http://www.scienceinschool.org/2009/issue12/fireballs
I judge this to be important of the LENR scientist as follows: These patterns proved that the fireballs were indeed full of particles with an average radius of about 25 nm - i.e. they are nanoparticles. The data also showed that* the particles varied widely in size (very important)* (as is typical of aerosols) and that there were about 109 particles per cubic centimetre. This makes the volume fraction of solid material (the ratio of volume of solid to total volume of space) in the fireball around 10-7 or 10 -8. There was really only a very, very, small amount of matter in the cloud. The analysis also suggested that the particles had quite a rough surface: the scientists found the surface to have a fractal dimension of 2.6 (2.0 corresponds to a smooth 2D surface, On Sun, Mar 9, 2014 at 10:53 PM, Blaze Spinnaker <blazespinna...@gmail.com>wrote: > > Axil, I don't get it. Why not optimize this for power generation? Find > a way to generate cracks in a nano material with a small amount of > electricity. Presumably there is an optimal material, shape, context in > terms of gases present that causes this, and a better method than just > 'shifting a Tupperware container' > > This sounds like a revolutionary news article where the main stream press > and a good university (Rutgers) is coming to terms with the reality > something is happening there. > > My only question, is that is voltage being reported. What was the excess > thermal heat? Going to email them. > > On Saturday, March 8, 2014, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-26462348 >> >> LENR has been talking about this for some time now. >> >
