MOTTO
Science is wonderfully equipped to answer the question 'How?' but it gets terribly confused when you ask the question 'Why?' (Erwin Chargaff)
DAILY NOTES
We well know that any serious scientific treatise starts with the necessary definitions
and the description of the basic facts- these being based on consensus between the scientists of the respective field/subject.
For LENR this is not possible (we refer now just only to the classic Fleischmann-Pons cell) if we start to discuss about it, we have to decide if it is LENR with NAE happening on the surface or LANR Lattice Assisted Nuclear reactions - in bulk, What is distinguishing a nuclearly active piece of palladium from one inactive? Is co-deposition a really great progress in PdD LENR? Can we really perform reproducible experiments in this system, and if yes, then, how? If not, then why? (see the Chargaff Motto above, please)
Could the situation be, after 27+ years, more mysterious, more interesting? Could it or worse? Why, despite so many admirable experimental works of high class dedicated researchers, why, despite at least a dozen of dozens theoretical works- we have so few certainties in PdD based LENR? In this jungle of facts only Storms offers a plausible explanation- it happens I disagree with the nano-cracks- pray that I am n deep error!
I have an answer that is usually rejected with contempt and anger: PdD wet is an INCOMPLETE, not fully developed LENR system - temperature too low, gaseous impurities from water phase harmful to active sites- therefore it simply CANNOT be made really reproducible, cannot deliver the data necessary for a theory, has no sufficient actionable parameters.
History has shown the way to useful LENR- gas phase high temperature systems; In my opinion gas phase is a must for deep degassing of the active sites, high temperatures enhance the dynamics of metal atoms that are forming nuclearly active nanostructures- but here is missing link, a necessary factor and we don't know what it is. Piantelli has worked at over 400 C, recently Andrea Rossi has tested a LENR system at 1500 C.
The LENR community has not accepted gladly such strange systems, Piantelli was ignored mostly; after 5 years of very interesting history there are many people searching grave-digger job for Rossi's E-Cat systems. LENR classic stagnates. LENR+ is under attack- just now the times are the most interesting..
I am rational, not superstitious however I am forced to accept the Chinese curse hitting LENR
DAILY NEWS
1) LENR Evolution/Eco-Humanics 3 Min. Gold News and Elaine Diane Taylor
LENR IN CONTEXT-1
Nuclear Structure then and now: 40 years of the 1975 Nobel Prize in Physics
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/andp.201600125/full
LENR IN CONTEXT-2
The Doctor Is Very In: Dr. James Truchard's Quest For Endless Innovation
Science is wonderfully equipped to answer the question 'How?' but it gets terribly confused when you ask the question 'Why?' (Erwin Chargaff)
DAILY NOTES
We well know that any serious scientific treatise starts with the necessary definitions
and the description of the basic facts- these being based on consensus between the scientists of the respective field/subject.
For LENR this is not possible (we refer now just only to the classic Fleischmann-Pons cell) if we start to discuss about it, we have to decide if it is LENR with NAE happening on the surface or LANR Lattice Assisted Nuclear reactions - in bulk, What is distinguishing a nuclearly active piece of palladium from one inactive? Is co-deposition a really great progress in PdD LENR? Can we really perform reproducible experiments in this system, and if yes, then, how? If not, then why? (see the Chargaff Motto above, please)
Could the situation be, after 27+ years, more mysterious, more interesting? Could it or worse? Why, despite so many admirable experimental works of high class dedicated researchers, why, despite at least a dozen of dozens theoretical works- we have so few certainties in PdD based LENR? In this jungle of facts only Storms offers a plausible explanation- it happens I disagree with the nano-cracks- pray that I am n deep error!
I have an answer that is usually rejected with contempt and anger: PdD wet is an INCOMPLETE, not fully developed LENR system - temperature too low, gaseous impurities from water phase harmful to active sites- therefore it simply CANNOT be made really reproducible, cannot deliver the data necessary for a theory, has no sufficient actionable parameters.
History has shown the way to useful LENR- gas phase high temperature systems; In my opinion gas phase is a must for deep degassing of the active sites, high temperatures enhance the dynamics of metal atoms that are forming nuclearly active nanostructures- but here is missing link, a necessary factor and we don't know what it is. Piantelli has worked at over 400 C, recently Andrea Rossi has tested a LENR system at 1500 C.
The LENR community has not accepted gladly such strange systems, Piantelli was ignored mostly; after 5 years of very interesting history there are many people searching grave-digger job for Rossi's E-Cat systems. LENR classic stagnates. LENR+ is under attack- just now the times are the most interesting..
I am rational, not superstitious however I am forced to accept the Chinese curse hitting LENR
DAILY NEWS
1) LENR Evolution/Eco-Humanics 3 Min. Gold News and Elaine Diane Taylor
2) Initiated by Replicator Me356
THREAD IP protection and publication of discovery
https://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/index.php/Thread/3370-IP-protection-and-publication-of-discovery/?postID=25241#post25241
https://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/index.php/Thread/3370-IP-protection-and-publication-of-discovery/?postID=25241#post25241
progress of Me 356 reactors here:
3) Up-to-dated, recommended by Doug Marke who says this link offers rational sanity
Are LENR devices real?
4) me356 Reports LENR Progress
http://www.e-catworld.com/2016/06/19/me356-reports-lenr-progress/
5) Rossi fights. #ThomasDarden faces an opponent that throughout his life cultivated and perfected the motto: "never give up, never give in".
https://twitter.com/we_cat_global/status/744341580190879744
(a Rossi denier adds to the Motto:"never deliver"
http://www.e-catworld.com/2016/06/19/me356-reports-lenr-progress/
5) Rossi fights. #ThomasDarden faces an opponent that throughout his life cultivated and perfected the motto: "never give up, never give in".
https://twitter.com/we_cat_global/status/744341580190879744
(a Rossi denier adds to the Motto:"never deliver"
LENR IN CONTEXT-1
Nuclear Structure then and now: 40 years of the 1975 Nobel Prize in Physics
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/andp.201600125/full
LENR IN CONTEXT-2
The Doctor Is Very In: Dr. James Truchard's Quest For Endless Innovation
Peter
ReplyDeleteAnother possible source of energy.
http://advances.sciencemag.org/content/2/6/e1501591.full
Sam
Dear Sam,
Deletea known source recovery of used plastics polymers- my original specialty is polymers.
Polymer pyrolysi used on large scale- this has happened at Rosi's Petroldragon too till greedy companies have started to bring very dangerous waste stuff there incontrollably. Anyway a relatively small source of energy. See about tires too
peter
Dear Sam,
Deletea known source recovery of used plastics polymers- my original specialty is polymers.
Polymer pyrolysi used on large scale- this has happened at Rosi's Petroldragon too till greedy companies have started to bring very dangerous waste stuff there incontrollably. Anyway a relatively small source of energy. See about tires too
peter
More optimistic. Why, for the last 30 years, despite billions of dollars, with rather small experiments, high temperature conductivity is not understood in a general case?
ReplyDeleteDear Danny
Deletethat is true; ctully the realm of unknown is greater than what we know but physicists are educated in a spirit of omniscuience.
peter
I want a world of truth, openness, honor, innovation, and compassion, for starters. A world the opposite of what Orwell warned us about. I want an end to Malthusian eugenics; wars based on lies; lifelong terminal medical "experiments," and the like. How about you Peter? I admire your support for Dr. Rossi but I wonder if you are who you say you are. Why call your blog Ego Out, for example? It would be difficult to think of anyone more egotistical than a secret police official who wants to control someone else and play God with their life. Wouldn't you agree?
ReplyDeleteRegards from Southern California
Greetings from North West Romania,
DeleteDear Christopher,
Re what you suggestI think you say "less pessimism" based on my long life experience I think the best slogan is:"Gain power from accepting reality!"
I think optimist thinking at any price including selection of fac\ts is very harmful in science especially in LENR. You can search for my FQXI essay easy to find both in my blog or on the web- about advantages of negative thinking in real life problem solving.
My support to Rossi is in great part motivated by the behavior of IH and its speakers- I will not say barkers or biters.
AN IMPORTANT ADVISE TO YOU: never ask something before searching the answer on the Web!
What you ask re me- I wrote about everything almost and not once there are 1067 potings on the blog. I have openly told sabout my 40 years in the chemical industry, 12 yers in Web Search and first of all my 27 plus years in LENR se e.g My LENR history.
EGO OUT is coined bt me see definition, it is in The English dictionary.
In part it was inspired by my friend asnd mentor the regretted sci-fi writer Arthur C.Clark who had EGOGRAMS. Nothing to do with egotism or secret police, dear Christopher
It has started on Dec 10, 2010 total pageview till now 790000 approx no ambitions of popularity is expresssive I do not want to impress.
All the best to you, answer what do ou wissh but please tke care with questions
'
Peter
Very well, Peter, I appreciate your taking the time to educate me in this regard. Without doubt you have done more to advance the state of LENR than I ever have or likely ever could, and I thank you for that. As you know, it is long past time that this lifesaving technology was released to the benefit of all.
ReplyDeleteRe: Arthur C. Clarke, as you know he was a true visionary. I didn't fully appreciate this until recently, when I read his forward to Charles Beaudette's excellent book "Excess Heat." I also understand that he developed the concept of geosynchronicity, now in use by communications providers all over the planet. Although at first glance I failed to see how your term EGO OUT pertains to his Egograms, after thinking it over and remembering your somewhat "quirky" writing style, I suppose I can accept your explanation. You are brilliant my friend: a polymath, multi-linguist, and visionary (I'm sincerely complimenting you; my ignorance is in remission but still vast), but a bit strange! For example, you say in one sentence that Clarke was your friend and mentor, but also that he is "regretted." Why would that be?
At any rate, I have some more questions. Your advice is to "gain power from reality," while not letting optimism get in the way of the facts, correct? While this would seem to be good advice, quite frankly it seems a bit ironic on an LENR blog—particularly one that takes great pains to defend our controversial (if beloved) Dr. Rossi. Wouldn't you agree, Peter, that rightly or wrongly, most people in the field of science would say that we're both delusional for believing in Cold Fusion/Dr. R? However as there are many facts that appear to confirm the viability of LENR, perhaps they are the delusional ones. In that case, they weren't optimistic enough—thus undermining your statement. How interesting indeed.
For my part, although I feel confident that Andrea is the real deal, if that turns out to not be the case, the energy/overall Renaissance will still prevail. Even if LENR itself doesn't work out, there are some promising alternatives out there. (I won't insult your intelligence by listing off the numerous LENR companies and research organizations here in the US and all over the world; or other forms of fusion such as dense plasma focus; or advanced fission/LFTRs; etc.)
Dear Christopher,
DeleteJust from curiosity have you read http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/2015
other things Arthur C Clarke was a greatman. I regretted his death
Re Rossi my option is my option and I take responsibility for it.
I prefer longer discussion on e-mail
don't like the letters here
Best
Peter
(Continued)
ReplyDeleteAs I'm sure you'll agree, the obstacles to progress have much more to do with political will than a lack of scientific prowess/innovation. This is what the Teslas of the world found out the hard way, unfortunately; and why I believe it is absolutely imperative to get the truth out there and challenge ideologies of hate and control such as "Malthusianism." I hope and pray that the time of the few to control and even "depopulate" the many is drawing to a close, my friend. The Internet would appear to be the asteroid that splashes down the plans of the "elite" dinosaurs that have gone unchallenged far too long. Yes, God is Love; but God is Truth as well; and although I don't claim to be the arbiter of such even I know that lies have defined the reality on this Earth for far too long. You don't have to worry: I won't let my optimism get in the way of the facts of the Bible. The Truth will set us free; and God and those of us who serve Him will prevail on behalf of everyone else! To love God is to be an optimist, you see. Facts are facts.
And now, Peter, some advice for you. For all the good you've done, I'm a bit concerned that in your eagerness to teach other people lessons you think they should learn that you may put yourself in a difficult position morally and spiritually. For example, you wouldn't want one of your lessons to contribute to someone's suffering, would you?
I note in one of your previous responses that you consider yourself educated "in the spirit of omniscience." Does that mean you feel you are actually omniscient, or have the right to conduct/present yourself in such a way? If the answer whether you can admit to it or not is actually "yes," then sadly this would seem to confirm my suspicions about the name of your blog (as a projection of your own ego onto someone else). I seem to recall someone/something in the Bible that would aspire to be greater than God, but of course never could. That one, Peter, is the enemy—yours and mine. I hope you haven't lost sight of that.
Thanks for taking the time to respond and read my reply. I've always wanted to visit Eastern Europe, I hear it's nice over there. I hope you won't take my opinions too harshly and am willing to continue to interact with me. Until then, best regards.
Your friend from SoCal
Christopher: "I note in one of your previous responses that you consider yourself educated "in the spirit of omniscience."
DeleteChristopher,
Learn to read. He's not a physicist. What Peter said was "that is true; truly (or actually?) the realm of unknown is greater than what we know but physicists are educated in a spirit of omniscience."
"
Dear Christopher,
DeleteWe will be gooid friends but be a bit more careful with your interpretation
I have no pedagogical ambitions, I hust tell here what I think,
peter