vo]:Zawodny on LENR in a recently uploaded NASA LaRC YouTube video
The scenario that they mention is beyond frightening and anyone who remained in the vicinity of that experiment should be given a metal for bravery. I can imagine the description of damage being used as part of the plot to a wild science fiction movie. What a shame that the occurrence was not better documented! Are you sure this was not part of an April fools joke? Dave -Original Message- From: Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Fri, May 25, 2012 5:17 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Zawodny on LENR in a recently uploaded NASA LaRC YouTube video Le Clair is quoted: The experiment gave off powerful crested cnoid de Broglie Matter wave soliton wave packages that were doubly periodic and followed the Jacobi Elliptic functions exactly, mostly in the form of large doubly-periodic vortices. Hundreds of wave trains and vortices appeared everywhere and are permanently burned into walls, objects and trees surrounding the lab. Good heavens. It is amazing they survived. Did they take photographs of these things? Did they preserve some of the hundreds of samples of damaged wood and other materials from the surroundings? If they did not take photos and samples, I doubt this account is accurate. Maybe I should not be so dismissive, since Fleischmann and Pons did not take photos or preserve samples from their explosion. It was very stupid of them not to. Very unprofessional. I said that to Martin, and he ruefully agreed. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Zawodny on LENR in a recently uploaded NASA LaRC YouTube video
http://pesn.com/2012/04/28/9602083_NanoSpire_Inc_on_Harnessing_Cavitation_Zero_Point_Energy_to_Produce_Fusion_and_Transmutation_in_Water/ the pictures from LeClair are in the comments section of this blog. Cheers: Axil On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 5:17 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: Le Clair is quoted: The experiment gave off powerful crested cnoid de Broglie Matter wave soliton wave packages that were doubly periodic and followed the Jacobi Elliptic functions exactly, mostly in the form of large doubly-periodic vortices. Hundreds of wave trains and vortices appeared everywhere and are permanently burned into walls, objects and trees surrounding the lab. Good heavens. It is amazing they survived. Did they take photographs of these things? Did they preserve some of the hundreds of samples of damaged wood and other materials from the surroundings? If they did not take photos and samples, I doubt this account is accurate. Maybe I should not be so dismissive, since Fleischmann and Pons did not take photos or preserve samples from their explosion. It was very stupid of them not to. Very unprofessional. I said that to Martin, and he ruefully agreed. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Zawodny on LENR in a recently uploaded NASA LaRC YouTube video
Reads like the catalyst may have been
*Lysergic acid diethylamide*
*
*On Friday, May 25, 2012, David Roberson wrote:
The scenario that they mention is beyond frightening and anyone who
remained in the vicinity of that experiment should be given a metal for
bravery.
I can imagine the description of damage being used as part of the plot to
a wild science fiction movie. What a shame that the occurrence was not
better documented!
Are you sure this was not part of an April fools joke?
Dave
-Original Message-
From: Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com javascript:_e({}, 'cvml',
'jedrothw...@gmail.com');
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com javascript:_e({}, 'cvml',
'vortex-l@eskimo.com');
Sent: Fri, May 25, 2012 5:17 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Zawodny on LENR in a recently uploaded NASA LaRC YouTube
video
Le Clair is quoted:
The experiment gave off powerful crested cnoid de Broglie Matter wave
soliton wave packages that were doubly periodic and followed the Jacobi
Elliptic functions exactly, mostly in the form of large doubly-periodic
vortices. Hundreds of wave trains and vortices appeared everywhere and are
permanently burned into walls, objects and trees surrounding the lab.
Good heavens. It is amazing they survived.
Did they take photographs of these things? Did they preserve some of the
hundreds of samples of damaged wood and other materials from the
surroundings? If they did not take photos and samples, I doubt this account
is accurate.
Maybe I should not be so dismissive, since Fleischmann and Pons did not
take photos or preserve samples from their explosion. It was very stupid of
them not to. Very unprofessional. I said that to Martin, and he ruefully
agreed.
- Jed
Re: [Vo]:Zawodny on LENR in a recently uploaded NASA LaRC YouTube video
Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: http://pesn.com/2012/04/28/9602083_NanoSpire_Inc_on_Harnessing_Cavitation_Zero_Point_Energy_to_Produce_Fusion_and_Transmutation_in_Water/ the pictures from LeClair are in the comments section of this blog. Thanks. Not many photos there. Only one, it seems. I do not know what to make of it. Ed Storms is quoted: I examined the material sent by NanoSpire and saw nothing unusual. I have no reason to doubt the experience they claim, but I have no reason to believe it either. As for the theory, it makes no sense based on my understanding of science. That is sensible. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Zawodny on LENR in a recently uploaded NASA LaRC YouTube video
LeClair has observed the generation of *Protonated Water Clusters* in the plasma of the collapsing cavitation bubble. This nanomaterial is a topologic material that concentrates positive charges; most probably superconductive and quantum mechanically coherent at the tip of the cluster. It is this charge concentration that reduces or cancels the coulomb barrier. See *The following doctoral thesis characterizes **Protonated Water Clusters. These clusters are formed around positive ions. * * * *http://gupea.ub.gu.se/bitstream/2077/28349/1/gupea_2077_28349_1.pdf*http://gupea.ub.gu.se/bitstream/2077/28349/1/gupea_2077_28349_1.pdf ** * * *Thermal properties of clusters and molecules* * * *- Experiments on evaporation, thermionic emission, and radiative cooling* * * *E**RIKA **S**UNDÉN* * * *Department of Physics* *University of Gothenburg* * * With the strength of the coulomb barrier greatly lowered or completely down, the energy of the bow shock wave only needs to be equal to or greater than the endothermic energy levels needed to transmit elements over the atomic number of iron. Storms is correct in his observation that the nuclear fusion process is “novel and unexpected”. The neutron production levels needed to transmute trans-iron elements is not produced since LeClear is still alive after exposure to his reaction. This proton based type of transmutation has been seen in exploding foil experiments and is a LENR reaction. There is a good chance that the LeClair effect has been seen before is these exploding foil experiments conducted in water. The electric spark would have produced a collapsing cavitation bubble identical to that seen in the LeClair experiment. http://aflb.ensmp.fr/AFLB-333/aflb333m645.pdf On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 5:43 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: http://pesn.com/2012/04/28/9602083_NanoSpire_Inc_on_Harnessing_Cavitation_Zero_Point_Energy_to_Produce_Fusion_and_Transmutation_in_Water/ the pictures from LeClair are in the comments section of this blog. Thanks. Not many photos there. Only one, it seems. I do not know what to make of it. Ed Storms is quoted: I examined the material sent by NanoSpire and saw nothing unusual. I have no reason to doubt the experience they claim, but I have no reason to believe it either. As for the theory, it makes no sense based on my understanding of science. That is sensible. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Zawodny on LENR in a recently uploaded NASA LaRC YouTube video
On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 2:38 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: the pictures from LeClair are in the comments section of this blog. I know very little about Mark LeClair or NanoSpire. The main thing I conclude from the photographs in the comments is that the lab is not clean and that contamination of any experiments seems likely. Eric
Re: [Vo]:Zawodny on LENR in a recently uploaded NASA LaRC YouTube video
On 2012-05-24 12:57, Akira Shirakawa wrote: Hello group, Here's a related blog post by Dennis Bushnell (Chief Scientist, NASA Langley Research Center). I don't know exactly how recent this is, but I've never seen it linked before: http://futureinnovation.larc.nasa.gov/view/articles/futurism/bushnell/low-energy-nuclear-reactions.html Cheers, S.A.
Re: [Vo]:Zawodny on LENR in a recently uploaded NASA LaRC YouTube video
The Page Info states - Modified: Wednesday, May 23, 2012 3:36:53 PM I am not sure if that means it was uploaded at that time. On 2012-05-24 12:57, Akira Shirakawa wrote: Hello group, Here's a related blog post by Dennis Bushnell (Chief Scientist, NASA Langley Research Center). I don't know exactly how recent this is, but I've never seen it linked before: http://futureinnovation.larc.nasa.gov/view/articles/futurism/bushnell/low-energy-nuclear-reactions.html Cheers, S.A.
RE: [Vo]:Zawodny on LENR in a recently uploaded NASA LaRC YouTube video
The device shown in the video is depicted in slides 20,21,22 of Zawodny's pdf presentation that NET obtained through the FOI request. The experiment is significant because it elegantly allows the direct observation of cold fusion without complicated calorimetry or controls. The Zawodny slides imply that direct measurements by IR camera have been made of terahertz radiation induced cold fusion with insitu control tiles directly adjacent to active tiles. If that is indeed what Zawodny has achieved it is a slam-dunk experiment that is extremely difficult to refute. I wish more details of his observations were available. Date: Thu, 24 May 2012 12:57:56 +0200 From: shirakawa.ak...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]:Zawodny on LENR in a recently uploaded NASA LaRC YouTube video Hello group, This is via ecatnews [1] / NASA Langley RC YouTube Channel [2] Joe Zawodny informally speaks again about his group's recent developments on LENR and future applications/implications. Widom-Larsen theory cited, new very small scale test device shown. This video appears to have been uploaded yesterday. Enjoy: NASA LaRC | Abundant Clean/Green Energy http://youtu.be/42hrCRx1JJY Cheers, S.A. [1] http://ecatnews.com/?p=2212 [2] http://www.youtube.com/user/NASAinnovation?feature=watch
Re: [Vo]:Zawodny on LENR in a recently uploaded NASA LaRC YouTube video
To avoid being laughed at and eventually fired, the people at NASA need a politically correct theory to legitimate their interest in cold fusion. High energy and plasma physics and its conceptual spawn, the standard model all say that the coulomb barrier is inviolate. So how can NASA embrace the possibility of cold fusion and still be on the right side of standard science? Well, just place credence and lip service into a “weak force” based theoretical alternative to cover their interest and their butt ends in a plausible conceptual framework. Let us hope that NASA does not become myopic and self-delusional in their blind adherence to this theory. The best course for them would be to develop diagnostic tools in an open minded quest to see what is really happening on the surface of the nickel lattice. On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 6:57 AM, Akira Shirakawa shirakawa.ak...@gmail.comwrote: Hello group, This is via ecatnews [1] / NASA Langley RC YouTube Channel [2] Joe Zawodny informally speaks again about his group's recent developments on LENR and future applications/implications. Widom-Larsen theory cited, new very small scale test device shown. This video appears to have been uploaded yesterday. Enjoy: NASA LaRC | Abundant Clean/Green Energy http://youtu.be/42hrCRx1JJY Cheers, S.A. [1] http://ecatnews.com/?p=2212 [2] http://www.youtube.com/user/**NASAinnovation?feature=watchhttp://www.youtube.com/user/NASAinnovation?feature=watch
