Is this what we are all supposed to understand, now -- or is this just your considered speculative opinion?
On Sun, Apr 2, 2017 at 5:34 PM, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote: > @Che > > Your expectations about how LENR will evolve is almost universally held > but unfortunately incorrect. LENR produces energy by ripping apart matter > into subatomic particles thereby producing radiation loading that is > proportional to the heat produced. If LENR produces tons of energy in the > aggregate, it will also produce tons of all pervasive and highly > penetrating meson based radiation exposure. > > Because of this radiation risk, LENR will be regulated just like neutron > based nuclear energy is today. Meson based nuclear energy will be similar > to neutron based nuclear energy except without the radioactive nuclear > waste problem. > > Large LENR reactors will be sited underground feeding gigawatts of > electric power to the grid. There will be no LENR powered cars or hot water > heaters or stand alone how based electric power generators. > > Those huge LENR based underground electric power stations won't be sited > and running until most of the Vort membership is long gone. > > > > On Sun, Apr 2, 2017 at 4:38 PM, Che <comandantegri...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> >> On Sun, Apr 2, 2017 at 1:33 PM, a.ashfield <a.ashfi...@verizon.net> >> wrote: >> >>> See http://www.e-catworld.com/why-i-believe-in-the-e-cat/ >>> Like it or not, Rossi rekindled interest in LENR like no other has. >>> >> >> >> Where's the BEEF?? >> Where's the damned water-heater the World was promised..? >> (Where's the 'Orbo' Revolution, for that matter...) >> >> Damned 'private-property' interests. >> Capitalist 'efficiency' (Over-Unity, at that) at its best... >> Pfft. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>> AA >>> >>> >>> >>> On 4/2/2017 12:12 PM, Che wrote: >>> >>> >>> Have I missed something? Why is Rossi still being taken seriously here >>> on vortex-L? >>> >>> At the very least, his proprietary secrecy has cost Science a great deal. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 3:31 PM, a.ashfield <a.ashfi...@verizon.net> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> It has been evident for years that Rossi has been spending time boning >>>> up on atomic physics. >>>> >>>> What he writes here makes sense to me, but perhaps others here, more >>>> expert than me, will comment. >>>> >>>> >>>> 1. Andrea Rossi >>>> March 31, 2017 at 12:55 PM >>>> >>>> <http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=892&cpage=223#comment-1273347> >>>> >>>> Eugene Atthove: >>>> As a matter of fact, neutrinos and antineutrinos in the nuclear >>>> physics equations are “tricks”, assumed to be real to obtain the >>>> respect of >>>> the leptons conservation law. >>>> For example: the neutron decay, of which we talked yesterday, gives >>>> one proton, one electron and one antineutrino: why? Because at the left >>>> of >>>> the neutron decay equation you do not have leptons, at the right you >>>> have >>>> one lepton and this would be against the leptons number conservation >>>> law: >>>> therefore you have to assume the emission of an antineutrino, so you >>>> have >>>> one plus lepton ( the electron ), one minus lepton ( the antineutrino ) >>>> = >>>> zero leptons also at the right of the equation, so that the law is >>>> respected. You could say that this sounds a little bit tricky, like an >>>> artifact, but…it is, albeit without this trick the Standard Model would >>>> brutally crack down: realistically, between a crack and a trick is >>>> better >>>> the trick. >>>> Warm Regards, >>>> A.R. >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> >
