LENR will be treated as any nuclear reactor and regulated heavily. Huge Rossi reactors will end up being sited far from people in ITER like reactors and difficult to maintain. In these facts, Rossi is misleading people. No basement sited reactors can work. Rossi thinks he can solve these problems with his reactors but he cannot.
Holmlid reports a high degree of ionization on the walls of his test gear from the charged muons that his tests produce. Me356 reports the same thing but alot worst. Insights about this issue from famous LENR developer, ME356 as follows: Emissions (RF, electrons and UV) during the test were so strong that my control circuit was absolutely crazy even that it was 3 meters away - it is unusable. I am very sure that this behavior is real as it happened to me too. I use analog pressure meter which cannot be damaged. I am sure that the noise is extremely high as it affects computers and USB peripherals 2 meters away. Everything is contactless. Also I have checked that SiC element is producing so intense EM field, that my IR meter (that is reading data from TC) was unstable at 800W and more." On Mon, Jan 2, 2017 at 11:23 AM, <bobcook39...@gmail.com> wrote: > George Egely’s item on transmutation by dust fusion reported sulfur from > oxygen maybe. See the current issue of Infinite Energy. A plasma is > involved in the phenomena. > > > > Bob Cook > > > > > > *From: *Jones Beene <jone...@pacbell.net> > *Sent: *Monday, January 2, 2017 7:16 AM > *To: *vortex-l@eskimo.com > *Subject: *Re: [Vo]:RE: Gaslighting > > > > FWIW - the only strong evidence of muons in LENR comes from laser > irradiation. (Holmlid, Winterberg) > > Laser irradiation produces so much more power in a short time frame than > electrolysis, that the two are not comparable. Neither are related to > biological transmutation (Kervran). It is a mistake to think that any of > these are related. > > Thus both viewpoints expressed in this thread can be correct - cold fusion > itself produces no muons, while laser irradiation of dense hydrogen does > produce muons. The transmutation of oxygen to sulfur is different and goes > back 150 years - well before Kervran in fact - see: > > http://bionutrient.org/library/reviews/biological-transmutations > > There is no evidence of muons in biological transmutation. > > Thus we have three very distinct classes of LENR already in this one > situation, neglecting Ni-H and they all have significant proof: > > 1) biological (Kervran et al); > > 2) cold fusion (P&F); and > > 3) laser irradiation of dense hydrogen (Holmlid). > > I think it is a big mistake to try to explain these as being part of any > single theory. However, there are connections between cold fusion of > palladium/deuterium to nickel/hydrogen. Once a laser is employed however - > all bets are off, even if the Letts/Cravens effect of low-powered lasers is > closer to cold fusion than to Holmlid. > > > > Axil Axil wrote: > > Here is the link to the diagram that did not appear in the post above: > > > > https://a.disquscdn.com/get?url=http%3A%2F%2Fpages.csam. > montclair.edu%2F%7Ekowalski%2Fcf%2F341fig1.jpg&key= > y8LKL4Hf4Ud13sQke0JURw&w=600&h=296 > > > > > > The so called Erzion phenomenon was discovered in a series of > electrolytic experiments marked by unexplained changes in a pool of cooling > water outside of the catalytic cell. After 40 minutes of electrolytic cell > operation, water on the tungsten anode side of the cooling vessel started > losing its transparency. > > > > https://youtu.be/MymFcb9U1Ck > > Strange that in this experiment showing the production of sulfur, the > activity was at the anode. Could the Erzion actually be muons? > > Water on the stainless steel cathode of the pool of cooling water remained > transparent, at the same 40 C temperature. A sample of bubbly water, > removed from the anode side, was tested for induced gamma radioactivity. No > such radioactivity was found in it; the sample became transparent after 24 > hours. Attempts to reproduce the long-term loss of cooling water > transparency with other electrolytes, and under different electrical > discharge conditions, were not successful. But the effect was highly > reproducible when experimenting with the tungsten-anode electrolytic cell > and the 7 M KF electrolyte containing 50% of heavy water. > > [image: > https://a.disquscdn.com/get?url=http%3A%2F%2Fpages.csam.montclair.edu%2F%7Ekowalski%2Fcf%2F341fig1.jpg&key=y8LKL4Hf4Ud13sQke0JURw&w=600&h=296] > > That cooling water on the outside of the electrolytic cell's glass reactor > shell at the right side (see Figure 1) is close to the anode while cooling > water on the left side is close to the cathode. The disappearance of > bubbles, after the electrolysis, was very slow (half-life of about 10 hrs). > Attempts to explain the phenomenon in terms of cavitation, and other > ultrasonic effects, were not successful. The only satisfactory explanation > was possible within the framework of the erzion model. Authors believe > that bubbles are produced through the action of neutral Erzions. > > The Erzons phenomenon behavior is consistent with the magnetic based > Exotic Neutral Particle(ENP). To begin with, the glass container is > transparent to the magnetically based ENPs both optically and magnetically. > The LENR reaction that keeps the ENPs viable produce the vapor that forms > the water bubbles. The ENPs become energetically self sufficient in the > water of the cooling pool where the ENPs remain viable for hours. > > If the Erzons phenomenon is produced by magnetically based ENPs, an iron > plate placed just on the outside of the glass wall adjacent to the anode > would prevent the ENPs from exiting the glass electrolytic cell. With the > ENPs blocked from travel, bubble production would be eliminated. > > > > The Erzons could be some form of exotic hydrogen such as ultra > dense hydrogen or maybe micro ball lightning. The hydrogen bubbles could be > the product of a muon catalyzed reaction with water. > > > > Whatever is going on at the anode, it looks like it is happening in a > reliable way. Experimenters might find some way to track this mischugenon > process down. I for one would love to read about the detective process that > makes the identification of this mischugenon process down in Russ's blog. > > > > Jed Rothwell wrote: > > Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > When LENR really gets going full blast and gigawatts are generated in > cars, trains, planes, boats, houses, everywhere in everything, the muon > loading will get into the terawatt levels. Muons flowing down the streets > will be so thick, you can cut them with a knife. And muons are a bitch to > shield against. > > > > Cold fusion has been run at over 100 W for three months, continuously. I > believe that if there were dangerous levels of muons, as you describe, they > would have caused harm, and they would have been detected. There is no sign > of them. People worked with these unshielded cells every day. So I expect > you are wrong about this. No theorist has said anything about muons being > produced by cold fusion in any paper I know of, and I know of all the > papers. I have searched for the term "muon" and found nothing, other than > the well-known 1989 discussions of muon-catalyzed fusion. > > > > - Jed > > > > > > > > > > >
