Well, Jones, to be fair to Dr Glumac, I do not see where he is verbalizing support for Mills' theoretical underpinnings. Scientific progress is based on having the funds and initiative to move forward. It is not surprising that as a contractee to Mills, Glumac was not asked to check for photon emission the absence of which would tend to invalidate Mills' hypothesis. It is Sunday morning and as a nominal Christian my little prayer for the day would be that a fellow scientist to Glumac would notice this report and have the guts and initiative (and the funds) to replicate the work as well as check for photon emission. Reproducibility is the bugbear of the LENR field. This experiment seems to be astonishingly simple from a technologic perspective, take some chemicals you bought from Sigma-Aldrich and heat them to 300 degrees
Steve High On Sun, May 25, 2014 at 9:48 AM, Jones Beene <jone...@pacbell.net> wrote: > Well, the professor should be questioned, if not chided - about what is > not seen and not reported, instead of what is seen and glossed over. This > is substandard, at best. > > > > It is an interesting experiment BUT it is one that looks more like the > Rossi effect than Mills. > > > > Heat is added to trigger thermal gain in experiment in which a > ferromagnetic material is used - and the added gain is seen. That fits > Rossi whereas the hallmark of Mills experiments is UV emission. No mention > of UV. > > > > The most reasonable conclusion for UV not being mentioned is that Mills > knew ahead of time, when he provided the experimental details, that UV was > absent. > > > > There is no indication that this relates to “hydrinos”… > > > > *From:* Carl High > > > > Leaving aside for the moment that he was working with the controversial > Randall Mills, a professor from University of Illinois has affixed his good > name to evidence that non-chemistry-based heat is produced when a copper > hydroxide/copper bromide mixture is heated to 300C in a differential > scanning calorimeter. > > > > > http://www.blacklightpower.com/wp-content/uploads/papers/GlumacReportwithGraphics2014.pdf > > > > Acknowledging that I am not an expert in technology such as this, this > evidence does appear as credit-worthy as any of the material I saw > presented at the recent MIT colloquium. A well-documented fairly > straight-forward replication of an experiment showing an anomalous heat > signature. As such his work deserves to be added to the diverse gallery of > anomalies that we so avidly track and discuss, and is ultimately deserving > of an explanation why and how. An added benefit:if you google the image of > Nick Glumac you will quickly notice that he is not a septuagenarian > shuffling around a lab long after he has earned his pension. So let's give > him credit for being a young man who is willing to put his career in > jeopardy by demonstrating and affirming an effect that most of his peers > would deride as junk science. May there be many more like him. > > > > Steve High >
