https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0W67qnktk_8#t=947
On Fri, May 2, 2014 at 8:16 PM, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote: > http://physics.aps.org/articles/v7/47 > > > > Focus: Why We Can’t Remember the Future > > > > In absolute certainty, LENR exists in the future; it is predestined > because it will eventually be discovered just like any major operating > principle of the universe must ultimately be. But how can we remember how > it works in the here and now and what is its eventual configuration. The > future exists just as surely as the past; this future just needs to be > configured in the present to assume the certainty of that preordained > future. > > > > We are captured by the certainty of this inescapable fate, of the surety > of the existence of what LENR must certainly be. What is not sure, is who > will remember that future and bring us into that future reality. The future > is looking for someone to remember; It is the uncertainty of the present > that we struggle under. > > > > On Fri, May 2, 2014 at 5:00 PM, Ken Deboer <barlaz...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Whoops, accidentally interrupted my above message. To conclude: >> >> That unraveling will, of course, take some great deal more effort, as >> well as probably a great deal of time and money, even though we all hope(d) >> that it could be carried off by the 'underground'. Lennart Thomas seems >> to have a good understanding of how the "Standard Model' of current >> business operates and his general approach may yet be necessary. It seems >> likely, in fact, as soon as a little more meat is on the LENR bones (or >> Rossi finally drops the bomb) that the huge industry surrounding LENR will >> suddenly devleop. Who will do this is a critical questiion. I'd rather >> not buy my lenr energy from Duke Enerergy or BP. >> Cheers, ken >> >> >> On Fri, May 2, 2014 at 2:55 PM, Ken Deboer <barlaz...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> FUTURE? >>> I'd like to throw in a couple of general comments on the current trend >>> of this Forum and LENR in general (Just as a cheerleader, since I am >>> totally incapable of contributing or even understanding the technical >>> details). >>> Despite no real evidence of any imminent breakthrough, still, we >>> seem to be witnessing something like an amorphous landlside of some kind >>> that is slowly inching us down (up?) towards a preliminary working model of >>> LENR. The ideas floating around the last several months seem like they are >>> kind of spiraling around the central kernel of the mystery. The ideas >>> around the size and shape of particles (nano and othewise), the role of >>> magnetism, RF, nanoplasmonics, lattices and the like seems to be taking a >>> (shadowy) shape and leads us to hope that a working synthesis might not be >>> that far away.. (We eagerly await too, Dr. Storms new book and work, and >>> Dr. Craven's >>> stuff, and MFMP, and others). >>> I am reminded of the history of genetics, where a gene was for a long >>> time thought of as a 'particle of inheritance', b ut without any idea of >>> what it might physically look like or how it worked. THe concept of the >>> NAE, the site of the magic activity on a metal, is analogous (and equally >>> pregnant as an heuristic tool). The nature of the gene of course has been >>> beaten down into its ultimate form, and now the nature of the NAE is being >>> dissected in somewhat the same manner as the gene was. There were Nobel >>> prizes attached to the genetic unraveling and there will be Nobel prizes in >>> the NAE unraveling. We would be thrilled if some of 'or guys' would be in >>> that number. At the least, there seems to be some definite directions as >>> to what kind of experimental reactors to test out. >>> >>> >>> On Fri, May 2, 2014 at 11:39 AM, Bob Cook <frobertc...@hotmail.com>wrote: >>> >>>> Yesterday Rossi (on his reader blog) indicated that the third party >>>> tests would *not* be reported before June. >>>> >>>> Vortexers have at least another month to speculate on the mechanism of >>>> the Ni-H Rossi Effect. However it may be quite bit longer, depending upon >>>> patent disclosure strategy. What are the possibilities regarding outing of >>>> a theory supported by good data in conjunction with the release of the >>>> third party report? >>>> >>>> Like Rossi implies in his response to a comment yesterday regarding the >>>> probability of the Rossi Effect happening naturally, the design of his >>>> reactor certainly had some design behind it. I think Focardi nailed the >>>> theory and should be hailed appropriately. Rossi had the wherewithal to >>>> add some development funds and theory of his own and probably should get >>>> the Nobel Prize. I hope it happens soon. >>>> >>>> I am planning a trip to Italy in September and will visit the >>>> University of Bologna for two days with the objective of talking with folks >>>> who knew Focardi and are currently working in the field of solid states >>>> physics and nano technology. Alain has already asked me to visit the >>>> History Dept there as well to find out the facts about the death of Bruno >>>> which this blog discussed a few weeks ago. >>>> >>>> I will report on my trip and interactions. Vortexers that may have >>>> other ideas or questions, if so inclined, should present them to me via my >>>> own email address so that I might address them with the Bologna historians >>>> or researchers. Alain has already given me some good ideas and leads. >>>> >>>> Bob Cook >>>> >>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>> *From:* Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com> >>>> *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com >>>> *Sent:* Friday, May 02, 2014 9:38 AM >>>> *Subject:* [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Pasadena: Theater Arts at Caltech >>>> dramatizes the discovery and debunking of “cold fusion” (bring tomatoes) >>>> >>>> I believe that play has been around for a while. I heard about it years >>>> ago. >>>> >>>> - Jed >>>> >>>> >>> >> >
