Re: [Vo]:About a March3 2010 thought experiment from Bernard Haisch

In reply to Jones Beene's message of Sun, 28 Nov 2010 07:13:44 -0800: Hi, [snip] >-Original Message- >From: mix...@bigpond.com > >> ...but they claim they did look and didn't find. > > >Can you point to a specific reference? I only have the paper itself to go on. Personally, I agree wit

RE: [Vo]:About a March3 2010 thought experiment from Bernard Haisch

-Original Message- From: mix...@bigpond.com > ...but they claim they did look and didn't find. Can you point to a specific reference? If you're referring to a passing comment with no data, like "no radioactivity was detected" then that is of little relevance. Obviously, in some olde

Re: [Vo]:About a March3 2010 thought experiment from Bernard Haisch

In reply to Jones Beene's message of Fri, 26 Nov 2010 14:43:01 -0800: Hi, [snip] >Well, again - he detects lots of copper as a transmutation product Well at least he detects SIMS peaks from 63-65 (BTW the 64 could as easily have been Ni-64). >, and my >comment is that, like Mills, radioactivity

RE: [Vo]:About a March3 2010 thought experiment from Bernard Haisch

-Original Message- From: mix...@bigpond.com Rossi: "No radioactivity has been found also in the Nickel residual from the process." RvS: This by itself would appear to be evidence that the reactions they propose were not those which actually took place. e.g. 26% of Ni is Ni-60. Add a prot

Re: [Vo]:About a March3 2010 thought experiment from Bernard Haisch

In reply to Jones Beene's message of Fri, 19 Nov 2010 18:19:38 -0800: Hi, [snip] "No radioactivity has been found also in the Nickel residual from the process." This by itself would appear to be evidence that the reactions they propose were not those which actually took place. e.g. 26% of Ni is

RE: [Vo]:About a March3 2010 thought experiment from Bernard Haisch

The Gamma Scout detector they use has a high threshold for gammas, and they used lead shielding. They did not show lack of gammas- only that the gammas did not penetrate the lead. Had the detector been placed on the other side of the shielding, presumably it could have detected gammas. That is my

Re: [Vo]:About a March3 2010 thought experiment from Bernard Haisch

In reply to Jones Beene's message of Fri, 19 Nov 2010 14:43:23 -0800: Hi, [snip] >http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/files/Rossi-Focardi_paper.pdf Quote: "During experimental tests, continuous controls on the radioactivity levels in close proximity to the apparatus suitably lead shielded,

RE: [Vo]:About a March3 2010 thought experiment from Bernard Haisch

No mention of lasers that I am aware of. The energy input is a mystery but could be lasers or even resistance heaters. Three other side notes: 1)The WPO patent application has been denied. It was extraordinarily poor. 2)You can see another reason why I have been convinced that Mills m

Re: [Vo]:About a March3 2010 thought experiment from Bernard Haisch

On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 2:24 PM, Jones Beene wrote: > Query: is this related to the Rossi rumors ?? > You mean this mysterious machine? http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/files/Rossi-Focardi_paper.pdf Is uses la

Re: [Vo]:About a March3 2010 thought experiment from Bernard Haisch

I re-read the thread carefully and yes Terry there are two Sarfatti 's commenting on the Haisch theory. Jack is undecided but David feels it is impossible. I remain undecided about the Haisch Moddel method of extracting the energy but must point out that Bernard isn't describing his method of e

RE: [Vo]:About a March3 2010 thought experiment from Bernard Haisch

* However, it is easy to understand why - the possibility of ICF using commercially available lasers and easily fabricated targets could be unsettling to some. To be a little more specific: (from the abstract) Clusters of condensed deuterium of densities up to 10^29 atoms per CC in pores in s

Re: [Vo]:About a March3 2010 thought experiment from Bernard Haisch

On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 12:56 PM, Jones Beene wrote: > *From:* Roarty, Francis X > > Ø David Sarfatti wrote: > OMG! Did Jack procreate? T

RE: [Vo]:About a March3 2010 thought experiment from Bernard Haisch

From: Roarty, Francis X * David Sarfatti wrote: 'Here is the fallacy with the Haisch patent, I believe : Since the atoms of the gas are in a lower energy state within the Casimir cavity, they are, in effect, in an energy well. Hence, they will experience a net force causing them to remain in the