Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation on nuclear events in lightning

In reply to Nigel Dyer's message of Mon, 12 Nov 2012 22:09:36 +: Hi, [snip] >Gamma rays are detected associated with a number of different aspects of >thunderstorms. As far 'conventional' lightning is concerned it seems to >be associated with initiation of the forks in the forked leader en r

Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation on nuclear events in lightning

what is their profile at ANS ? Scientists ?(I mean the APS like, MIT like, Science/Nature Like) Industrialists ? (Business) Engineers (in the french meaning: link between science and industry, between project and technology, between feasible and done)? Applied scientist ? (a science version of the

Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation on nuclear events in lightning

On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 1:38 PM, wrote: Possibly also, but I see no reason why WL are wrong about lightning. I was > simply pointing out that though they may well be correct about neutron > production in lightning, I suspect they are wrong about neutron production > in a > lattice. > It would be

Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation on nuclear events in lightning

nking that hot fusion may be occurring within the lightning >> stroke? I have read that gamma rays have been detected under some >> conditions. >> >> >> Dave >> >> >> >> -Original Message- >> From: mixent >> To: vor

Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation on nuclear events in lightning

It's in the rainbow...you might have to shine a big spotlight to find it if the sun is not also shining. Stewart Darkmattersalot.com On Monday, November 12, 2012, wrote: > Several recent papers state that this neutron production is anomalous > and still not properly explained, e.g., from a popul

Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation on nuclear events in lightning

on, Nov 12, 2012 3:45 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation on nuclear events in lightning In reply to pagnu...@htdconnect.com's message of Mon, 12 Nov 2012 14:25:19 -0500 (EST): Hi, [snip] http://www.slideshare.net/lewisglarsen/larsen-electroweak-neutron-production-and-captu

Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation on nuclear events in lightning

Several recent papers state that this neutron production is anomalous and still not properly explained, e.g., from a popular science site - "Lightning strikes produce free neutrons, and we're not sure how. Low energy neutrons not due to cosmic rays or any other previously known source." http://ar

Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation on nuclear events in lightning

In reply to David Roberson's message of Mon, 12 Nov 2012 15:58:31 -0500 (EST): Hi, [snip] >Are you thinking that hot fusion may be occurring within the lightning stroke? > I have read that gamma rays have been detected under some conditions. Possibly also, but I see no reason why WL are wrong ab

Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation on nuclear events in lightning

mixent 'mix...@bigpond.com');>> > To: vortex-l 'vortex-l@eskimo.com');>> > Sent: Mon, Nov 12, 2012 3:45 pm > Subject: Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation on nuclear events in > lightning > > In reply to pagnu...@htdconnect.com 'pagn

Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation on nuclear events in lightning

How confident are you that we will need the ice picks very soon? If no cooling becomes evident does that suggest that your theory has a fatal flaw? Just asking. Dave -Original Message- From: ChemE Stewart To: vortex-l Sent: Mon, Nov 12, 2012 3:53 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:New Lattice

Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation on nuclear events in lightning

Are you thinking that hot fusion may be occurring within the lightning stroke? I have read that gamma rays have been detected under some conditions. Dave -Original Message- From: mixent To: vortex-l Sent: Mon, Nov 12, 2012 3:45 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation

Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation on nuclear events in lightning

That too! On Monday, November 12, 2012, Terry Blanton wrote: > > > > On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 3:53 PM, ChemE Stewart > > > wrote > > Also, with two great orbiting comets on the way get your ice pick. >> >> > And a good single malt. > >

Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation on nuclear events in lightning

On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 3:53 PM, ChemE Stewart wrote Also, with two great orbiting comets on the way get your ice pick. > > And a good single malt.

Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation on nuclear events in lightning

What they are missing is the orbiting energetic particle creating the static lightning just like piantelli thinks it is orbiting hydrogen and not an orbiting neutrino. It is all in the orbit...on Earth many times we call them...rainbows. Behold the beauty. Also, with two great orbiting comets on

Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation on nuclear events in lightning

LOL! I totally agree! Every time another set of those slides comes out, I cringe at the thought of attempting to read them. On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 12:01 PM, ChemE Stewart wrote: > He sure can fit a lot of words into one sentence... > > Also, his powerpoint slide density matches the density of

Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation on nuclear events in lightning

In reply to pagnu...@htdconnect.com's message of Mon, 12 Nov 2012 14:25:19 -0500 (EST): Hi, [snip] >http://www.slideshare.net/lewisglarsen/larsen-electroweak-neutron-production-and-capture-in-lightning-dischargesans-meeting-san-diego-nov-2012 Lightning contains many high velocity electrons, which

Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation on nano-carbon LENRs

I wrote: One question I have concerns the thermal properties of the [carbon nanotube > bulk] system. I have started to conclude that the thermal properties are > important -- for example, perhaps the temperature in the substrate must > gradually build to the point where some kind of resonance is

Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation on nano-carbon LENRs

Thank you, Lou, for the interesting links. Concerning Lewis Larsen's slides, the first twenty or so include abstracts from recent papers on various topics relating to graphene and carbon nanotubes. The second paper you mention touches on high magnetic fields generated in carbon nanotubes (I am go

Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation

On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 6:20 PM, wrote: > An invisible unicorn can't be pink ;) How could you know if you can't see them? T

Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation

In reply to Terry Blanton's message of Sat, 7 Apr 2012 13:05:54 -0400: Hi, [snip] >The fact that I have not searched for invisible pink unicorns An invisible unicorn can't be pink ;) Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html

Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation

No. Not me. But I did spend most of my life in the semiconductor business, too. > Pagnucco > "Lou Pagnucco, Kulite Semiconductor Products Inc, Leonia, NJ"   > Not you? > > Sorry. > > >   > > >

Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation

Team, Sorry to disappoint, but I own no shop. However, if the tech you refer to is real, it should be easy to set up a persuasive public demo. LP Teampositive wrote: > Pagnucco, > > If the boys in the back of your NJ shop are successfully finished their > free Lattice Energy through arc plasmas

Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation

Pagnucco, If the boys in the back of your NJ shop are successfully finished their free Lattice Energy through arc plasmas in hydrogen here is a next project: Gearing Up to replicate this startling free energy devise at http://pesn.com/2012/04/15/9602075_Inteligentry_Manufacturers_Gearing_Up_for

RE: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation

At 10:09 PM 4/11/2012, Finlay MacNab wrote: There are many problems with this paper. The most glaring error is that they heated their sample to 1000C for 10 minutes before measuring. They do this to remove sulphur, which should not be present under tightly controlled conditions (incidentally

RE: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation

peak before D2 gas permeation which is not present in the Iwamura samples before gas permeation. > Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2012 20:58:47 -0400 > Subject: Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation > From: hveeder...@gmail.com > To: vortex-l@eskimo.com > > On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 8:30

Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation

At 07:58 PM 4/11/2012, Harry Veeder wrote: On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 8:30 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote: > At 01:34 AM 4/11/2012, Eric Walker wrote: > >> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 8:47 AM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax >> <a...@lomaxdesign.com> wrote: >> >> Iwamura's results are c

Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation

On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 8:30 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote: > At 01:34 AM 4/11/2012, Eric Walker wrote: > >> On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 8:47 AM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax >> <a...@lomaxdesign.com> wrote: >> >> Iwamura's results are certainly interesting and worthy of replicatio

Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation

At 01:34 AM 4/11/2012, Eric Walker wrote: On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 8:47 AM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax <a...@lomaxdesign.com> wrote: Iwamura's results are certainly interesting and worthy of replication, and there have been replication attempts, some of which appear to

Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation

  Von:Abd ul-Rahman Lomax An: vortex-l@eskimo.com; vortex-l@eskimo.com Gesendet: 17:24 Mittwoch, 11.April 2012 Betreff: Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation I'm not concerned with the "official record," per se. However, well-reported

Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation

I was under the impression the research done by Iwamura et al was among the most convincing in the LENR field! harry On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 2:34 AM, Eric Walker wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 8:47 AM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax > wrote: > >> Iwamura's results are certainly interesting and worthy

Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation

At 11:40 PM 4/10/2012, Eric Walker wrote: On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 8:47 AM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax <a...@lomaxdesign.com> wrote: It's crucial. I know of only one *partial* theory that actually makes quantitative predictions, beyond Preparata's expectation of helium,

Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation -- and on to the future.

At 04:43 PM 4/10/2012, Jed Rothwell wrote: On 4/10/2012 4:39 PM, Alain Sepeda wrote: Defkalion on their forum gave a similar explanation, talking about the heat caused by H2 breaking before loading and, recombination after degasing... It can't possibly be recombination! Both the power and ene

Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation

How to build a fusion reactor in your garden shed. Interesting post at:  http://www.e-catworld.com/2012/04/robert-godes-of-brillouin-energy-comments-on-lenr-research/ "Jed on April 10, 2012 at 11:24 pm Robert, You state: “increase more spillover of atomic hydrog

Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation

On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 8:47 AM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote: Iwamura's results are certainly interesting and worthy of replication, and > there have been replication attempts, some of which appear to have failed > (or, in a recent case, just published in the CMNS journal, there was an > apparent t

Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation

]:New Lattice Energy presentation On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 8:47 AM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote: No, not at all. Where did you get that idea? Heat is not missing, except when we look at what would be required to generate the observed levels of helium following the W-L pathways. The third

Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation

On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 8:47 AM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote: > No, not at all. Where did you get that idea? Heat is not missing, except > when we look at what would be required to generate the observed levels of > helium following the W-L pathways. The third missing observable is the > levels of

Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation

On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 1:58 PM, Axil Axil wrote: If the proton was produced by free neutron decay, an electron would have > also been produced. These electrons were not seen in the Piantelli’s cloud > chamber. Could this mean that Piantelli’s reaction is different from the > neutron centric Bri

Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation

seem to know it all. Pity is, some of them got insane. (Goedel) (No, I am not Rossi) Guenter Von: "pagnu...@htdconnect.com" An: vortex-l@eskimo.com Gesendet: 0:07 Mittwoch, 11.April 2012 Betreff: Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation First,

Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation

First, I have to say I am not sure Piantelli's observations are real. Maybe he had faulty instruments. But, if he did see protons, and they were from decaying neutrons (sequestered in some decay-attenuating niche), then, he should have seen electrons (and probably some X-rays), I think. But, reca

Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation

On 4/10/2012 4:39 PM, Alain Sepeda wrote: Defkalion on their forum gave a similar explanation, talking about the heat caused by H2 breaking before loading and, recombination after degasing... It can't possibly be recombination! Both the power and energy far exceeds that in many cases, as Flei

Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation

At 01:01 PM 4/10/2012, Axil Axil wrote: I am interested in the “life after death” phenomena as an indicator of the possibility of multiple causes of cold fusion. Some systems show life after death and others do not; Rossi…yes, the Brillouin Energy system…no. A single cause should show the s

Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation

holds, even in his theory. So there must be something else, which is more fundamental. Von: Jed Rothwell An: vortex-l@eskimo.com Gesendet: 22:00 Dienstag, 10.April 2012 Betreff: Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation Axil Axil wrote: I am interested in t

Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation

If the proton was produced by free neutron decay, an electron would have also been produced. These electrons were not seen in the Piantelli’s cloud chamber. Could this mean that Piantelli’s reaction is different from the neutron centric Brillouin Energy system’s reaction? On Tue, Apr 10, 2012

Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation

27;bad' case-- (at least to my knowledge) Therefore: what must not exist, does not exist. Guenter Von: "pagnu...@htdconnect.com" An: vortex-l@eskimo.com Gesendet: 21:33 Dienstag, 10.April 2012 Betreff: Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation

Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation

Defkalion on their forum gave a similar explanation, talking about the heat caused by H2 breaking before loading and, recombination after degasing... 2012/4/10 Jed Rothwell > Axil Axil wrote: > > I am interested in the “life after death” phenomena as an indicator of >> the possibility of mult

Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation

Axil Axil wrote: I am interested in the “life after death” phenomena as an indicator of the > possibility of multiple causes of cold fusion. > I do not think life after death is significant. I think the causes are prosaic. With bulk material, it is caused by highly loaded Pd samples that gradual

Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation

It would be interesting to know if some of these (and maybe other "bursty") phenomena were due to self-sustaining generation of micro-fractures - i.e., some kind of tipping into a phase transition. Also, it would interesting to know if the protons seen long after energy production stops in Piantel

Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation

I am interested in the “life after death” phenomena as an indicator of the possibility of multiple causes of cold fusion. Some systems show life after death and others do not; Rossi…yes, the Brillouin Energy system…no. A single cause should show the same type of behavior. What does (Lattice Energ

Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation

At 05:16 PM 4/9/2012, Jed Rothwell wrote: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax <a...@lomaxdesign.com> wrote: Interpretations of work can involve theory. McKubre is an electrochemist, not a nuclear physicist. While his opinions about theory may not exactly be irrelevant, neither sho

Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation

At 03:42 AM 4/10/2012, Alain Sepeda wrote: Some point agains WL by AUL Lomax are ok, but they also are against DD fusion. Depends. What is "DD fusion"? There is a known set of reactions which can be called "DD fusion." That is not what is happening in the FPHE. Obviously. The Storms review

Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation

At 12:08 AM 4/10/2012, Eric Walker wrote: On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 9:48 AM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax <a...@lomaxdesign.com> wrote: Â W-L theory allows for a farrago of proposed reactions, so one can pick and choose for a large and complex field, to find a reaction that m

Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation

Some point agains WL by AUL Lomax are ok, but they also are against DD fusion. gamma are expected in both cases. WL give a strange solution, but DD give none... especially if you take into account Ni+H, W+D,... and also the strange LENR that WL have gathered (ligtnings, rocks breaking, wires explo

Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation

On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 9:48 AM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote: > W-L theory allows for a farrago of proposed reactions, so one can pick and > choose for a large and complex field, to find a reaction that might explain > a particular result. And that the required reaction series might be > way-silly-i

Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation

In reply to Alain Sepeda's message of Mon, 9 Apr 2012 08:30:42 +0200: Hi, [snip] >just to quote Larsen in his cite: >- He criticize the ide that He4 is trapped, and an ad hoc excuse >- he claims that some transmutation cycle produce much more coherent >energry by He4 than DD fusion > >you can fin

Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation

In reply to Abd ul-Rahman Lomax's message of Sun, 08 Apr 2012 21:51:25 -0500: Hi, >At 12:31 AM 4/8/2012, mix...@bigpond.com wrote: >>In reply to Abd ul-Rahman Lomax's message of Thu, 05 Apr 2012 11:34:24 -0500: >>Hi, >>[snip] >> >Widom-Larsen theory completely fails to explain the actual >> >expe

Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation

consider this: Hagelstein -an intermediate figure at MIT- does a borderline experiment with a couple of students. He proves something, ie something akin to 'cold fusion'. The result looks convincing, but does not enter the MIT establishment, because they would loose funding in hot fusion, which th

Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation

Von: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax An: vortex-l@eskimo.com; vortex-l@eskimo.com Gesendet: 0:35 Dienstag, 10.April 2012 Betreff: Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation >In my view, the job of developing cold fusion theory will involve materials >scientis

Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation

Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote: > Interpretations of work can involve theory. McKubre is an electrochemist, > not a nuclear physicist. While his opinions about theory may not exactly be > irrelevant, neither should we expect them to be authoritative . . . As far as I know, McKubre feels that Hagels

Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation

At 12:25 PM 4/9/2012, pagnu...@htdconnect.com wrote: Abd, First, thanks for putting in so much effort into your review. I think most of us find the reaction pathways bewildering complicated. I am perplexed, though, that you say that McKubre's experiments provide no evidence for W-L theory, si

Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation

At 12:25 PM 4/9/2012, pagnu...@htdconnect.com wrote: Do you communicate with McKubre and have any update on his theory? - especially wrt Brillouin's LENR hypothesis. The idea that McKubre has a "theory," or that this is, in some way, important, is Krivit propaganda. He is an experimentalist.

Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation

Abd, First, thanks for putting in so much effort into your review. I think most of us find the reaction pathways bewildering complicated. I am perplexed, though, that you say that McKubre's experiments provide no evidence for W-L theory, since he is now a technical advisor for Brillouin Energy.

Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation

At 01:30 AM 4/9/2012, Alain Sepeda wrote: just to quote Larsen in his cite: - He criticize the ide that He4 is trapped, and an ad hoc excuse - he claims that some transmutation cycle produce much more coherent energry by He4 than DD fusion you can fin their reasoning in

Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation

just to quote Larsen in his cite: - He criticize the ide that He4 is trapped, and an ad hoc excuse - he claims that some transmutation cycle produce much more coherent energry by He4 than DD fusion you can fin their reasoning in http://www.slideshare.net/lewisglarsen/lattice-energy-llctechnical-ov

Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation

At 12:31 AM 4/8/2012, mix...@bigpond.com wrote: In reply to Abd ul-Rahman Lomax's message of Thu, 05 Apr 2012 11:34:24 -0500: Hi, [snip] >Widom-Larsen theory completely fails to explain the actual >experimental results of cold fusion experiments, particularly the PdD >reactions of the Pons-Fleis

Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation

In reply to Abd ul-Rahman Lomax's message of Thu, 05 Apr 2012 11:34:24 -0500: Hi, [snip] >Widom-Larsen theory completely fails to explain the actual >experimental results of cold fusion experiments, particularly the PdD >reactions of the Pons-Fleischmann Heat Effect. Not that I'm a fan of WL :

Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation

that is the point that Lewis larsen put the focus on in his Slides. like this one http://www.slideshare.net/lewisglarsen/lattice-energy-llcmany-lenr-paths-may-produce-he4march-03-2012 2012/4/7 Terry Blanton > On Sat, Apr 7, 2012 at 1:44 PM, Jones Beene wrote: > > Terry - the helium would pre

Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation

Terry, Brillouin's theory starts with H and ends up with He - what is going on in between seems to be the land of the pink unicorns and includes rattling the metal lattice cage with EMF to shake loose some energy. They mention having to purge the system of He every once in awhile. http://brillou

Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation

On Sat, Apr 7, 2012 at 1:44 PM, Jones Beene wrote: > Terry - the helium would presumably come from alpha decay, not fusion. Since we know there are likely a myriad of subatomic reactions flitting about these days, I tend to get a bit sensitive to the use of the word 'fusion'. I know that many gr

RE: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation

Terry - the helium would presumably come from alpha decay, not fusion. It should be noted that the "WendtIrion" paper cited - also assumed alpha decay; but tungsten is much heavier than nickel. Ni is not known to have an alpha channel where this paper suggests that W does: http://arxiv.org/abs/nu

Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation

On Sat, Apr 7, 2012 at 1:05 PM, Terry Blanton wrote: That applies to cold fusion theories. There is the sun. :-) T

Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation

On Sat, Apr 7, 2012 at 12:42 PM, wrote: > Terry, > > That does not mean it's not there, though. > It should be checked for. The fact that I have not searched for invisible pink unicorns does not mean they are not there. However, I have no reason to look for them. No theory I have seen indica

Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation

Reliable/fusion.cal, If an experiment this simple produces He, it proves LENR. Now, for sure, one of the objections raised would be that the He detected was mixed in with the methane - even if the Argon is used. Has anyone ruled out this possible artifact? fusion.calo...@gmail.com wrote: > Lou,

Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation

Terry Blanton wrote: On Sat, Apr 7, 2012 at 8:08 AM, fusion.calo...@gmail.com > wrote: >> Where there is He there is Rossi Fusion. > > He has never been claimed to be a byproduct of the Rossi eCat. Terry, That does not mean it's not there, though. It should be checked for. One of the first ex

Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation

On Sat, Apr 7, 2012 at 8:08 AM, fusion.calo...@gmail.com wrote: > Where there is He there is Rossi Fusion. He has never been claimed to be a byproduct of the Rossi eCat. T

Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation

Lou, Show this to one of your non degree tech guys working at your transducer based instrument factory shop in N. J. : http://www.icpig2009.unam.mx/pdf/PB13-3.pdf He could assemble it in an hour. Use Ar instead of He. Next day check for He. Surprise! The C deposit is conical nano structur

Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation

There are a number of constrains we must meet to get a positive result. One of these constrains is that the reaction takes place in a lattice comprising an even atomic numbered host metallic element. Gold will not work with an atomic number of 79. Tungsten at 74, Platinum at 78, nickel at 28, pa

Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation

Abd, It is not obvious what you want to falsify. The paper by Pendry - "Low Frequency Plasmons in Thin Wire Structures" - JB Pendry http://www.cmth.ph.ic.ac.uk/photonics/Newphotonics/pdf/wires.pdf - presents very simple calculation (based on wires array geometry) of nanowire surface conduction

Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation

Von: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax An: vortex-l@eskimo.com; vortex-l@eskimo.com Gesendet: 19:37 Freitag, 6.April 2012 Betreff: RE: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation > If we look carefully at the new territory, we may find many beasts. Assuming > there i

RE: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation

At 09:55 PM 4/5/2012, pagnu...@htdconnect.com wrote: You are right - I did not intend to sound dogmatic. Great. I am beginning to wonder whether a couple of different phenomena, perhaps sharing a common denominator, are occurring - depending on experimental materials and procedures. Nature

Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation

At 09:40 PM 4/5/2012, Eric Walker wrote: On Thu, Apr 5, 2012 at 4:36 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax <a...@lomaxdesign.com> wrote: Gamma sources could be placed so that gammas pass through the supposedly active heavy electron patches, and, if W-L theory is real, drasti

Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation

Eric, The plasmon conduction electrons in nanowires can be very "heavy" - i.e., they possess a huge "effective mass" when they impact a particle in the direction of the current flow (- but not in orthogonal directions.) Similar to a light metal plate that penetrates a strong barrier because it is

RE: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation

Abd, You are right - I did not intend to sound dogmatic. I am beginning to wonder whether a couple of different phenomena, perhaps sharing a common denominator, are occurring - depending on experimental materials and procedures. Nature may be getting a little perverse here. The Wendt-Irion expl

Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation

On Thu, Apr 5, 2012 at 4:36 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote: Gamma sources could be placed so that gammas pass through the supposedly > active heavy electron patches, and, if W-L theory is real, drastic > attenuation should be seen. That attentuation should not be seen with > controls. W-L theory re

RE: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation

At 05:15 PM 4/5/2012, Jones Beene wrote: -Original Message- From: pagnu...@htdconnect.com > "Jones, Sure, some of those experiments produce hot plasmas, but there are many experimental results which appear to produce transmutations with temperatures too low to produce collisions energeti

RE: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation

At 04:37 PM 4/5/2012, pagnu...@htdconnect.com wrote: My suggestion is that transmutations be the litmus test for LENR - not the calorimetry results which never seem definitive enough for everyone. If the reported successful experiments were well conducted, then they will be reproducible. There

RE: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation

Abd, I intend to do some more research on this - plasmonics is pretty dicey. I'm not sure whether a nanowire has a cross-section large enough to scatter gammas originating at any significant distance, thoug, unless they are extremely collimated. But, I am more optimistic than you are that W-L wo

RE: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation

Jones, Good points. I do not know the Oppenheimer-Phillips effect. I will research it tonight. There could be a number of confounding effects that coexist. Our tendency to look for a relativistic collision behind every nuclear event (except radioactivity) could be the problem. Lou Pagnucco Jon

RE: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation

At 03:29 PM 4/5/2012, pagnu...@htdconnect.com wrote: Abd, Regarding the absence of gammas - ... is it reasonable to suppose that a high energy gamma would experience many (anomalously high) dissipative Compton collisions before escaping as a less energetic photon? If this is plausible, could we

RE: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation

-Original Message- From: pagnu...@htdconnect.com > "Jones, Sure, some of those experiments produce hot plasmas, but there are many experimental results which appear to produce transmutations with temperatures too low to produce collisions energetic enough for fusion"... Lou - yes tha

RE: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation

Jones, Sure, some of those experiments produce hot plasmas, but there are many experimental results which appear to produce transmutations with temperatures too low to produce collisions energetic enough for fusion - unless the energy is focused and "hidden" in infinitesimal volumes. My suggest

Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation

At 02:22 PM 4/5/2012, integral.property.serv...@gmail.com wrote: Great to see you all back from the future to reality. See the following Chan links: http://www.buildecat.com/blog_detail/the-chan-formula-4.html http://www.buildecat.com

Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation

/2012, Guenter Wildgruber wrote: Von: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax An: vortex-l@eskimo.com; vortex-l@eskimo.com Gesendet: 18:34 Donnerstag, 5.April 2012 Betreff: RE: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation >And I still have seen no expanation, anywhere, of the basic problems with W-L theory. Abd

RE: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation

Abd, Regarding the absence of gammas - Don't nanoscale currents store far more inductive momentum/energy than macro currents do per conduction electron? For example, see - "Low Frequency Plasmons in Thin Wire Structures" - JB Pendry http://www.cmth.ph.ic.ac.uk/photonics/Newphotonics/pdf/wires.pd

Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation

Von: "integral.property.serv...@gmail.com" An: vortex-l@eskimo.com Gesendet: 21:22 Donnerstag, 5.April 2012 Betreff: Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation >Great to see you all back from the future to reality. >This is a challenge

Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation

Von: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax An: vortex-l@eskimo.com; vortex-l@eskimo.com Gesendet: 18:34 Donnerstag, 5.April 2012 Betreff: RE: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation >And I still have seen no expanation, anywhere, of the basic problems with W-L >theory

Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation

Great to see you all back from the future to reality. See the following Chan links: http://www.buildecat.com/blog_detail/the-chan-formula-4.html http://www.buildecat.com/blog_detail/chan-formula-update-i-5.html See Hideki  at:  http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Andrea_A._Rossi_Cold_Fusion

Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation

On Thu, Apr 5, 2012 at 9:59 AM, Jones Beene wrote: > Well, it is a slick presentation, glossy and well-prepared - and very > convincing for LENR in a most superficial way. Consultant's motto: "It always works in the PowerPoint presentation." T

RE: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation

At 08:59 AM 4/5/2012, Jones Beene wrote: This is hot, so to speak. Cough, cough ... that can be understood in a slightly derogatory way. Well, it is a slick presentation, glossy and well-prepared - and very convincing for LENR in a most superficial way. Cheerleaders for W-L, like Steve Krivit wi

RE: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation

This is hot, so to speak. Cough, cough ... that can be understood in a slightly derogatory way. Well, it is a slick presentation, glossy and well-prepared - and very convincing for LENR in a most superficial way. Cheerleaders for W-L, like Steve Krivit will be quick to heap on the praise. Put on