http://smartscarecrow.com/2012/09/presentation-by-mark-leclair-of-nanospire/
The LeClair talk is up on the smartscarecrow site and starts at about 30:23 in. Axil On Fri, Sep 21, 2012 at 2:04 PM, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote: > From this recent presentation, I have gained new insight into what > motivates LeClair to spend so much time on his fusion/water crystal > research. This knowledge that he gains in this area is central to the > success of his cavatation business. > > LeClair’s business model is built around ultra-high nano-precision based > cavitation cutting. > > He saw that in many cases, there was an unknown factor in cavatation that > caused unwanted randomized cutting going on. He could not explain it nor > could he control it. > > Slide 17 shows some of the random results that led him to look into this > problem. He saw both circular and straight grooving and strange tracks that > he could not explain so he set out to find what was causing this > unexplained behavior coming from his cavatation procedures. > > So that is how he came to find water crystals. > > Once he realized that these crystals were the causitive factor that was > cutting material, he was able to come up with a mathematical model that > closely predicted how cavatation cut most types of material. The existing > model was an order of magnitude inaccurate in predicting cavatation erosion. > > This model is very valuable commercially and is closely held by Nanospire. > > LeClair also realized that the type of transmutation that was going on in > cavatation could have massive military implications. He took it onto > himself as a duty to humanity to characterize this threat to nuclear > controls. > > This analysis included the formation of a model of the transmutation > process. > > He informed the relevant authorities and they thanked him. > > From looking at slide 29, the bomb material U233, 235, and Pu239 at first > glance look like to me that they are all denatured with even numbered > isotopes which would require difficult isotopic separation procedures to > purify them to bomb grade material. > > In closing, LeClair is an outcast among outcasts. I have noticed that many > fringe groups show the same intolerance for new ideas that they themselves > are subjected to. I have come to realize this propensity to intellectual > intolerance is inherent in human nature; I myself suffer from it. I have > accepted this behavior as part of the human condition. But close > mindedness does very much slow our acquisition of new knowledge making our > learning processes painfully slow. > > > > > Cheers: Axil > > On Fri, Sep 21, 2012 at 11:37 AM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax <a...@lomaxdesign.com > > wrote: > >> Mark LeClair has a fantastic story to tell. It should be recognized that >> very little of this story has been confirmed, yet some of it should be >> rather easy to confirm. I haven't listened to the show, but did review the >> slides. >> >> What I can tell, clearly, is that LeClair is theorizing way beyond what >> he has evidence for. First things first. >> >> He has expertize in cavitation. So it is reasonable that he might find a >> way to create bubble fusion. Bubble fusion is hot fusion. >> >> In slide 39, he presents his work as related to CF/LENR, but he includes >> bubble fusion. >> >> Cavitation Fusion in Other LENR Devices >>> •Ultrasonics/Sonofusion:, Stringham, Impulse Devices >>> •Pons-Fleischmann Cells, Taleyarkhan, JET >>> •Cavitating Rotor-Stators: Griggs Hydrosonic Pump (Hydrodynamics, Inc.), >>> Potopov, Energetics, Inc. >>> •Brillouin? Defkalion? Rossi? >>> >> >> It's well-known and not controversial: CF/LENR isn't hot fusion. It does >> not produce neutrons, except possibly in very small quantities through rare >> branches or secondary reactions. Bubble fusion is hot fusion. Talyarkhan's >> work involved a claim of detecting bubble fusion through the emission of >> neutrons. >> >> Bubble fusion allegedly works through the generation of very high >> temperatures. If neutrons are generated, this is certainly hot fusion, to >> distinguish it from cold fusion. >> >> By lumping all those approaches together, LeClair demonstrates that he >> doesn't understand cold fusion at all. He claimed massive radiation >> poisoning, which would be from massive neutron generation. His effect, if >> he knows how to create it, and he's claimed more than one massive radiation >> event, should be easy to demonstrate, plus such a massive event would leave >> lots of traces. Material that he claimed to be transmuted was sent to Dr. >> Storms, who found nothing unusual with it. >> >> LeClair's work, if real, has massive military implications. They would be >> all over it, and we know that cold fusion scientists with extensive >> military connections are aware of his claims. Nobody, other than LeClair >> and Lebid -- who is almost completely silent -- has confirmed any of his >> story, as to what indicates a massive anomaly. >> >> It's worse than the situation with Rossi et al. There, at least with >> Rossi, there have been public demonstrations. We may argue that the >> demonstrations were not conclusive, but at least they happened. >> >> And LeClair claims no new science. Really? ZPE self-powered flying water >> crystals, reaching relativistic velocities? No new physics? >> >> My point is that LeClair doesn't know what he's doing in his >> presentations. He's off the edge. >> >> If what he's found is real, if he is not literally insane, the path he is >> following is to imitate someone who is crazy. >> >> A small demonstration device, sold with plenty of caveats, would turn >> this completely around. It doesn't have to be commercially ready. A device >> for the investigation of the effect. But people like LeClair and Rossi et >> al don't do that. That would be "giving away" the secret. While the >> position is understandable, it's also highly paranoid. Essentially, it >> defines the world as not-ready-for-change. >> >> Because if "they" have the money and power to cheat the inventor if the >> inventor reveals the secrets, they also have the money and power to >> penetrate any such secret. >> >> LeClair might seem to have revealed the secret, but he hasn't. You could >> not replicate his work with the information in the slide show. All that you >> could do is to try to explore cavitation, which plenty of people have been >> doing. >> >> At 11:02 PM 9/20/2012, Axil Axil wrote: >> >> <http://smartscarecrow.com/wp-**content/uploads/2012/09/** >>> 092012_2020_Presentatio1.png<http://smartscarecrow.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/092012_2020_Presentatio1.png> >>> >h**ttp://smartscarecrow.com/wp-**content/uploads/2012/09/** >>> 092012_2020_Presentatio1.png<http://smartscarecrow.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/092012_2020_Presentatio1.png> >>> >>> >>> >>> Mark LeClair presented his thesis and supporting evidence(see reference >>> above) in a live presentation on 9/20/2012. >>> >>> This presentation will be available on YouTube shortly. >>> >>> In slide 39, mark said that the Pons-Fleischmann effect is just a very >>> weak version of the LeClair effect. Could the water crystal be the active >>> agent in the PF effect. >>> >>> >>> If this equivalency is true, could a tradeoff between the radiation and >>> transmutation of cavatation in the LeClair effect be made by using nickel >>> or palladium as the target material in the cavatation reactor where proton >>> pairs on the surface of these metals might form and thermalize the nuclear >>> reactivity of the water crystal(slide 16)? >>> >>> On Slide 20, LeClair shows how a water crystal had carved a 5 foot >>> trench in a coil of copper wire. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Cheers: Axil >>> >> >> Slide 20 doesn't show that at all. It does show a coil of copper wire, >> more like 5 cm long than 5 feet. It shows a broken copper wire. Which means? >> >> From LeClair's last slide: >> >> • Cavitation reentrant jets generating the LeClair Effect are the key to >>> harnessing fusion and producing transmuted material on an industrial scale. >>> NanoSpire leads the field in both results and theory >>> >> >> In isolated, unconfirmed results, no controls, and no "harnessing" has >> been shown. There has been no conclusive demonstration of transmuted >> material. EDX results, without controls, are almost useless, because of how >> ubiquitous materials turn out to be when you use these sophisticated >> methods of analysis. Anything, almost literally, is everywhere. The issue >> is shifts in quantity, and because a process can move stuff around, this >> can be tricky. "Before and after" aren't adequate, for example. >> Electrolysis is famous for concentrating materials on the surface of the >> cathode, they can migrate from impurities anywhere in the cell. >> >> • NanoSpire’s cavitation reactor generated 2900 watts of hot water flow >>> using only 840 watts of electrical input, a coefficient of performance >>> (COP) of 3.4 >>> >> >> Unconfirmed. If LeClair saw this, sure, he's excited. But he's also way >> over-interpreting and perhaps misinterpreting his results. It does not >> inspire confidence. >> >> • The LeClair Effect correctly explains excess heat and transmutation >>> seen in many LENR devices without the need for new physics, such as heavy >>> electrons, plasmons or other proposed particles or reactions >>> >> >> So, ZPE self-acceleration of an alleged new crystal form of water, to >> relativistic velocities, is not "new physics"? LENR is reported in many >> contexts where cavitation fusion makes no sense at all. Gas-loaded >> nanoparticle palladium? Not to mention that LENR results, so far, don't >> produce neutrons, and only produce transmutations in very small quantities. >> LeClair got very sick, he claims, from radiation poisoning. If he was >> producing hot fusion, he would indeed get very sick, unless serious >> precautions were taken. Cold fusion, no. This claim then shows that LeClair >> has no idea what he's talking about. He may have had dramatic experiences, >> but he's turning that into his being the scientific genius of the century. >> The thinking pattern isn't unfamiliar. >> >> •The LeClair Effect produces intense fusion >>> >> >> If it works, yes. Hot fusion, intense. Which is unmistakeable. And if he >> can do that with cavitation, what he's done is amazing, but more than >> amazing. It's dangerous as hell, and the military would be all over this, >> and since it's highly likely that the military knows about the claims, and >> the military doesn't give a fig about "established theory," that he is >> being allowed to publicize this shows a high likelihood that their own >> investigation has shown "nothing here." >> >> If that's incorrect, LeClair could rather easily, if he has done what >> he's claimed, refute it. This has been going on for, what, more than a year? >> >> with many different substrates and most importantly, even without a >>> substrate under the right conditions. This means that no electrochemistry, >>> lattice-based theories (Widom-Larsen, Brillouin, others), palladium, nickel >>> or any catalysts are required to produce fusion >>> >> >> That's right. Just get stuff really, really hot, and you will get fusion. >> "Substrate" is something needed in condensed matter, and there is no such >> thing as condensed matter at fusion temperatures. That LeClair might reach >> fusion temperatures with cavitation isn't intrinsically impossible. So that >> he could create hot fusion isn't intrinsically impossible. >> >> But flying self-accelerated relativistic velocities for a new crystalline >> form of water? At one point I asked what the experimental basis was for >> conclusing that. LeClair didn't answer with anything clear. >> >> If LeClair isn't crazy, or maybe even if he is, how about a small machine >> that demonstrates the effect? Yes, dangerous, so sold with plenty of >> warnings. Lots of things are dangerous and can be sold. Or even a large >> complicated machine, if that's necessary. He'd set it up, and demonstrate >> it to customers, who could observe it all, having signed an NDA (if some of >> the technology must be kept secret, covering the secret). If, using this >> machine, which can be a black box, lots of neutrons are generated, that's >> valuable all by itself, such machines are currently quite expensive. >> >> I'm not holding my breath. >> > >
