Dear Axil. I do not remember a mass balance analysis of the Indian foundry changes in total mass wjth apparent transmutations. I doubt the huge loss of mass you have suggested actually happened.
Bob Cook ____________________________________ ________________________________ From: Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2019 11:47:50 AM To: vortex-l Subject: Re: [Vo]:If Mizuno is correct, this design is likely tobetheprecursor to all future devices There is a natural tendency in the formulation of LENR theory to ignore or flat out deny the existence of outlying or contraindicated LENR processes that are generally observed and proven by observation but conflict with preconceived notions of LENR reality. One of these observations is that transmutation of elements in LENR does not for the most part yield energy: gamma, heat, light, particles, and loses mass. These counter indicators include biological transmutation, the associated very safe and benign environment that LENR occurs in, and the unexplained loss of mass and/or energy where that loss is absolutely required by any proposed theory. I have in mind the production of ferrosilicon in India where an electric arc processing method transmutes 4.5 tons of iron and silicon each day from carbon, oxygen and other ambient elements inside the environment of the electric arc blast furnace. The outsized amount of transmutation of so much mass every day should produce enough energy to meet the power needs of Europe for a year, and yet that huge amount of energy production is not observed. Transmutation in the LENR reaction for the most part occurs under a state of quantum mechanical superposition where that energy produced and the mass exposed to the LENR reaction is permanently lost to our reality. This argument about hydrogen fusion is pointless because the energy produced by this reaction is invisible to our observation. The issue is that the weirdness of quantum mechanics is made manifest to our observation and we cannot understand that it is happening. On Tue, Jul 16, 2019 at 9:54 AM JonesBeene <jone...@pacbell.net<mailto:jone...@pacbell.net>> wrote: From: H LV<mailto:hveeder...@gmail.com> * How much of the energy in a nuclear reaction is actually due to mass change? Is there any reason to think that it would not be all? Even if sequential hydrogen cluster formation is responsible for the gain, and there is no fusion at all - the ultimate source of that heat would still be nuclear mass.
