Re: [Vo]:We should employ new methods of persuading the public

"there is no hope to convince people until there is a working prototype that we can put on the client table, and that clearly work, even roughly." I could have sworn that was what I've been writing on and off for the last year or so! No one but scientists care if CF exists but isn't useful in the

Re: [Vo]:The new normal

Exactly. [mg] On Fri, Nov 9, 2012 at 5:34 PM, Jones Beene wrote: > But no one is sure what how far you can go with rock solid COP of 1.5 ... > in > terms of a commercial item... Essentially that is Gibbs' point, no? >

Re: [Vo]:Centre for the Study of Existential Risk

On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 5:57 AM, Alain Sepeda wrote: > the gibbs like "it might be wrongly done or use, so just don't do it" > You should read what I write more carefully: I didn't say CF/LENR shouldn't be used but that possible unintended consequences should be considered. [mg]

Re: [Vo]:Direct heating of Celani's wire at EU cell of MFMP

Something I haven't seen any discussion about is the amount of energy required to load materials with hydrogen to be used in these various LENR/CF devices. If that energy is taken into account, are the claims of excess energy from the operation of the devices still valid? [mg]

Re: [Vo]:Direct heating of Celani's wire at EU cell of MFMP

And what about in the MFM Project? [m] On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 6:26 PM, Terry Blanton wrote: > Yes, McKubre takes the endothermic loading and exothermic off loading > into his calculations in his work at SRI. > > On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 9:17 PM, Mark Gibbs wrote: > > Someth

Re: [Vo]:Direct heating of Celani's wire at EU cell of MFMP

9:26 PM, Terry Blanton wrote: > > Yes, McKubre takes the endothermic loading and exothermic off loading > > into his calculations in his work at SRI. > > > > On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 9:17 PM, Mark Gibbs wrote: > >> Something I haven't seen any discussion about is

Re: [Vo]:Direct heating of Celani's wire at EU cell of MFMP

ferent LENR reactions occuring. Are they based on the same > > physics? Maybe yes, maybe no. > > > > On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 9:26 PM, Terry Blanton > wrote: > >> Yes, McKubre takes the endothermic loading and exothermic off loading > >> into his calculations in his

Re: [Vo]:A Proposal to stop all Off-Topic posts (was: Continued trolling by Jojo Jaro)

Is it worth pointing out that if you all did what Jed does -- filter Jojo out -- you wouldn't have to be annoyed over what he says. The end result would have the same result as banning him without the need for appeals to the list mom to do the dirty work. [mg] On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 12:02 PM, D

Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age

Pig breeding, Birthers, attacks on Islam, attacks on each other ... what is the matter with you people? Jojo throws out blatant nonsense that isn't intended to achieve anything constructive and that only the most generous would treat as reasonable discussion and everyone rises to the bait. Abd, to

Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age

Stewart > *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com > *Sent:* Saturday, December 29, 2012 2:24 AM > *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age > > Unfortunately I sense lots of bad mojo behind many of the posts in this > exchange > > On Friday, December 28, 2

Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age

eally an optimal solution. What's needed is a moderator who can enforce adult, civilized behavior. [m] On Fri, Dec 28, 2012 at 2:07 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > Mark Gibbs wrote: > > Does anyone know how to get William Beaty to manage the conduct on this >> list? >> &g

Re: [Vo]:(OT) epidemic and endemic

On Friday, December 28, 2012, Peter Gluck wrote: > > but it raises the question if/when will enter LENR such lists? > When there is a testable theory or a demonstrably practical device. So far, LENR is, to be perhaps somewhat poetic, no more than a willow-the-wisp ... [mg]

Re: [Vo]:(OT) epidemic and endemic

On Sat, Dec 29, 2012 at 8:38 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > Mark Gibbs wrote: > > but it raises the question if/when will enter LENR such lists? >>> >> >> When there is a testable theory or a demonstrably practical device. >> >> So far, LENR is, to

Re: [Vo]:(OT) epidemic and endemic

On Sat, Dec 29, 2012 at 9:11 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > FURTHERMORE, the notion that cold fusion results are unconvincing or close > to the noise is also gross ignorance. People who say this know nothing > about experimental significance. I never said the results were unconvincing ... as I've wr

Re: [Vo]:(OT) epidemic and endemic

James, Which theory is that? [mg] On Sat, Dec 29, 2012 at 10:01 AM, James Bowery wrote: > On Sat, Dec 29, 2012 at 11:58 AM, Mark Gibbs wrote: > >> Sure, there's lots of interesting experiments but is there a testable >> theory? >> > > Yes, there is a wide

Re: [Vo]:(OT) epidemic and endemic

to voice a dissenting opinion. He was also the only Nobel > laureate. > > Ramsey insisted on the inclusion of this preamble to the DoE panel's > report as an alternative to his resignation from the panel. > > > On Sat, Dec 29, 2012 at 12:08 PM, Mark Gibbs wrote: > >>

Re: [Vo]:(OT) epidemic and endemic

On Sat, Dec 29, 2012 at 10:24 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > Mark Gibbs wrote: > > >> I am sorry to be abrasive, but this is ignorant nonsense. >>> >> >> Alas, you really aren't sorry. That's just a technique to try to avoid >> being called out

Re: [Vo]:(OT) epidemic and endemic

On Sat, Dec 29, 2012 at 11:31 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > Mark Gibbs wrote: > > No, it is pro-forma, Japanese style. It is what you say before you are >>> forced to be uncivil. >>> >> >> One is never "forced" to be uncivil. >> > > I

Re: [Vo]:(OT) epidemic and endemic

ave enough on my plate as it is. That said, if someone with deep pockets should ask me what would be a good outlier project to invest in, I'd definitely tell him or her to talk to Ed Storms. So, what are you doing about getting funding for you or someone else to test your theories? Regards

Re: [Vo]:(OT) epidemic and endemic

On Sat, Dec 29, 2012 at 1:14 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > Mark Gibbs wrote: > > So, your considered and thoughtful way to address what you see as >> someone's misunderstandings and to educate them is to be insulting and to >> attack the man while you address the argumen

Fwd: [Vo]:(OT) epidemic and endemic

-- Forwarded message -- From: Edmund Storms Date: Sat, Dec 29, 2012 at 2:33 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:(OT) epidemic and endemic To: Mark Gibbs Cc: Edmund Storms On Dec 29, 2012, at 3:04 PM, Mark Gibbs wrote: Ed, On Sat, Dec 29, 2012 at 10:58 AM, Edmund Storms wrote: > Mark

Re: [Vo]:(OT) epidemic and endemic

On Sat, Dec 29, 2012 at 2:56 PM, OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson < orionwo...@charter.net> wrote: > From Mark Gibbs > > > And remember, this whole discussion is Peter's fault ... > > Peter's fault? Whatever... > I was joking. Of course it wasn't

Re: [Vo]:Suppose Watson tells people "cancer treatment does not work"?

On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 3:14 PM, Jones Beene wrote: > ** > > What if the entire corpus of physics is loaded, and Watson concludes that > LENR is the superior energy solution for the future of humanity, far more > so than hot fusion or fission ? > > ** > What if Watson concludes LENR is a lo

Re: [Vo]:Suppose Watson tells people "cancer treatment does not work"?

ld not be surprised, so it's kind of boring. > > > 2013/1/17 Mark Gibbs > >> On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 3:14 PM, Jones Beene wrote: >> >> >>> ** >>> >>> What if the entire corpus of physics is loaded, and Watson concludes >>>

[Vo]:Nanor

Does anyone know what the status is of the Nanor device at MIT? Has it been kept running? Has anyone duplicated the device and successfully run it? Thanks in advance. [mg]

Re: [Vo]:Nanor

On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 7:09 PM, Terry Blanton wrote: > On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 10:07 PM, Terry Blanton > wrote: > > Swartz has been very secretive. His web site: > > > > http://world.std.com/~mica/jettech.html > Yep, that's a lot of ... er, stuff. > > Probably the most info publicly availabl

Re: [Vo]:Nanor

I read that ... which is to say I scanned it but I can't draw any conclusions from it. Anyone willing to apply their huge brain to that document and summarize it? Thanks in advance. [m] On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 7:30 PM, Terry Blanton wrote: > On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 10:28 PM, Ma

Re: [Vo]:Nanor

>> Hagelstein's video is of theoretical issues, and speaks of NANOR here and >> there for support, but there is no NANOR video included (I didn't get >> through it to the end though!) >> >> From the release on his website, it seems that there may be some video &

Re: [Vo]:Nanor

cience is magnificent, technology works for us. > Peter > > On Fri, Feb 1, 2013 at 8:38 AM, Mark Gibbs > > > wrote: > >> I must be behind the curve ... and what might KILOR and MEGAR be? >> >> [m] >> >> >> >> On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 10:

[Vo]:Tech Predictions

http://www.polratings.com/predictions Currently they're all IT predictions but anyone care to predict what will happen in CF in 2013? If you have an insight, fire away: http://www.polratings.com/predictions/prediction-submission/ [mg]

Re: [Vo]:Tech Predictions

How about throwing in some predictions on world resource use, nuclear power, wind power, robots, the erosion of funding for HF, or the zombie apocalypse? [mg] On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 7:50 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > The IT predictions are interesting! > > I have sworn off trying to predict the f

Re: [Vo]:Science Set Free

On Fri, Feb 15, 2013 at 10:02 AM, Edmund Storms wrote: > Yes, but more exactly a trial-and-errorist. > Which is hardly god-like ... it seems to me that the Catholic god (omniscient, omnipotent, and omnipresent) is what a true god should be ... the alpha and omega ... all other flavors of god are,

Re: [Vo]:Science Set Free

On Fri, Feb 15, 2013 at 10:49 AM, Chris Zell wrote: > However, that still allows for a transcendent impersonal God who operates > as a system - and might even answer prayers. A true god would not answer prayers as he would have created the conditions that required your prayers and would have de

Re: [Vo]:Deadly insect drones of the future

Too late: http://www.indiegogo.com/robotdragonfly/x/1658702 ... basic version to be priced at $250 without camera and a camera-less "silent" version at $280 (perfect for stealth toxic chemical delivery). Surveillance version with two cameras (one HD) with an on-board computer that may be powerful e

Re: [Vo]:Re: CMNS: explaining LENR - II

When I recently suggested in response to Peter Gluck's question [1] that a testable theory was a necessity for LENR to be recognized as a great invention [2], it sure seemed like you all disagreed. It sure sounds like you now think a theory is required ... [m] [1] http://www.mail-archive.com/vor

Re: [Vo]:Re: CMNS: explaining LENR - II

On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 10:53 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > > It makes no sense to demand "a testable theory or a demonstrably practical > device." Science does not work that way. It usually starts with discovery > and then progresses to theory, to practical device. (On rare occasions the > theory com

Re: [Vo]:Re: CMNS: explaining LENR - II

On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 11:47 AM, Kevin O'Malley wrote: > They did not need to put first-principles theories of flight in their > patent. Gibbs seems to think this has been a requirement all along. > O'Malley is making unfounded assumptions. Gibbs never wrote or implied any such thing. [m]

Re: [Vo]:Violante and others are trying the engineering approach

On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 3:27 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > Mark Gibbs wrote: > > >> On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 11:47 AM, Kevin O'Malley wrote: >> >>> They did not need to put first-principles theories of flight in their >>> patent. Gibbs seems to

Re: [Vo]:Violante and others are trying the engineering approach

On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 4:49 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > Mark Gibbs wrote: > > >> Gibbs didn't say anything about the Wright Brothers ... that was Ed >> Storms: >> > > Wrong person! Ed was speaking loosely. > Ah, so if Ed speaks "loosely"

Re: [Vo]:Violante and others are trying the engineering approach

A question for Ed: On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 6:56 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > The definition of "success rate" in these experiments is fuzzy. Ed stated > with 90 cathodes. He tested them and identified 4 that met all of his > criteria. These 4 worked robustly, and repeatedly. So, is that a 5% succe

Re: [Vo]:Violante and others are trying the engineering approach

several other people have made codeposition make heat, although I have not > had success with this method. People keep looking for the critical > feature, but I believe they have not yet looked at small enough scale to > see the active sites, which I believe are in the 1-5 nm range. >

[Vo]:Gizmag: "NASA's basement reactor"

BTW, did everyone see the Gizmag article "NASA's basement reactor" ( http://m.gizmag.com/article/26309). It's a bit fluffy and hand-waving but I was intrigued by this section: According to Zawodny, LENR isn’t what was thought of as cold fusion and it doesn't involve strong nuclear forces. Instead

[Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:What the Japanese Government Isn’t Saying About F**ushima

Follow-up to the sailors affected by radiation poisoning on the USS Ronald Reagan: "US Sailors’ Lawsuit Dismissed in Fukushima Radiation Exposure Case" ... http://legalinsurrection.com/2013/12/us-sailors-lawsuit-dismissed-in-fukushima-radiation-exposure-case/ [m] On Sun, Dec 22, 2013 at 5:10 PM,

[Vo]:General Fusion Founder to Speak at TED Conference

January 31, 2014 General Fusion Founder to Speak at TED Conference Chief Scientist to highlight progress on much-anticipated fusion energy VANCOUVER, BRITISH COLUMBIA--(Marketwired - Jan. 31, 2014) - When TED, the world's primary idea exchange, moves to its new home in Vancouver this year, the c

Re: [Vo]:General Fusion Founder to Speak at TED Conference

fusion has >> demonstrated a commercial generator having more plausibility than what is >> being shown to be the case using hot fusion. At what point does rational >> thinking take over from the bad habits of the past? >> >> Ed Storms >> >> On Jan 31, 2

Re: [Vo]:: RAR gravity engine

Is there an explanation somewhere of how this machine is supposed to work? Who's funding the projects? [m] On Fri, Feb 7, 2014 at 1:29 PM, a.ashfield wrote: > RAR are progressing with the construction of their second "gravity > engine" and posted four new photos today. > Presumably they have

Re: [Vo]:Hot fusion OU milestone reported

Correct me if I'm wrong but they didn't really achieve OU because the target only got 10% of the incident energy so the actual energy gain was in a subsystem rather than in the whole system. [m] On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 6:44 PM, Eric Walker wrote: > On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 12:52 PM, David Rober

[Vo]:Rethinking wind power

“People have often thought there’s no upper bound for wind power—that it’s one of the most scalable power sources,” says Harvard University applied physicist David Keith. After all, gusts and breezes don’t seem likely to “run out” on a global scale in the way oil wells might run dry. Yet the lates

[Vo]:Fwd: NASA Does "Cold Fusion"

I don't think this link has been posted to this list yet: http://futureinnovation.larc.nasa.gov/view/articles/futurism/bushnell/low-energy-nuclear-reactions.html ** ** [m]

[Vo]:Light particles illuminate the vacuum

http://www.rdmag.com/news/2013/02/light-particles-illuminate-vacuum In an article published in the PNAS scientific journal, researchers from Aalto University and the VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland showed experimentally that vacuum has properties not previously observed. According to the

[Vo]:Is a Comet on a Collision Course with Mars?

http://www.universetoday.com/100298/is-a-comet-on-a-collision-course-with-mars/ There is an outside chance that a newly discovered comet might be on a collision course with Mars. Astronomers are still determining the trajectory of the comet, named C/2013 A1 (Siding Spring), but at the very least,

[Vo]:Is a Comet on a Collision Course with Mars?

(Sing to the tune "As Time Goes By") And so, it's come to this A miss is just a miss When a comet's passing by The fundamental laws apply Across the sky ... [mg] On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 1:42 PM, Jed Rothwell > wrote: > > > So, a miss is just a miss. The fundamental things apply. (Newtonian > ph

[Vo]:Nanotubes generate huge electric currents from osmotic flow

http://www.rdmag.com/news/2013/03/nanotubes-generate-huge-electric-currents-osmotic-flow

[Vo]:13 things that do not make sense - space - 19 March 2005 - New Scientist

http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg18524911.600-13-things-that-do-not-make-sense.html?full=true And #13 is ... [m] 13 Cold fusion AFTER 16 years, it's back. In fact, cold fusion never really went away. Over a 10-year period from 1989, US navy labs ran more than 200 experiments to investigate

Re: [Vo]:13 things that do not make sense - space - 19 March 2005 - New Scientist

Bugger. Missed that. I assumed that they'd link from a current article [1] to a current article, not to history and now I find that that original article, which was linked to a current article wasn't any such thing ... it was also from 2005! I am now very suspicious of New Scientist but welcome to

Re: [Vo]:Novam Research comments on eCat

Interesting lack of objectivity: "During the congress I met Andrea Rossi for the first time. In my estimation he is kind, competent and reputable." [mg] On Sun, Apr 7, 2013 at 11:05 AM, Eric Walker wrote: > Further to the thread about gammas, here are these "money" quotes from the > PDF by Li

Re: [Vo]:Novam Research comments on eCat

On Sun, Apr 7, 2013 at 7:46 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > Mark Gibbs wrote: > > Interesting lack of objectivity: >> >> "During the congress I met Andrea Rossi for the first time. In my >> estimation he is kind, competent and reputable." >> > > W

Re: [Vo]:Why you should believe the Toyota Roulette data

Are the fine details of the Toyota experimental set up known? Has anyone tried to replicate that configuration? On Sun, May 12, 2013 at 10:47 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > Others said that the Toyota research and the NEDO program were stopped > because "progress was too slow" (I agree), and "we dete

Re: [Vo]: ECAT Time Domain Response

On Mon, May 20, 2013 at 12:46 PM, Arnaud Kodeck wrote: > Rossi has recently stated in JONP that local hot spots in its reactor were > the main issue. If a spot come to a certain upper threshold, the reactor > goes out of control. Does anyone know what happens when Rossi's reactor goes out of con

Re: [Vo]: ECAT Time Domain Response

So, in run away mode the reactor can do/always does emit radiation (of what type? X-rays and/or gamma?) is it possible that the casing of the reactor and the other components would not become radioactive? Is there any information as to what type of detector Celani used? If the spectators at the dem

Re: [Vo]: ECAT Time Domain Response

Consider yourself asked ... oh, and what type of radiation was/would be involved? [mg] On Mon, May 20, 2013 at 8:24 PM, Axil Axil wrote: > > > > If you require the theory behind this overview, just ask. > > >

Re: [Vo]:Fwd: CMNS: Rossi's 3rd party test released:

two but for heaven's sake, this is the Internet ... you can cite a link as Alan Fletcher did so people can get directly to the original article (which, BTW, has been updated). Copying the entire piece to hundreds of people just wastes bits. William, please delete Kevin's post from the archive

Re: [Vo]:Levi Hot Cat paper is a gem

On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 1:49 PM, Andrew wrote: > There's another way to perpetrate the output hoax, and that's to secrete > infrared lasers in the ceiling and heat the device up remotely. Lasers?! Don't you think that seems just a little farfetched? And it raises, once again, as do many of the

Re: [Vo]:Fwd: CMNS: Rossi's 3rd party test released:

; your reputation. > > > On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 10:16 AM, Mark Gibbs wrote: > >> Kevin, >> >> Publishing a summary or abstract of my piece would have been fine (under >> the concept of "Fair Use") but posting my article in full to a list (and a >>

Re: [Vo]:Fwd: CMNS: Rossi's 3rd party test released:

re now much higher on the hit list. > Wrong. I don't have time to educate you but you are simply wrong. > > [mg] > > > > > On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 4:35 PM, Andrew wrote: > >> ** >> I am with Mark. Kevin needs to grow some ethics. >> >> Andrew >&g

Re: [Vo]:Gibbs' article featured on major Italian newspaper

We both thank you. [mg] On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 2:35 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > I wrote: > > >> That's pretty good! Bravo for Mark Giggs . . . >> > > And for Mark Gibbs. Him too. > > - Jed > >

Re: [Vo]:Fwd: CMNS: Rossi's 3rd party test released:

via a > different address. Please standby until he has a chance to respond. > > This list has benefited you in the past. I suspect your gain exceeds your > loss. > > On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 1:16 PM, Mark Gibbs wrote: > > Kevin, > > > > Publishing a summary or a

Re: [Vo]:Fwd: CMNS: Rossi's 3rd party test released:

Wed, May 22, 2013 at 5:24 PM, Terry Blanton wrote: > On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 8:10 PM, Mark Gibbs wrote: > > Terry, > > > > Thanks. The issue has become a moot point and Bill needn't bother. > > I really don't care what you do to the offender; but, injuring thi

[Vo]:E-Cat Tester's Bios

Does anone have any more in-depth bios of the group that tested the E-Cat. This is what I have so far: Giuseppe Levi Assistant Professor Department of Physics and Astronomy Bologna University Bologna, Italy Bio: http://www.unibo.it/SitoWebDocente/default.htm?upn=giuseppe.levi%40unibo.it&TabControl

Re: [Vo]:Secret wiring hypothesis [second copy?]

Which author is a vet? I didn't find any such thing ... [mg] On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 3:41 PM, Andrew wrote: > Rossi has stated that the testers brought their own cables. A poster here > asserts that they were Rossi's cables. As usual, this issue is not > addressed by the paper. > > If I were c

Re: [Vo]:Hartman's not a vet...

Sunil, May I quote you in a Forbes posting? If I may, may I cite your name? Thanks in advance. Yours, Mark Gibbs. On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 5:20 AM, Sunil Shah wrote: > Hi All, > > My first post, after a couple of year's hiding in the shadows.. > Just want to settle a

Re: [Vo]:Hartman's not a vet...

nil > > -- > From: mgi...@gibbs.com > Date: Fri, 24 May 2013 11:50:29 -0700 > Subject: Re: [Vo]:Hartman's not a vet... > To: vortex-l@eskimo.com > > > Sunil, > > May I quote you in a Forbes posting? If I may, may I cite your name? > >

Re: [Vo]:More delusional scientists, and over 60,000 publications!

Mark, If I get a chance may I quote you? [mg] On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 5:48 PM, Mark Iverson wrote: > "There have been more than 60,000 papers published on high-temperature > superconductive material since its discovery in 1986," said Jak Chakhalian, > professor of physics at the University of

Re: [Vo]:Gibbs: Rossi's A Fraud! No, He's Not! Yes, He Is! No, He Isn't!

On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 9:02 PM, Harry Veeder wrote: > > I suspect "hand waving" began as a derisive reference to occult > activities since these might involve the waving of hands and/or a wand. . > You would be completely wrong. In fact, that is perhaps the most ridiculous conclusion anyone has

Re: [Vo]:Of NAEs and nothingness...

What is a Hydroton? I googled the term and all I could find were references to a clay-based plant growing medium much prized by marijuana growers ... [mg] On Thursday, May 30, 2013, Harry Veeder wrote: > > > > On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 11:00 AM, Edmund Storms > > > wrote: > >> Harry, imagine bal

Re: [Vo]:On deception

On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 1:12 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > Cude has waved his hands and said there might be a method of deception > that he has not thought of yet. As I have often pointed out, such > assertions cannot be tested or falsified. There might be an error in Ohm's > law we have not yet disc

Re: [Vo]:Rossi is suing Wikipedia for libel

Daniel, The link you gave (May 31st, 2013 at 2:53 PM) doesn't have a posting with the text you quoted and I can't find that text on the site. Can you send a link to the letter from Rossi you quoted? Thanks. [mg] On Fri, M

Re: [Vo]:Rossi is suing Wikipedia for libel

Rossi is infuriating. And his caps lock key is stuck. [mg] On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 4:31 PM, Daniel Rocha wrote: > No, that's all I had. Probably he deleted. Well, I hope someone else > printed the screen... > > > 2013/5/31 Mark Gibbs > >> Daniel, >> >&g

Re: [Vo]:A Couple Hundred Bucks Maybe...

Even though I'm still wearing my skeptic's hat (that's the one with the propeller on top) isn't the argument about the need for calorimetry made irrelevant the amount of energy observed to have been generated? In other words, even with more precise measurements the exact energy output couldn't have

Re: [Vo]:A Couple Hundred Bucks Maybe...

On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 1:22 PM, DJ Cravens wrote: > yes, calorimetry is not needed IF you believe the claims, methods, and the > effect. > The claims are that the device produces significantly over unity, the methods have been alluded to but Rossi is definitely not public with this and he may we

Re: [Vo]:A Couple Hundred Bucks Maybe...

On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 3:02 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > Mark Gibbs wrote: > > Ah, now we have it ... it's the questions of reproducability and >> controlability, >> > > But these questions have no bearing on whether the effect is real or not. > > We're

Re: [Vo]:Why are pseudoskeptics so relentless in their mission to debunk?

Might I suggest using a smaller point size and any typeface other than Comic Sans (it's a typeface that give us type nerds bad dreams). [mg] On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 8:04 PM, Roger B wrote: > But, seriously, that was an excellent description. Can you supply a link > to it? > > Roger > -

[Vo]:Why are pseudoskeptics so relentless in their mission to debunk?

: > >> On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 8:42 PM, Mark Gibbs wrote: >> >> Might I suggest using a smaller point size and any typeface other than >>> Comic Sans (it's a typeface that give us type nerds bad dreams). >>> >> >> I think Comic Sans is a

[Vo]:Reifenschweiler effect rediscovered in Japan

Are there any indications the Reifenschweiler effect produces excess heat along with the decrease in radioactivity? [m] On Sunday, June 9, 2013, Jed Rothwell wrote: > I do not see where I can add a comment to that article in ColdFusionNow > but anyway, here are three papers from Otto: > > http:/

Re: [Vo]:Molecular Impact Steam Technology

On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 8:16 PM, Jones Beene wrote: > ... Richard Aho … or “Smokie” CEO or MIST - tries to defend his device > to skeptics. It is not easy to do. There are many red flags and the > so-called testing stinks. > Now where have we heard that before ... ? > He may or may not have som

Re: [Vo]: About the March test

I've been following the endless arguments about how the tests could have been rigged and it seems like every theory has been repeated over and over again but no one who claims it's a fraud seems to be willing to admit they just don't know even though they have no actual evidence of fraud and can't

Re: [Vo]:A partial list of skeptical objections to Levi et al. in Forbes

$0.02 [mg] On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 7:50 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > Mark Gibbs wrote: > > I've been following the endless arguments about how the tests could have >> been rigged and it seems like every theory has been repeated over and over >> again . . . >> >

Re: [Vo]: About the March test

> I don't know if you ever looked at my fakes document (the lost post which > never DID show up ...) > > Did you post that on Technobabble? I never saw anything like that ... only the two posts we discussed. [m]

Re: [Vo]:OT: Way out there! Simon Parks government officieal & UFO /Alien encounters

The mere appearance of being normal doesn't mean someone is normal. [mg] On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 7:27 PM, OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson < orionwo...@charter.net> wrote: > It’s the weekend! Time for a brief break! > > ** ** > > For all those Vorts who might be interested in some OT far

Re: [Vo]: About the March test

If it can be agreed that the IR measurements were, to within some reasonable margin of error, accurately measuring output power then the only issue in dispute is how much input power was provided. If, and this obviously may not happen, Rossi were to allow another test and the only point at which el

Re: [Vo]:MFMP cells in Europe and US now showing signs of excess heat

Am I missing something here? Surely if the control cell is producing some small amount of energy from an LENR process due to contamination but it's less than that being produced by the experimental cell then while a baseline might be hard or even impossible to establish wouldn't a significant power

Re: [Vo]:MFMP cells in Europe and US now showing signs of excess heat

easonable explanation for the excess. > > -Mark I > > ** ** > > *From:* mark.gi...@gmail.com [mailto:mark.gi...@gmail.com] *On Behalf Of *Mark > Gibbs > *Sent:* Wednesday, June 26, 2013 4:31 PM > > *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com > *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:MFMP cel

Re: [Vo]:Could Rossi add DC Power to AC Lines?

While this whole argument has become somewhat ridiculous the assertion that "... to idly discuss these claims without proper verification is very careless" because of some theoretical economic impact has got to be the most ridiculous so far. If this were a real concern then science fiction should b

[Vo]:E-Cat Offer and Swedish District Heating

I've seen some buzz that implies Swedish District Heating may take up Hydro Fusion's E-Cat offer but when I chased it down everything pointed to just one article self-published by Russ George [1] that actually only suggests SDH as a suitable candidate. Anyone know anything more? [mg] [1] http://a

Re: [Vo]:Waterspouts can't lift water?

On Tue, Jul 2, 2013 at 1:20 PM, ChemE Stewart wrote: > *Curious what others think about that water moving up in the spout as it > crosses onto land. I don't think the humidity changes that much so I do not > think it is due to a change in condensing (which would be vacuum condensing > anyway) I

Re: [Vo]:Atmospheric Vortex vs (and?) LENR

Everything you're talking about equates intelligence with problem solving which is essentially a very narrow view of what intelligence involves and that's fine if problem solving is the only measure of intelligence you care about. The problem with this perspective is that it excludes other aspects

Re: [Vo]:Bold attempt at OverUnity via gravity

Can anyone explain how this machine is supposed to work? [mg] On Sun, Jul 7, 2013 at 12:29 PM, Terry Blanton wrote: > Sterling says they are building one in Illinois: > > http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:RAR_Energia_Ltda_Gravity_Motor > > We've got a page full of gravity > motor

[Vo]:Why "Cold Fusion" Has to Die

http://www.forbes.com/sites/markgibbs/2013/07/15/why-cold-fusion-has-to-die/ [mg]

Re: [Vo]:Rossi: it is shared now and does not anymore depend only on me

How do you know this? [mg] On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 7:03 PM, Daniel Rocha wrote: > Defkalion has a much superior technology. You can just ignore Rossi. > > > 2013/7/18 Jed Rothwell > >> >> This puts to rest Guglinski's worry that Rossi might drop dead, and the >> secrets might die with him, th

Re: [Vo]:Preparing for the Defkalion demos of 22 and 23 July

What do people expect these demos will show? What could make them convincing or unconvincing? If you reply either publicly or privately, please let me know if I may cite your name if I quote you. [mg] On Sun, Jul 21, 2013 at 11:26 AM, Peter Gluck wrote: > My dear friends. > > Tomorrow will ta

  1   2   >