The "Laws of Nature" contain all the physical laws in the universe. They are inseparable and invariant - all intertwined and working in perfect harmony. Each law has its specific duties. They create and guide the matter and energy of the universe. Every cubic inch of the universe contains all of nature’s physical laws.
In the work of those who seek to take advantage of the Ni-H reaction: Piantelli, Rossi, Mills and others, the task of analysis is to separate out the factors that are related to engineering and those that are related to the fundamental laws in the universe. For example, the production of light is based on physical laws inseparable and invariant in the universe. And yet light can come from any number of separately engineered and distinct platforms: an incandescent bulb or a mercury vapor lamp, or a laser, or a star. But if we look deep enough the source of light is all the same. The same is true with gamma production in the Ni-H process. Gamma rays must come from the same universal origin no matter what the engineering peculiarities of that origin may be. In particular, it is reasonable to project the behavior of gamma production in the Piantelli and the Rossi systems behave the same. >From this paper by Ficardi et al… *Evidence of electromagnetic radiation from Ni-H Systems* * * http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/FocardiSevidenceof.pdf** [snip] During the degassing period, the very first acquisition revealed a spectrum (Fig. 5) dramatically different from the background one. During some acquisition sequences sample temperature was changed in the range from 350 to 750K without any detectable variation in the spectrum. Samples were kept 52 days under vacuum before hydrogen admission in order to study extensively the photon emission. After this too prolonged treatment, the system did not produce energy. *It may be that the two phenomena, extended photon emission and energy production, are alternative, and mutually exclusive*.[/snip] The highlighted section may be a universal characteristic of gamma production common to all Ni-H implementations. In the same way as Ficardi did, we must devise an array of tests to isolate and simplify physical mechanisms related to gamma emissions using simplified experiments to determine the physical basis of what is going on fundamentally in the Ni-H reaction as well as cold fusion in general. On Mon, May 30, 2011 at 1:37 AM, Peter Gluck <peter.gl...@gmail.com> wrote: > Let's suppose that 100% of what Rossi tells is 105% true. > 100% of the time. > Then what about this: > > " My process has nothing to do with the process of Piantelli,” Rossi > wrote. “The proof is that I am making operating reactors; he is not.” (New > Energy Times) > > In this case it is an error to use the data of the > old Piantelli-Focardi cells for the E-cats. Deep mystery- a a patent can be > captured in it. > > Peter > > On Mon, May 30, 2011 at 8:01 AM, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Here is “Evidence of electromagnetic radiation from Ni-H Systems” >> >> >> >> http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/FocardiSevidenceof.pdf >> >> >> >> Emissions derived from undefined nuclear reactions were detected in three >> successive experiments in a temperature range between 350 and 750 K. >> >> >> On Sun, May 29, 2011 at 6:32 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax <a...@lomaxdesign.com >> > wrote: >> >>> At 12:12 AM 5/29/2011, Terry Blanton wrote: >>> >>>> That's one heck of a frequency conversion! >>>> >>> >>> No, it simply requires that the gammas be absorbed by the apparatus. >>> That, I believe, places an upper limit on the gamma energies, but I'm not >>> about to calculate it, and this would also depend on the shielding thickness >>> and the shielding material. >>> >>> He implies that there is gamma radiation generated during the reaction, >>> which would point, by the way, to a scientific demonstration, showing a >>> nuclear reaction, but it's one he does not want to do, because all that has >>> to happen is for someone to measure the energy of those gammas, and the >>> E-Cat could be out of the bag. >>> >>> Note that this demonstration would not rule out fraud. Fraud is very >>> difficult to rule out by any sort of supervised demonstration, which is why >>> I don't expect it to be ruled out until Rossi gets his patent protection. >>> >>> It's really weird. If Rossi is a scammer, he is being *protected* by US >>> patent office refusal to grant patents, because it gives him a complete >>> excuse to not disclose what he's doing, completely. >>> >>> Patents for something considered impossible should be issued. The patent >>> applicant pays all the cost of the examination, and the patent (all patents) >>> should clearly state that the practical operation of the device is not >>> guaranteed by the patent office. The argument that issuance of a patent is >>> some sort of seal of approval is preposterous, as to substance. All kinds of >>> patented stuff has been completely useless. >>> >> >> > > > -- > Dr. Peter Gluck > Cluj, Romania > http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com > >
