IMHO, the production of kaons in Holmlids reactor is important stuff. Like LENR itself, so important that all of science cannot believe it.
On Sat, Mar 12, 2016 at 2:47 PM, Russ George <russ.geo...@gmail.com> wrote: > The noise about the flash in the pan glow stick signal is getting totally > out of hand. Mark Twain described such ‘social media madness’ 'There is > something fascinating about *science*. One gets such wholesale returns of > conjecture out of such a trifling investment of fact.' > > > > > > *From:* Axil Axil [mailto:janap...@gmail.com] > *Sent:* Saturday, March 12, 2016 10:43 AM > *To:* vortex-l > *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:Cellani replication 'flea bitten' lenr radiation NOT > > > > What is considered energy? Holmlid produces loads of pions, and muons, and > electrons? Are these sub atomic particles included in the energy > calculations. > > > > Holmlid saw a loss of energy in his reaction and that was why he whent > looking for sub atomic particle creation. > > > > Rossi says that 50 percent of his XCat COP comes from electricity that > newly created electrons produce. Rossi does not count the energy that it > takes to create electrons and neutrinos in his COP figures. > > > > By the way, when matter is produced from nothing, the energy balancing > mechanism is the creation of negative gravity or dark energy. > > > > There is a lot of matter produced by LENR in the universe because there is > a lot of dark energy produced in the expanding universe. > > > > On Sat, Mar 12, 2016 at 1:15 PM, Jones Beene <jone...@pacbell.net> wrote: > > -----Original Message----- > From: H LV > > Ø All claims of excess of heat (including P&F's) are based on > observations of thermal anomalies plus the hypothesis that the storage of > input energy is either irrelevant or impossible. There has never been an > energy audit that proves the effect yields more energy produced than all > the energy used throughout the *entire* history of an experiment. > > That’s not accurate, Harry. P&F ran a cell for 6 months of continuous > gain in France, and Thermacore ran for over a year. No way was the > startup delay which was not over a couple of days in either case - > commensurate > with the net output over the long runtime. > > Ø In other words, the possibility of "unknown" storage effect has > never > been ruled out. > > That is partially true, since in one sense there probably is always a “storage > effect,” within the process. It would be ongoing, however, and is already > factored into the net gain in situations like the above – in the two long > runs, one of P&F and the other Thermacore. If Rossi has proved net gain > over a year, he would be the third instance of very long gain. > > This ongoing storage would be the situation where dense hydrogen or > deuterium must be made in situ, before being use for gain. However, in a > well-controlled system, the manufacture and use are in sync and after the > startup delay - there is continuity of gain despite the ongoing storage. > > >
