In reply to Axil Axil's message of Fri, 10 May 2019 18:00:18 -0400: Hi, [snip] >The net increase in silicon from the input feed is 18%, The net increase in >iron form the input feed is 28.4%. These increases in the output product >are so large that such increases cannot be mistaken for CO being >chemically bound as a trace contaminant either on a short term or long >term basis.
There was probably no increase in either Fe or Si. These are simply assumptions that the author made based on the probably false assumption that transmutation was taking place. > >Face it. You face it. While LENR and transmutation may well be real, I seriously doubt that this is an example thereof, particularly given that a very reasonable alternative explanation is available. >You are fighting against a long term assumption about the way the >LENR reaction and transmutation actually works. Not at all. I'm willing to accept that transmutation may have occurred, but I think that in this case, it's highly unlikely. You simply picked a poor example. >LENR is a pure quantum >mechanical process involving superposition of particles and radiation as >well as non-locality of matter and energy. When particles and radiation are >in the state of superposition, they travel unobserved and without impact on >their environment to a field very from their place of origin while the >LENR reaction is active.. This is pure fantasy. >This quantum mechanical nature of the LENR >reaction may be why few LENR experiments show excess heat and/or radiation. >Experimenters expect to see immediate results, but positive results might >only be observable until the LENR reaction terminates. Such is the nature >of quantum mechanics. Wrong. Contrary to popular opinion, cats are not both dead and alive at the same time. They are either one or the other. The only uncertainty is in the mind of the observer, not in reality. Note also that quantum equations reflect the current knowledge of the experimenter, which naturally changes when a measurement is done, hence the "collapse" of the wave function is a consequence of the experimenter having to use a modified equation due to their change in knowledge as a consequence of having made an observation. There is no magic involved just a complete and utter anthropocentric misinterpretation of what's happening. Scientists far too certain of their own importance. [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk local asymmetry = temporary success
