MOTTO
DAILY NOTES
a) About radical, disruptive, deep thinking, not only in LENR
From different reasons the use and popularity of the adjective "radical" are constantly increasing and the polysemantism of the word is augmented for good and for extremely bad and dangerous too. The World needs radical changes made in modes as harmless as possible.
Radicalized means prepared innocent people for an ideal without reason.
Next week we can expect some radical changes to happen; the US elections, the success of Brilliantlightpower based on a very radical theory, my collaboration with Prof. Lev Sapogin whose Unitary Quantum Theory is again really a radical one, as you will see.
To mention that all the 6 pillars of LENR+ are based on radical concepts, deep changes relative to the classic LENR- especially Otherness , Dynamism must e radicalized; Metamorphosis is by definition a radical disruptive transformation.
More in the coming days.
b) A radical answer to an ill-willed and XXXX (censored) Anonymoua
his was his(her?) repeated message re Cold Fusion was a case of miscovery:
Well, for some reason, despite Pons and Fleischmann's "miscovery" of cold fusion, the researchers at SPAWAR were able to replicate it, and improve on it. Perhaps you should spend less time bitching about P&F and more time reading their research papers.
The problems of LENR had zero to do with "miscovery" and everything to do with dirty science politics initiated and continued by the supposed "scientists" of hot fusion who were more worried about competition than they were about actually following the accepted rules and mores of scientific impartiality.
Note that NASA initiated and replicated a gas phase Pd/D2 system which had none of the disadvantages of the electrolytic approach, yet that was also ignored for precisely the same reason as the P&F work. How does your "miscovery" theory accommodate that fact??
My answer
Two girl students from the Medicine University had a vibrant dispute on some professional subject; one of them had good arguments, the other not at all. Eventually the loser has lost her temper and said angrily: "It is my fault, why I am just discussing in vain with a miserable phtisical nobody!" This real case too has inspired the thinker Mihail Ralea to define intelligence as the art, skill, to not confound , mix the points of view.\
My opponent does this unintelligent error routinely and deliberately; add to this his rather high degree of dislike for a virtue known as Fairness.
First paragraph of his comment: a lot of good researchers were able to replicate Fleischmann and Pons and not only SPAWAR who have massively used creative co-deposition- and this complicates the concept of replication. I have never expressed any doubt regarding the existence per se of the Fleischmann and Pons Effect just said that it cannot be developed and scaled up
because in the cradle cell the effect is incomplete and limited.
It is dishonest to say that I am bitching F&P, on the contrary I am making their laudatio for having discovered the effect even in the worse conditions- an unique merit of their genius.
But this does not change the idea that the effect must be extended in places and with parameters that make it full.
Anonymous does not know which scientific papers I am reading; the truth is that I try very hard to find all to my Readers, and to read the abstracts of all and the complete content of the relevant ones (a difficult choice, not only to me) it is a cheap trick to say - 'you are not reading
the scientific papers' when somebody thinks differently. Anonymous - in how many languages can you read LENR papers? Are you using well Google translate?
The sabotage and oppression of Cold Fusion by what could be called the Hot Fusion Mafia is/was a reality. However they could have been defeated by good, repeatable, reproducible, progressive experimental results. There ere such results but rather sporadically and thy were non-additive. I had the privilege to discuss with Martin Fleischmann (at Asti 1997) the results obtained by him, Stanley Pons and a team at IMRA France well funded by Toyota. NO breakthrough and Pons has abandoned Cold Fusion research. So the hot fusion Mafia had prevailed. Tell me please Anonymous about theory- which theory actually demonstrates beyond any doubt that cold fusion is possible? Define its identity first please!
You are using too freely scientific impartiality" to compare sets of incomplete and inconsistent experimental results - both for Hot and Cold fusion. More things are rotten in both disciplines!
Add to this that LENR is fragmented divided and weakened by infight.
You say about NASA's Pd/D2 system , to which paper publication are you refering exactly?
Equally interesting re the results of the Russian researcher Vitalii Kirkinskii (pleae do a search in my blog)- he works at 600 C has a an Euro patent for a PdD process but as far as I know excess power density is still , 10 W/gram. And the scientist is not communicating- but I try.
My miscovery theory refers to the electrolytic PdD system; sincerely I see no reasons to retract or to dilute it. It is not a sin to be hit by bad luck and it was no error of the Founders.
DAILY NEWS
1) ROSSIS COLD FUSION 2 0 ECAT NEWS
4) New QuarkX Dimensions Show Decreased Power Density
https://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/index.php/Thread/4608-New-QuarkX-Dimensions-Show-Decreased-Power-Density/
5) Rossi Plans Two Presentations of QuarkX, Sweden and USA
http://www.e-catworld.com/2016/11/06/rossi-plans-two-presentations-of-quarkx-sweden-and-usa/
DAILY NOTES
a) About radical, disruptive, deep thinking, not only in LENR
From different reasons the use and popularity of the adjective "radical" are constantly increasing and the polysemantism of the word is augmented for good and for extremely bad and dangerous too. The World needs radical changes made in modes as harmless as possible.
Radicalized means prepared innocent people for an ideal without reason.
Next week we can expect some radical changes to happen; the US elections, the success of Brilliantlightpower based on a very radical theory, my collaboration with Prof. Lev Sapogin whose Unitary Quantum Theory is again really a radical one, as you will see.
To mention that all the 6 pillars of LENR+ are based on radical concepts, deep changes relative to the classic LENR- especially Otherness , Dynamism must e radicalized; Metamorphosis is by definition a radical disruptive transformation.
More in the coming days.
b) A radical answer to an ill-willed and XXXX (censored) Anonymoua
his was his(her?) repeated message re Cold Fusion was a case of miscovery:
Well, for some reason, despite Pons and Fleischmann's "miscovery" of cold fusion, the researchers at SPAWAR were able to replicate it, and improve on it. Perhaps you should spend less time bitching about P&F and more time reading their research papers.
The problems of LENR had zero to do with "miscovery" and everything to do with dirty science politics initiated and continued by the supposed "scientists" of hot fusion who were more worried about competition than they were about actually following the accepted rules and mores of scientific impartiality.
Note that NASA initiated and replicated a gas phase Pd/D2 system which had none of the disadvantages of the electrolytic approach, yet that was also ignored for precisely the same reason as the P&F work. How does your "miscovery" theory accommodate that fact??
My answer
Two girl students from the Medicine University had a vibrant dispute on some professional subject; one of them had good arguments, the other not at all. Eventually the loser has lost her temper and said angrily: "It is my fault, why I am just discussing in vain with a miserable phtisical nobody!" This real case too has inspired the thinker Mihail Ralea to define intelligence as the art, skill, to not confound , mix the points of view.\
My opponent does this unintelligent error routinely and deliberately; add to this his rather high degree of dislike for a virtue known as Fairness.
First paragraph of his comment: a lot of good researchers were able to replicate Fleischmann and Pons and not only SPAWAR who have massively used creative co-deposition- and this complicates the concept of replication. I have never expressed any doubt regarding the existence per se of the Fleischmann and Pons Effect just said that it cannot be developed and scaled up
because in the cradle cell the effect is incomplete and limited.
It is dishonest to say that I am bitching F&P, on the contrary I am making their laudatio for having discovered the effect even in the worse conditions- an unique merit of their genius.
But this does not change the idea that the effect must be extended in places and with parameters that make it full.
Anonymous does not know which scientific papers I am reading; the truth is that I try very hard to find all to my Readers, and to read the abstracts of all and the complete content of the relevant ones (a difficult choice, not only to me) it is a cheap trick to say - 'you are not reading
the scientific papers' when somebody thinks differently. Anonymous - in how many languages can you read LENR papers? Are you using well Google translate?
The sabotage and oppression of Cold Fusion by what could be called the Hot Fusion Mafia is/was a reality. However they could have been defeated by good, repeatable, reproducible, progressive experimental results. There ere such results but rather sporadically and thy were non-additive. I had the privilege to discuss with Martin Fleischmann (at Asti 1997) the results obtained by him, Stanley Pons and a team at IMRA France well funded by Toyota. NO breakthrough and Pons has abandoned Cold Fusion research. So the hot fusion Mafia had prevailed. Tell me please Anonymous about theory- which theory actually demonstrates beyond any doubt that cold fusion is possible? Define its identity first please!
You are using too freely scientific impartiality" to compare sets of incomplete and inconsistent experimental results - both for Hot and Cold fusion. More things are rotten in both disciplines!
Add to this that LENR is fragmented divided and weakened by infight.
You say about NASA's Pd/D2 system , to which paper publication are you refering exactly?
Equally interesting re the results of the Russian researcher Vitalii Kirkinskii (pleae do a search in my blog)- he works at 600 C has a an Euro patent for a PdD process but as far as I know excess power density is still , 10 W/gram. And the scientist is not communicating- but I try.
My miscovery theory refers to the electrolytic PdD system; sincerely I see no reasons to retract or to dilute it. It is not a sin to be hit by bad luck and it was no error of the Founders.
DAILY NEWS
1) ROSSIS COLD FUSION 2 0 ECAT NEWS
2a) Search results- Brilliantlightpower
2b) Adrian Ashfield - thanks! - writes this on Vortex:
There are seven videos at https://www.youtube.com/playli
You can skip the first two that are basic introductions.
The third video is the longest. In it Mills describes his theories and then goes on to describe the SunCell in detail.
The fourth video is short and covers independent verification of energy out.
The fifth video describes the engineering firm contracted to turn the SunCell into a commercial device. They forecast they will have a working model in Jan 2017, a basic prototype by mid year and a commercial unit at the end of 2017.
The sixth video covers the design and possibilities for the PV cells to convert the light energy into electricity.
The seventh video cover their marketing strategy,
I thought Mills argued points for his theory well. I felt the time line for commercial production was optimistic but got the impression that this time they are serious about making commercial units..
You can skip the first two that are basic introductions.
The third video is the longest. In it Mills describes his theories and then goes on to describe the SunCell in detail.
The fourth video is short and covers independent verification of energy out.
The fifth video describes the engineering firm contracted to turn the SunCell into a commercial device. They forecast they will have a working model in Jan 2017, a basic prototype by mid year and a commercial unit at the end of 2017.
The sixth video covers the design and possibilities for the PV cells to convert the light energy into electricity.
The seventh video cover their marketing strategy,
I thought Mills argued points for his theory well. I felt the time line for commercial production was optimistic but got the impression that this time they are serious about making commercial units..
3) Cold fusion.Now site statistics:
https://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/index.php/Thread/4608-New-QuarkX-Dimensions-Show-Decreased-Power-Density/
http://www.e-catworld.com/2016/11/06/rossi-plans-two-presentations-of-quarkx-sweden-and-usa/
AXIL ABOUT HYDRINOS
Mills is very open in describing his technology, far more openly than Rossi has been. Mills is also able to get his ideas patented with no problems. Is that because his theories are based on chemical energy production only? LENR can't get patents through the system and this has caused Rossi to become tight lipped about his tech and looking for IP thieves behind every bush and around every corner.
Its no wonder that Mills has not checked for isotopic changes. A positive result would be the end of his chemistry only ploy and the beginning of his issues with the patent office.
Raising money from investors has been easy for Mills. He has spent 10 million so far on the SunCell. investors buy into his chemistry only ploy.
Come on now, who can believe that 5 megawatts can be generated inside the volume of a teacup using chemistry only. Electron orbitals don't produce that much power. Mills must doubt his hydrino myth when he sees 5 kilograms of tungsten electrodes vaporize in 20 seconds.
Rossi could lose the overunity energy race by being honest about the underpinning of his reaction as Mills sails free and clear into product development, manufacturing, and product release into the market place.
Does Mills really believe in the hydrino or is it a ploy to make his system development easier. Maybe Rossi should also claim that his tech is based on the hydrino, then he can get his stuff patented and everybody can understand it in detail. I am sympathetic about the hydrino for that reason...propaganda.
Its no wonder that Mills has not checked for isotopic changes. A positive result would be the end of his chemistry only ploy and the beginning of his issues with the patent office.
Raising money from investors has been easy for Mills. He has spent 10 million so far on the SunCell. investors buy into his chemistry only ploy.
Come on now, who can believe that 5 megawatts can be generated inside the volume of a teacup using chemistry only. Electron orbitals don't produce that much power. Mills must doubt his hydrino myth when he sees 5 kilograms of tungsten electrodes vaporize in 20 seconds.
Rossi could lose the overunity energy race by being honest about the underpinning of his reaction as Mills sails free and clear into product development, manufacturing, and product release into the market place.
Does Mills really believe in the hydrino or is it a ploy to make his system development easier. Maybe Rossi should also claim that his tech is based on the hydrino, then he can get his stuff patented and everybody can understand it in detail. I am sympathetic about the hydrino for that reason...propaganda.
and
In my time at looking at nuclear reactor design, one key competitive advantage is power density. The more power that a reactor can produce with the smallest input of structural material makes the highest power dense reactor the winner.
The pebble bed reactor never appealed to the electric utilities because it was a low power dense contraption. Customers want economies of scale and minimal structure in plant construction. Its simple, the bigger the plant, the more it costs,
Mills will beat the pants off of Rossi with his 20 watt Quark nonsense. Who wants to buy a megawatt reactor the size of a shipping container when a reactor the size of a breadbox will serve.
Mills has the edge in this race.
LENR IN CONTEXT-1
Weak atomic bond, theorized 14 years ago, observed for first time
The pebble bed reactor never appealed to the electric utilities because it was a low power dense contraption. Customers want economies of scale and minimal structure in plant construction. Its simple, the bigger the plant, the more it costs,
Mills will beat the pants off of Rossi with his 20 watt Quark nonsense. Who wants to buy a megawatt reactor the size of a shipping container when a reactor the size of a breadbox will serve.
Mills has the edge in this race.
LENR IN CONTEXT-1
Weak atomic bond, theorized 14 years ago, observed for first time
Date:November 2, 2016
Source:Purdue University
Summary:
Rydberg molecules are formed when an electron is kicked far from an atom's nucleus. A physicist theorized in 2002 that such a molecule could attract and bind to another atom.
Show the EmDrive works: Inventor of revolutionary 'Star Trek' space thruster reveals all
LENR IN CONTEXT-2
HOW TO BUILD THE FUTURE BY ASKING FOUR FORWARD-FACING QUESTIONS
Peter,
ReplyDeleteI am sorry to say this but after seeing Axil asking questions related to Mills and Hydrinos at the ecatworld blog site, he has lost considerable credibility with myself. He never replied to several suggestions that he go directly to the Mills site (we provided the link), and ask Mills his questions directly. All he would get at ecatworld would be opinions and interpretations.
So, I do not place too much trust in what Axil says about what Mills is doing.
Doug
I'll use a term from my farming childhood......horse puckey.
ReplyDeleteYour comments look not at all like a "laudatio" to me. But at any rate, we heard you the first 100X...so why keep bringing it up??? It accomplishes nothing positive.
Go to E-cat world and page through the history citations. Replication after replication, yet "breakthrough" hasn't happened IN SPITE OF all of that science. So your notion that those blocking LENR can be "defeated" by good science is wrong on its face. It hasn't happened. I think Rossi is right..nothing will change the "powers that be" in academic physics unless it is a commercial device. In this case, science has failed and politics has won.
The gas phase Pd/D2 system was done at NASA Langley, and their writeups are available on the web. George Miley found the same results in his experiments with a ZrO2/Pd/D2 gas phase device.
Drop the phony philosophizing and stick to finding publications not readily available to those of us in the USA and elsewhere. THAT you do well, and that is the sole reason I return to your site. But I do get really, really tired of your pompous ego-stroking self-congratulatory counterproductive blather. It does far more harm than good.
Thanks for the answer- ou style is better than I thought, ou could sign with a more distinctive nickname.
ReplyDeleteObviously oday I (we) have to answer to the C&EN paper-
a forced mix of F&P, Randy Mills, Andrea Rossi and a few of our best men.
You will not like my answer, i predicy.
Anyway, please tell what has dry hot PdD solved from the problems of LENR?
What is the trouble with my blather?
Can you explain what is my sin/error?
peter