The New Normal: A spatial paradigm which goes well beyond LENR.
A few days ago, an effort was made to verbalize a strange and possibly
Universal phenomenon which is associated not only with LENR but other energy
anomalies. It relates to thermal gain in a way that seems to violate the
Laws of
BTW -the Ahuja paper first came to our attention 22 months ago (thanks to
Horace and Fran), but to little fanfare:
http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg41705.html
The last paragraph is interesting...
Overall, the scientists predicted that this understanding of relativity's
There's nothing normal about these gains. They're anomalous in the sense
that they are not understood. If they're normal in any way whatsoever
that means they are repeatable in at least a statistical fashion -- which
means they are amenable to scientific discovery. As Ramsey said, even one
well
In reply to ChemE Stewart's message of Sat, 10 Nov 2012 14:44:40 -0500:
Hi,
[snip]
Guys,
Just a short update on my research:
Guys,
I am not a Nuclear Engineer so I fall short there but please accept me for
who I am.
1) My research tells me LENR is basically atomic Hydrogen collapsing to a
Maybe some of that GeV went to those 6 or 7 additional dimensions of space
all curled up...
On Tuesday, November 13, 2012, wrote:
In reply to ChemE Stewart's message of Sat, 10 Nov 2012 14:44:40 -0500:
Hi,
[snip]
Guys,
Just a short update on my research:
Guys,
I am not a Nuclear
In reply to ChemE Stewart's message of Tue, 13 Nov 2012 15:54:12 -0500:
Hi,
[snip]
Maybe some of that GeV went to those 6 or 7 additional dimensions of space
all curled up...
In that case, energy should be able to come from there too, and it would happen
all the time, so we would have no law of
It does come back as Hawking radiation over a log period of time.
All thermo laws obeyed. It can also annihilate with another like particle
according to Feynman interactions and you get a pop.
Stewart
Darkmattersalot.com
On Tuesday, November 13, 2012, wrote:
In reply to ChemE
Biggest particle wins
http://arxiv.org/abs/1011.3592
Same as when a comet particles meet up with the sun particle
Like we will see next year right before grid melt on Earth.
http://m.youtube.com/#/watch?v=Mat4dWpszoQdesktop_uri=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DMat4dWpszoQ
No dirty snowballs involved.
Stewart
On Fri, Nov 9, 2012 at 8:34 PM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote
Bottom line: it is looking like the new normal for chemistry is what was
formerly 1COP2 and is not nuclear and not chemical - thus it can be called
suprachemical.
...or infranuclear. ;-)
harry
Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:
Answer: gain, but LOW gain - and remarkably consistent long -term low-gain.
In other words, the new normal.
I am sorry but there is not the SLIGHTEST experimental evidence for this. I
may not understand advanced physics but one thing I do have is
From: Jed Rothwell
Answer: gain, but LOW gain - and remarkably consistent long -term low-gain.
In other words, the new normal.
I am sorry but there is not the SLIGHTEST experimental evidence for this.
Get some caffeine, or someone will think you have lost the encyclopedia.
Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:
Get some caffeine, or someone will think you have lost the encyclopedia…
cough, cough… after all, this is only the longest running (by far)
validated experiment in the entire field. Fully replicated by NASA at two
locations with same results. COP about
even a week.
My contention stands - that when the criterion is for a month continuous
operation in the multi-watt range, there is adequate evidence for low-gain
only, and zero reliable evidence for long-term high gain.
Jones
From: Jed Rothwell
Subject: Re: [Vo]:The new normal
Jones
for low-gain
only, and zero reliable evidence for long-term high gain.
** **
Jones
** **
*From:* Jed Rothwell
*Subject:* Re: [Vo]:The new normal
** **
Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:
Get some caffeine, or someone will think you have lost
Curious observation - funny in a sardonic way, but not completely humorous -
and it can be called the new normal. To cut to the chase, the new normal
is 1COP2 but non-nuclear (supra-chemical). To be explained.
What do Ni-H experiments with potassium (or another spillover catalyst like
Exactly.
[mg]
On Fri, Nov 9, 2012 at 5:34 PM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net 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?
On Fri, Nov 9, 2012 at 8:34 PM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:
Curious observation
I find it interesting that you did not include the Patterson Cell. Any reason?
Oh, I guess it is because of the lithium sulfate. I read too fast.
On Fri, Nov 9, 2012 at 9:35 PM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Nov 9, 2012 at 8:34 PM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:
Curious observation
I find it interesting that you did not include the Patterson
device temperature or fuel supply.
Dave
-Original Message-
From: Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Fri, Nov 9, 2012 8:34 pm
Subject: [Vo]:The new normal
Curious observation - funny in a sardonic way, but not completely humorous -
and it can
available.
Dave
-Original Message-
From: Mark Gibbs mgi...@gibbs.com
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Fri, Nov 9, 2012 8:47 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:The new normal
Exactly.
[mg]
On Fri, Nov 9, 2012 at 5:34 PM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:
But no one is sure what
Yes - I was specifically excluding Pd-deuterium, high gain, and nuclear ...
as opposed to hydrogen, low gain and nickel.
Thus Patterson, Storms, Swartz and many other who report much better COP
primarily with Pd and deuterium were not overlooked. Swartz did do nickel
experiments but generally -
Dave,
I did not make the main point of that post clear.
There certainly could be a higher gain regime - or not. But the claims of
Rossi are essentially meaningless.
The major point to me in the big picture - and it is way beyond coincidence.
is that many good and believable reports
22 matches
Mail list logo
