Axil -- Yes, I know you have an axe to grind with Ed. That was my point. It's really quite amazing how you can call out Storms' theory for "not being peer-reviewed" (even though it has been several times as I pointed out) and not see the irony. When can we here on vortex expect a draft of your white paper expounding more on your "soliton theory of LENR" and TOE?
On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 2:28 AM, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote: > *Seriously. Ed's theory has been peer-reviewed by JCMNS, Infinite Energy, > and he submitted/presented a white paper at ICCF-18.* > > Herein lies the problem with the LENR community. It is mired in the > misconceptions of the deuterium/palladium history of LENR that has > developed over the last 25 year, with the quest for tritium and the fusion > to helium. This is Ed's tradition and is unfortunately a wrong turn in the > understanding of LENR. Dr Miley is more on track and Ed derides Miley's > ideas. A bad sign, Ed discounts my heroes and the foundation of my > thinking. Ed need to be returned to the proper theoretical camp, I owe it > to Ed, his position in LENR deserve no less. > > I am anonymous and as such I avoid the complications and the pitfalls of > ego and reputation. Whatever Ed says about me does not stick. > > > On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 2:10 AM, Foks0904 . <foks0...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Axil -- You're all over the place. Seriously. Ed's theory has been >> peer-reviewed by JCMNS, Infinite Energy, and he submitted/presented a white >> paper at ICCF-18. I'd need a much clearer definition of what the "soliton >> theory of LENR" is before I trust that could disprove anything. Do you >> actually mean "your theory"? The theory that has never appeared in print >> (beside a fractured mosaic of message board posts) and has never been >> subjected to any real scrutiny or test whatsoever? And if you mean >> Shoulders' theory instead, well that isn't your theory, and like I said it >> would disprove all fusion models, not just Ed's. You have a preoccupation >> with Ed because he dared to call you out for being a fuzzy thinker. >> >> >> On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 2:01 AM, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Ed's theory requires peer review. The soliton theory of LENR is >>> incompatible with Ed's theory as it stands now but with a little adjustment >>> Ed could be promulgating the correct LENR doctrinaire. Ed is a prominent >>> voice in the LENR community, if Ed can be converted to the truth, then >>> others may follow. >>> >>> >>> On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 1:38 AM, Foks0904 . <foks0...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> And you seem to have some strange chip on your shoulder regarding Ed >>>> Storms and his theory. If a plasmoid EVO is producing excess heat and >>>> transmutation, all fusion theories are wrong, not just Ed's. I don't >>>> understand your rant in the slightest. >>>> >>>> >>>> On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 1:16 AM, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Anyone who references a plasmoid structure cannot take the theory of >>>>> Ed Storms seriously. >>>>> >>>>> A plasmoid projects the causation of the reaction at a distant from >>>>> the plasmoid. That negates the premise of Ed's theory because Ed's theory >>>>> is one where the action of causation is directed inward within the crack. >>>>> >>>>> Remote LENR reactions are seen all the time in LENR experimentation. >>>>> Any such experiment will disprove Eds theory. >>>>> >>>>> The plasmoid will project as anapole magnetic field axially in a >>>>> direction normal to its direction of current rotation. >>>>> >>>>> Action at a distance is a key that indicates the reaction causation in >>>>> projected magnetism. This is a simple concept not a extremely outlandish >>>>> and completely unsubstantiated ideas, It has been seen in many experiments >>>>> that I can reference *ad nauseam.* >>>>> >>>>> http://www.uf.narod.ru/public/recom_e11.pdf >>>>> >>>>> * LOW-ENERGY NUCLEAR REACTIONS AND THE LEPTONIC MONOPOLE * >>>>> Snip >>>>> >>>>> Doctor Ivoilov will present in his report some very interesting >>>>> results for the >>>>> >>>>> traces.8 Here are some conclusions based on the presented >>>>> experimental data. >>>>> >>>>> (1) The particle, which left the trace in the nuclear emulsion is >>>>> charged, as >>>>> >>>>> nuclear emulsions are insensitive to neutrons. >>>>> >>>>> (2) The particle cannot have electric charge, as otherwise it could >>>>> not be able to >>>>> >>>>> pass through *two meters of atmospheric air and two layers of black >>>>> paper.* >>>>> >>>>> (3) The particle does not have high energy, as no delta electrons are >>>>> observed. >>>>> >>>>> (4) The mechanism of the interaction between the particle and the >>>>> photosensitive >>>>> >>>>> layer is not clear. Assuming the Coulomb mechanism, the absorbed >>>>> >>>>> energy estimated using the darkening area equals around 1 GeV. >>>>> >>>>> (5) The radiation is of nuclear origin; it interacts with magnetic >>>>> fields. >>>>> . >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 12:37 AM, Foks0904 . <foks0...@gmail.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Sat, Jul 26, 2014 at 6:38 PM, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> *it is in these domains of the nano-material that these coherent >>>>>>> structures can become stable * >>>>>>> >>>>>>> There are only a few particles that stay together for an extended >>>>>>> period of time, only the proton really. The neutron will stay around >>>>>>> within >>>>>>> the context of the proton, but will decay when isolated on its own. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Solitons can stay stable in the context of the BEC for as long as >>>>>>> the BEC endures but will decay when isolated on its own. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The application of energy to air will catalyze a polariton soliton, >>>>>>> but that vortex will rapidly decay. A high energy electron produced by >>>>>>> beta >>>>>>> decay might produce a polariton soliton, when the emitted electron >>>>>>> releases >>>>>>> its energy in a collision with a nitrogen molecule. But that soliton >>>>>>> does >>>>>>> not stay around very long, it decays in Picoseconds. The same is true >>>>>>> for >>>>>>> spark discharge in air. However, if the spark vaporizes material, say an >>>>>>> aluminum sheet, a cooling plasma of aluminum will supply nano and micro >>>>>>> particles together with the electrons and the photons in the spark >>>>>>> discharge within a contextual medium to catalyze a polariton soliton >>>>>>> BEC. >>>>>>> The energy of the discharge is great enough to form a BEC. With the >>>>>>> support >>>>>>> of this polariton BEC, this soliton ensemble persists and is localized >>>>>>> for >>>>>>> long enough to transmute the surrounding material through the >>>>>>> projection of >>>>>>> a coherent anapole magnetic field (a monopole field). >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Ken Shoulders saw this whole process unfold in this research, but he >>>>>>> never added the polariton and the associated BEC context to his >>>>>>> experimental explanations. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Sat, Jul 26, 2014 at 6:02 PM, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> picking up and displacing very "fine grained" material and >>>>>>>> re-depositing it elsewhere >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> With all respect, this is some conceptual junk that you pick up >>>>>>>> along the way as an inappropriate analogy. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The key is that the magnetic field has an effect on the vacuum >>>>>>>> which results in a complicated set of results. Spin flipping (the Higgs >>>>>>>> mechanism) cannot be described in any context with the sedimentation of >>>>>>>> material. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Sat, Jul 26, 2014 at 2:20 PM, Foks0904 . <foks0...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I'm not so sure one needs to posit Higgs Field interactions -- >>>>>>>>> maybe. I see it in a very basic way without too much esoterica. In >>>>>>>>> over-unity electrical systems (possibly cold fusion) we initiate >>>>>>>>> non-linear >>>>>>>>> coupling between appropriate materials. This non-linear coupling >>>>>>>>> produces >>>>>>>>> these collective anharmonic modes. Moray B. King calls them "ion >>>>>>>>> acoustical >>>>>>>>> modes", T. Henry Moray was one of the first to propose this mechanism >>>>>>>>> was >>>>>>>>> at play in his plasma tubes. Harold Aspden eventually arrived at the >>>>>>>>> same >>>>>>>>> conclusion while attempting to explain the Correa PAGD -- which both >>>>>>>>> he and >>>>>>>>> Mallove believed was legitimate. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> So once the non-linear mode is setup, if all the conditions for >>>>>>>>> material requirements and proper integration are met, the system will >>>>>>>>> set >>>>>>>>> up these nano-vortices -- usually magnetic -- which, like any other >>>>>>>>> vortex, >>>>>>>>> is quite good at picking up and displacing very "fine grained" >>>>>>>>> material and >>>>>>>>> re-depositing it elsewhere -- in this case from the "Aether" into >>>>>>>>> our 3D-space (Higgs field, ZPF, or whatever) (think of a longitudinal >>>>>>>>> wave >>>>>>>>> in a riverbed). We know ball-lightning solitons result from >>>>>>>>> fracto-emissions -- perhaps it is in these domains of the >>>>>>>>> nano-material >>>>>>>>> that these coherent structures can become stable and setup resonance >>>>>>>>> with >>>>>>>>> the vacuum. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> All speculation of course. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Sat, Jul 26, 2014 at 2:09 PM, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Another area that Ahern needs to look into is the way the Higgs >>>>>>>>>> field seems to connect together magnetism and quantum >>>>>>>>>> chromodynamics (QCD), which is the theory of quark-gluon >>>>>>>>>> interactions. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> When Ahern is postulating that nanomagnitism is effecting the >>>>>>>>>> vacuum, he may mean to address how the Higgs field and nanomagnitism >>>>>>>>>> interact, >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Sat, Jul 26, 2014 at 1:54 PM, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Most scientists are constrained in their focus by their >>>>>>>>>>> specialization to a limited field of study. To understand a system >>>>>>>>>>> fully, >>>>>>>>>>> many fields of study must be considered to put all the pieces >>>>>>>>>>> together. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> One obvious area of inquiry that Ahern never pursued is to >>>>>>>>>>> understand how magnetism affects the vacuum and/or nuclear >>>>>>>>>>> stability. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Another important piece of the puzzle that Ahern neglects in the >>>>>>>>>>> critical role of quantum mechanics plays as a powerful amplification >>>>>>>>>>> mechanism toward powering up Nanomagnetism to huge levels. When the >>>>>>>>>>> dimensions of the lattice get below 100 nm, quantum effects >>>>>>>>>>> predominate. To >>>>>>>>>>> understand Nanomagnetism, quantum mechanics is the sole factor that >>>>>>>>>>> reveals >>>>>>>>>>> all the facts in the story of the nano system >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Furthermore, Ahern never mentions the pivotal role the spin >>>>>>>>>>> plays in Nanomagnetism, including what defeats Nanomagnetism and >>>>>>>>>>> what >>>>>>>>>>> supports it. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, Jul 26, 2014 at 1:26 PM, Foks0904 . <foks0...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Yeah he's pretty dismissive of the Heat/Helium work, which I >>>>>>>>>>>> disagree with for PdD at least, and we're still waiting on >>>>>>>>>>>> reliable ash >>>>>>>>>>>> measurements from NiH, but he's of course entitled to his opinion >>>>>>>>>>>> and I >>>>>>>>>>>> still have a lot of respect for his views. I think, like he said, >>>>>>>>>>>> his >>>>>>>>>>>> theory applies better to mysterious electromagnetic "free energy" >>>>>>>>>>>> systems >>>>>>>>>>>> than it does to LENR, but he thinks the same phenomenon is at play >>>>>>>>>>>> in both. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> I think non-linear anharmonic modes may indeed be at play here. >>>>>>>>>>>> As I think I mentioned in the interview, on a personal level, I >>>>>>>>>>>> like the >>>>>>>>>>>> analogy of loaded hydride in a wet or gaseous system as a >>>>>>>>>>>> non-equilibrium, >>>>>>>>>>>> non-linear, open system of sorts -- so I think energy >>>>>>>>>>>> concentration (in >>>>>>>>>>>> "violation" of the second law) may indeed be at play. But on the >>>>>>>>>>>> flip side >>>>>>>>>>>> I can't totally dismiss Storms' point of view that doesn't think >>>>>>>>>>>> any sort >>>>>>>>>>>> of abnormal energy concentration is necessary -- that linear >>>>>>>>>>>> reaction-diffusion can get H/D to the NAE efficiently enough >>>>>>>>>>>> without >>>>>>>>>>>> needing to invoke non-linear dynamics. It's hard to say. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> I'm hoping the ash analysis being carried out by ELFORSK can >>>>>>>>>>>> shed some light on what's going on (i.e. fusion or not fusion). >>>>>>>>>>>> I'm banking >>>>>>>>>>>> on that, because I don't really have a lot of faith DGT will be >>>>>>>>>>>> releasing a >>>>>>>>>>>> wealth of mass spectrometer work anytime soon, even though they >>>>>>>>>>>> promised to >>>>>>>>>>>> at last years ICCF. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Regards, >>>>>>>>>>>> John >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, Jul 26, 2014 at 12:35 PM, Jones Beene < >>>>>>>>>>>> jone...@pacbell.net> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> This is an excellent interview. Have not finished yet, but >>>>>>>>>>>>> there are a few things to add. Ahern is strongly impressed with a >>>>>>>>>>>>> magnetic >>>>>>>>>>>>> invention (Manelas device) since he did the 8 day test - and >>>>>>>>>>>>> which device >>>>>>>>>>>>> others have belittled. It is similar to the Floyd Sweet device >>>>>>>>>>>>> (for the >>>>>>>>>>>>> historians of overunity). The cross-connection to LENR is not >>>>>>>>>>>>> easy to >>>>>>>>>>>>> explain but is there. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> It can be noted up front that Ahern does not believe that >>>>>>>>>>>>> there is any evidence whatsoever for nuclear fusion in LENR. That >>>>>>>>>>>>> includes >>>>>>>>>>>>> deuterium fusion to helium and especially Ni-H. He thinks it is >>>>>>>>>>>>> all >>>>>>>>>>>>> nanomagnetic. Nanomagnetism is roughly equivalent to a >>>>>>>>>>>>> combination of >>>>>>>>>>>>> superferromagnetism and superparamagnetism. They are two are >>>>>>>>>>>>> extremes of >>>>>>>>>>>>> the same phenomenon. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> He believes that the helium seen in Pd-D is basically >>>>>>>>>>>>> measurement error - noise. Krivit is probably pleased with that >>>>>>>>>>>>> assessment. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> *From:* Alan Fletcher >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Foks0904 wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm sure many of you know of Brian Ahern from his EPRI >>>>>>>>>>>>> report, his MIT colloquium appearance earlier this year, and now >>>>>>>>>>>>> his >>>>>>>>>>>>> collaboration with MFMP. Even if you're not aware of him, I think >>>>>>>>>>>>> this >>>>>>>>>>>>> conversation has enough for 3-4 threads worth of topics. We even >>>>>>>>>>>>> flirt with >>>>>>>>>>>>> the ever-so-dangerous & taboo possibility of "perpetual motion". >>>>>>>>>>>>> Titled: >>>>>>>>>>>>> "Nanomagnetism, Cooperative Modes, & Non-Linear LENR". Hope you >>>>>>>>>>>>> guys/gals >>>>>>>>>>>>> enjoy: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I_kID_E-3tY >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> An outline can be found here: >>>>>>>>>>>>> http://jmag0904.wordpress.com/2014/07/25/dr-brian-ahern-nanomagnetism-cooperative-modes-non-linear-lenr/ >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> That's a MUST-LISTEN link. (And I'm only half-way through!) >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Goes into some of the history of anharmonic modes (related to >>>>>>>>>>>>> discrete breathers, Quodons we've discussed recently). >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> At about 19minutes he says superconductivity and >>>>>>>>>>>>> (super?)-ferro-magnetism are closely related (and that the latter >>>>>>>>>>>>> persists >>>>>>>>>>>>> up to a thousand degrees.). >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Then I *think* he says that LENR could be a localized >>>>>>>>>>>>> ferromagnetic effect tapping into vacuum energy. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Needs a transcript. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> >
