Hi,
it is a question of the historians of cold fusion.
I remember that some nasty terms was used agains Fleischmann experiments...
beside Meshuganon used in some conference, there was an insult to say bad
science somethin like schienshe
For documentation I would like to find the terms used...
if
For those who missed it, yesterday's video interview of Brillouin founders
is at:
Brillouin Energy Interview on Smart Scarecrow Show
http://www.e-catworld.com/2013/09/brillioun-interview-on-smart-scarecrow-show-tonight-live-thread/
Alain,
The article -
MIT and Cold Fusion: A Special
Reporthttp://www.infinite-energy.com/images/pdfs/mitcfreport.pdf
- contains a number of insults.
Alain Sepeda wrote:
Hi,
it is a question of the historians of cold fusion.
I remember that some nasty terms was used agains Fleischmann
Alain Sepeda alain.sep...@gmail.com wrote:
I remember that some nasty terms was used agains Fleischmann experiments...
beside Meshuganon used in some conference,
Meshuganon was not an insult at all. Edward Teller used it at at the NSF
conference. See:
The reason for this interview is that Brillouin needs some money for
development of their gas phase reactor.
Brillouin is proposing that their reaction is a variant of the Widom-Larsen
theory, where a fast electron combines with a proton to become a neutron
(reverse beta decay). The Brillion
Axil,
Good find! Another perplexing result.
The full text preprint is available at -
Observation of neutron bursts produced by laboratory high-voltage
atmospheric discharge
http://arxiv.org/pdf/1304.2521.pdf
BTW, the discharge tube is only one meter long.
Here is the abstract and conclusion:
2013/9/13 Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com
Meshuganon
ok, I understand now... it is like X-ray... an hypothesis, to
characterize...
not like shlock science (which is unconfirmed from IE)...
thanks for the correction.
so not much to say.
most critics seems quite untold, yet they spread like
The interview is by Gary with Robert Godes (inventor) and Bob George
(business).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eXAg_424_2o
I'd recommend watching from 0:30 to 0:45... then 1:02- 1:08
Highlights:
Brillioun calls their LENR CECR, for Controlled Electron Capture Reaction
The theory is described
I'm perplexed that Google wouldn't provide funding after observing some
of the experiments.
Were they either (a) unconvinced, (b) already allied with others,
(c) directed not to engage with Brillouin, (d) reluctant for other reason?
If I recall correctly, Godes claims the absence of tritium is
Keep an open mind, but a closed wallet.
Their gas phase system has the potential to conform to Nanoplasmonic
principles. However, I do not yet detect a good chance for plasma
condensation of the catalyst to nanoparticles. But at least they say that
they use a catalyst.
The reactor
Does anyone else see that the explanation given by Godes is pure word
salad having no relationship to reality. The description is in direct
and basic conflict with what is known and accepted in science. I'm
flabbergasted that money is being spent and discussion is taking place
based on
If precise dimensions are required in 3D for optimal resonance structures
and gas permeability advances in this tech may play a role.
http://nextbigfuture.com/2013/09/caltech-engineers-focus-on-nano-to.html
*Three-dimensional, hollow titanium nitride nanotruss with tessellated
octahedral
The other thing that bothers me is their claim that the device converts
energy into mass. A kind of nuclear refrigerator they say. That would be
an endothermic reaction. As far as I know, no one has observed significant
endothermic reactions except for chemical reactions in the initial loading
of
Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com wrote:
Does anyone else see that the explanation given by Godes is pure word salad
having no relationship to reality. The description is in direct and basic
conflict with what is known and accepted in science.
I do not know enough about theory to judge
http://coldfusionnow.org/brillouin-energy-patent-granted-in-china/
*Essentially, it is a tube containing the catalytic material with the metal
nickel that allows for control over the flow of hydrogen gas as well the
Q-pulses, the electromagnetic pulses that start and drive the reaction. *
This
Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote:
This is standard WL theory. 700K electron volts are needed to make neutron
production from electrons and protons energetically possible.
I know. I guess the total output is continuously exothermic. But at one
point in the video it sounds like they are
This is standard WL theory. 700K electron volts are needed to make neutron
production from electrons and protons energetically possible.
On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 3:38 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
The other thing that bothers me is their claim that the device converts
energy
Meshuganon will probably turn out to be hydrino/deuterino
Peter
- Original Message -
From: Jed Rothwell
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Friday, September 13, 2013 7:43 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Meshuganon, pseudo-scientists and other ridiculing terms...
Alain Sepeda
Its not like Jed to miss something like that. I sense a Disturbance in The
Force.
On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 3:10 PM, pagnu...@htdconnect.com wrote:
Axil is correct.
If Brillouin and W-L are correct, the e+p--n conversion taps 782 KeV
electromagnetic field energy. Temperature does not
Axil is correct.
If Brillouin and W-L are correct, the e+p--n conversion taps 782 KeV
electromagnetic field energy. Temperature does not decrease.
Jed Rothwell wrote:
Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote:
This is standard WL theory. 700K electron volts are needed to make
neutron
production
Jed,
Google apparently did not archive it, but I recall reading a posting by
Godes to Goat Guy who was a caustic skeptic on an eet blog (I think.)
Godes realized that Goat Guy lived nearby and offered to let him inspect
his lab and test procedures. Goat Guy did not respond.
Now that Brillouin
James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote:
Its not like Jed to miss something like that. I sense a Disturbance in
The Force.
Okay, I admit, I wasn't paying close attention to the video. I find it
irritating.
I am updating all of the ICCF3 Abstracts, which is tedious. Another reason
I am
It's pretty cool that these authors have gotten a LENR-ish paper into
Physical Review Letters in 2013. I suspect this paper should be understood
to be in the line of LENR papers, proper, rather than that of an outside
group looking at something akin to LENR. At least two of the authors, for
A current problem in plasma physics http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physics is
that observed reconnection happens much faster than predicted by MHD in
high Lundquist number http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lundquist_number plasmas:
solar flares, for example, proceed 13-14 orders of magnitude faster than
Eric,
Since a typical lightning strike is a gigavolt in potential … with 10 to 20
kilo-amps of current what is the reason to invoke LENR to explain neutrons?
These input parameters are more energetic than a tokomak.
In fact, this abstract indicates that fast neutrons are detected over 10
the wiki page on lightning says the temperature of lightning (about 50 000
K) is too low for existing theory to explain the production of x-rays.
Harry
On Sat, Sep 14, 2013 at 12:07 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:
Eric,
** **
Since a typical lightning strike is a gigavolt
My apologies -- I should have clarified that some of the authors look like
researchers that have a history of participation in research related to
LENR. I guess that is relevant because it means that the article could
just as well have been published in JCMNS (although the article also made
it
On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 11:46 AM, pagnu...@htdconnect.com wrote:
I'm perplexed that Google wouldn't provide funding after observing some
of the experiments.
I didn't hear anything about Google's decision after the neutron
measurements -- perhaps they did go ahead with funding after all? I
28 matches
Mail list logo
