tthe isotopic shift observed is probably only a side effect of the real
reaction.
from others LENR experiments one can suspect that hydrogen is the fuel,
and that Ni is just modified.

that the surface of the powder is pure Ni62 maye be simply that it is
cooked by the reactions, stay stable, and work anyway.

it is like a barbecue made with bricks.
at the end the bricks are all black, and they stay black. they don't burn,
but they are blackened.

that someone tweaked the isotopic shift is not logic, as it is useless...
heat is the question. forbidding isotopic measurement was possible as it is
IP protected.

that Ni62 is consumed just when they stop the reactor, while it show no
evidence of exhaustion, is not logic.

one possible idea is that the Ni62 transmutation may be the cause of the
COP improvement after few days of test. only an idea... not sure at all. it
can be lattice reorganisation, decontaminations...


2014-10-09 5:29 GMT+02:00 Robert Lynn <robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com>:

> so the claim is essentially that this soup of elements were also consumed
> to exhaustion, without changing power input or output as their quantities
> reduced, in an amazingly perfect process that has as its only product the
> highest binding energy Ni62 (also consuming Ni64) and without creating any
> observable radiation during the process and no radiative ash.
>
> It will require a very high level of proof to convince the world of the
> truth of that.
>
> On 9 October 2014 11:15, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> You have some unfounded assumptions in your thinking that are the same
>> assumption that the testers suffer from.
>>
>> The reaction does not center on the nickel or the lithium. The LENR
>> transmutation is done in the hydrogen and the aluminum and other elements.
>>
>> Did you see this line on page 53?
>>
>> Sample 2 was the fuel used to charge the E-Cat. It’s in the form of a
>> very fine powder. Besides the analyzed elements it has been found that the
>> fuel also contains rather high concentrations of C, Ca, Cl, Fe, Mg, Mn and
>> these are not found in the ash.
>>
>> This means that C, Ca, Cl, Fe, Mg, Mn were consumed in the LENR reaction.
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 11:07 PM, Robert Lynn <
>> robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> De-cloaking long term lurker.
>>> Latest test result issues that raise my suspicions:
>>>
>>>    - The uniformity of the Ni ash concerns me, the burn mechanism
>>>    somehow converts all natural Ni isotopes (smaller and larger!! so fusion
>>>    and fission in evidence) to Ni62, but with miraculously no radioactive
>>>    isotopes produced?
>>>    - The test is stopped at a pre-determined time where all the Ni just
>>>    happens to have been converted, and nearly all the Li7, Rossi must have
>>>    done exhaustive development to judge it so perfectly.
>>>    - Huge consumption of Li, Ni 'fuel' - almost to exhaustion, yet the
>>>    reaction power and COP appears to not change significantly through the
>>>    test.  To me that is exceptionally strange (practically magical) 
>>> behaviour.
>>>
>>> If I were setting up a fake there are simple means to get power into the
>>> unit invisibly- like IR or UV lasers, fiber lasers, x-ray tubes, focused
>>> microwaves etc but I don't have enough info about the setup and facilities
>>> to make any judgement on things like this.  I'm happy with black box
>>> reactor approach, and optical thermography/calorimetry is OK for these
>>> COPs, but flow calorimetry would be better.  Unless and until truly
>>> independent testers have full control over the environment and calorimetry
>>> in facilities not controlled by Rossi these tests will not convince the
>>> world.
>>>
>>> I'll continue to observe, and hold some hope, but given the track record
>>> of sub-par demos and rumours of unpublished negative results I will need
>>> independent external testing by other than old associates of Rossi.
>>>
>>> On 9 October 2014 10:26, Blaze Spinnaker <blazespinna...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Jed, perhaps someone is trying to discredit Rossi and thought this was
>>>> the best way to do so.
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 7:22 PM, Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Blaze Spinnaker <blazespinna...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> If Rossi switched out the ash, he's a fraud.  End of story.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Here is something you think about. Why would he switch out the ash?
>>>>> What possible benefit would that bring to him? What motivation would he
>>>>> have? The answers are no reason, none and none. Reasons:
>>>>>
>>>>> 1. The people paying for this work do not care about what causes the
>>>>> effect. They are interested in excess heat. Whether it comes from Ni
>>>>> transmutation or zero-point-energy is beside the point. It will not be 
>>>>> more
>>>>> convincing to them if Rossi puts unnatural Ni isotopes into the mix. On 
>>>>> the
>>>>> contrary, that will only confuse the issue and delay the research.
>>>>>
>>>>> 2. Suppose he did it. He is bound to be caught sooner or later. If
>>>>> this technology ever goes anywhere it will be independently replicated by
>>>>> people Rossi never meets, in labs he never goes to. It is certain they 
>>>>> will
>>>>> find out he is faking. Long term, he will fail. So what short term gain 
>>>>> can
>>>>> there be?
>>>>>
>>>>> 3. Along the same lines, if it is not true, he cannot get a patent for
>>>>> it, or a Nobel, or anything else.
>>>>>
>>>>> 4. Since people would soon distrust him, this would get in the way of
>>>>> proving the excess heat is real, and setting up commercial ventures. The
>>>>> excess heat is the only thing with commercial value at this stage, and
>>>>> Rossi is only interested in commercial development. He does not give a fig
>>>>> about science.
>>>>>
>>>>> Levi and Rossi's backers also have zero motivation to fake the Ni
>>>>> results. It would not benefit them at all, for the same set of reasons.
>>>>>
>>>>> Can you suggest any reason he *would* want to do this? Since this is
>>>>> your hypothesis, it is up to you to give a plausible reason why it might 
>>>>> be
>>>>> true.
>>>>>
>>>>> - Jed
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>

Reply via email to