When I read all the theories and how they conflict or partly agree with me *I wonder why we do not hear about anyone replicating Holmlid's experiment.? I am not able to set up the required components or conduct the measurements required. However, it amazes me that we do not hear others doing it - people with knowledge how to do this type of tests. It seems to me that the method and the required detailed are well described by Holmlid and by other people commenting on Holmlid's model. I am asking because I am trying to understand the reason (hurdle) that obviously exist in a replication.
Best Regards , Lennart Thornros www.StrategicLeadershipSac.com lenn...@thornros.com +1 916 436 1899 202 Granite Park Court, Lincoln CA 95648 “Productivity is never an accident. It is always the result of a commitment to excellence, intelligent planning, and focused effort.” PJM On Wed, Oct 7, 2015 at 9:36 AM, Jones Beene <jone...@pacbell.net> wrote: > *From:* Blaze Spinnaker > > Why is everyone getting excited? Louis hasn't even claimed radiation or > transmutation or significant energy density beyond something that can be > chemically explained. It's just an informal email with vague hints about > other things. The only thing that was particularly exciting was that he > thinks Rossi is credible. > > I think the Holmlid fellow is much more interesting. > > - Has a long history of published literature in credible journals > > - He's claiming real energy > > - He's measuring real radiation (muons, but still) > > Exactamundo. I agree completely. Holmlid looks like the real-deal while the > old version of Pd-D electrolysis is mired at the subwatt level, and will > be repeating old disappointments. > > The future of LENR is emerging on several fronts and clearly one of them > is in being able to take lessons which came from cold fusion but went > missing from the mainstream, such as dense deuterium (f/H, pychno, or > whatever you want to call it), and putting that species into the context > of hot fusion – so as to allow hot fusion to break out of its own private > hell of waste and failure. > > Hot fusion will be the biggest beneficiary of cold fusion – in the end… > and Leif Holmlid holds the key. MIT would be wise to recruit him on the > spot. > > OK – we all realize that Holmlid’s work is also subwatt for now, but by > using low powered lasers, which do scale up - he ties directly and > seamlessly into ICF… which… drumroll… is a technology which is desperately > looking > for just what he has to offer. Holmlid (suggested by Winterberg) offers > the field an ICF target which can be irradiated with a thousand times > less power, and can go into service and past breakeven at 10,000 times > less cost. Well… since ICF is in the purview of DoE for now (LLNL), > better make that a hundred times less cost. > > That target comes from the Low Energy field, And it can turn a 50 billion > dollar boondoggle at LLNL into the savior of the next generation of > profligate consumers (our grandchildren) who learned to “super-size-it”… > with few complaints from us. > > Jones > >
