The Playground

I remembered some years ago ENEA showed some slides of their work for EU and there was a very interesting gem in there. They had out of say 100 sample found say 5 active (5% sucess rate is in the right ballpark). Then the shiped the samples over the atlantic and a new team tested the samples and reproduced the effect in say 50% of them. But I could not from the slides judge this with a statistical test that told me if this was a say 3 star coincidence. They only plotted the meassured effect on the active samples. Now if the second set of experiments where done on all the samples randomized and blindly, the result would be that the artifact is basically proven as correlating with excess heat, e.g. it is real physics. If they only shiped the active samples for retesting, then the exercise was a waste of time and no proof would result. Anyway I'm verys supsicious of this result because when you experiment and the result is nondeterministic you simply accompany all results with standard deviation and/or p-values together with a discussion of the statistical procedures. Nothing of that sort which made it all look like a work of ignorant people. Medical research, social sciences, agricultural development of crops and cattles all know the importance of good statistical procedures. Why is this field so void of it, (on both sides of the table). Is it ignorance?, lack of resources?, a despice of the methods?, not invented here?

Quote from Dewey Weaver

Sifferkoll - I've just discovered the book you co-wrote and had published in Sweden in 2014. I have a good friend, who is an absolute genius, who suffers from the same syndrome and is very high functioning as long as things stay balanced.

I have sympathy for your struggle and, in all seriousness, do not think that the intensity your participation as one of Rossi's PR warriors is very good for your health or the well-being of your family. I was pursuing legal action for criminal libel against you in Sweden because of all the lies and fabrications that you have posted about me but have ordered that stopped after translating and reading some of your book.

You need to take a break and let the Rossi situation settle to its natural level.

Many who read this will view it as an attack but they will be wrong. You need to ensure that you take care of yourself. I'm backing off of you completely and wish you good health from this day forward.

Display More

Dewey thank you for posting this. I too will not be directing any negativity or sarcasm toward Sifferkoll, and honestly wish him well. I am absolutely not alluding to Sifferkoll not being able to defend himself or anything, I just think this is now a good time to for even us skeptics to play completely nice even on the playground. Nothing negative toward Sifferkoll with this. If anyone can get ahold of Thomas, please tell him the climate has changed a bit lately and it's time for him to come back lol. I think things are going to have a bit calmer tone around here moving forward.

Quote from stefan

Medical research, social sciences, agricultural development of crops and cattles all know the importance of good statistical procedures. Why is this field so void of it, (on both sides of the table). Is it ignorance?, lack of resources?, a despice of the methods?, not invented here?

I don't really know. I wish there were much more statistical analysis. It could come down to any or all of these things. As of 2016, I suspect the professional scientists are running out of steam. My hope is that the hobbyists will pick up the ball and adopt some of the needed methodological rigor, including use of statistical procedures.

stephenrenzz

Quote from stephenrenzz

Thomas, please tell him the climate has changed a bit lately and it's time for him to come back lol. I think things are going to have a bit calmer tone around here moving forward.

Thomas will not post while his details remain here for people to see, they were taken off by Alan and put back on again by Rends so he believes this is an attempt by this forum to 'out' him and so he has gone. If his details disappear, well anything could happen!!!!!

Having said that, I think the link (put back on by Rends) is now 'broken' so I don't know, if this has been interrupted by Thomas he might still be 'miffed' and I see no solution.

Best regards
Frank

Keie once again applies his understanding of the world and how he operates to others. He thinks that everyone lies, is underhanded, is devious, an astroturfer, etc.., etc.. because that is his frame of reference. This is a permanent condition for Keie and several others who post here.

We continue to learn more about many who support Rossi. This will be part of the Rossi legacy, his influence on others and a cornerstone principle once the true "Rossi effect" is outlined and documented.

Renzz - heartfelt and geniune. Thanks for the support.
-Dewey

Thanks Alan. It's very hard not to get drawn in by some of these exchanges and react in ways we can later regret. But that said there is no excuse for those latest exchanges. The respectful thing to do would be to back off with no comment. Sifferkoll had already done that significantly the last days. In this he showed the greater respect.

On June 9, 2016, Abd wrote……
several derogatory comments about my written critiques of SPAWAR CR-39-based conclusions of charged particle and neutron production…such as:
“The only critique I have seen from you, in non-journal discussions, is preposterous…”
“…what you write about simply does not resemble what is actually shown…”
“You point out much that is simply irrelevant to the neutron claims…”

These types of comments indicate Abd’s mindset, namely that my proposal and concerns are always irrelevant and immaterial as far as he’s concerned. He is essentially unteachable, and I won’t try to do that here. But for those interested, please read on…

The SPAWAR folks prepared cathodes for F&P-type cells by chemically reacting Pd in solution to form metallic Pd adhered to a base metallic mesh. The Pd so formed is dendritic (i.e. fern-leaf-like) in appearance. They placed the Pd-coated mesh directly on a CR-39 plate. (CR-39 is a clear polymeric material usually used to make eyeglasses.) CR-39 is known to display pits after being exposed to radiation and then etched (i.e. ‘eaten away’) by concentrated sodium hydroxide for 5-7 hours at 70-90C or so. Longer times give more material removed, and one can ‘depth profile’ the plates by etching and examining in stages. The SPAWAR folks do electrolysis for a while, then remove the plates and etch them and they see many thousands of pits. These pits overlap extensively and appear to cover the surface, although not uniformly. Some of them are ‘triplets’, which has been related to neutron exposure in other controlled experiments with known neutron sources. So, the SPAWAR folks call their triplets ‘neutron created’ also.

That is their first problem. They take a radiation detection device and place it right in the middle of their experiment, as close to the action as is physically possible, and then assume its behavior will be unchanged from the situation where it would be placed in a holder and exposed to radiation at some distance from the source. My *primary* critique of this is that they cannot be certain of this, as there are chemical means to cause the CR-39 to show pits upon etching. That is, I believe, what Abd considers preposterous.

In other forums and papers, I talk about the possibility of either H2 or O2 chemically reacting with the plate material to form a pit nucleation point (normally formed by interaction with the radiation in the normal use situation). The SPAWAR folks did a little work to try to disprove this, but I feel that what they did was inadequate to prove their point.

But that is not really important, as I feel the biggest problem they have is the effect of the FPHE (Fleischmann-Pons-Hawkins Effect, specifically a non-nuclear one) on the material. The biggest factor is the presence of explosions at the CR-39. The SPAWAR folks captured them with an ir video, and have published stills from that, in which they claim the hot spots that form and disappear arise from ‘mini-nuclear explosions’. I on the other hand think they come from chemical ones (H2 + O2), the at-the-electrode recombination I have mentioned before.

What are the typical effects of a nuclear explosion? How about heat, light, radiation, and… a shockwave. A chemical explosion also has heat, light, and a shockwave, no radiation though. What does a shockwave do to matter that it impinges on? Depending on the strength, it often destroys it, by tearing it into pieces. Now the hot spots the SPAWAR folks photographed are about 1 mm in size, pretty small. That size of a mixed H2+O2 bubble isn’t going to develop enough energy to rip the CR-39 apart, but it *might* have enough energy to damage a small point on the surface. That’s all you need to form (or nucleate) an etch pit.

Also, what will happen to the shockwave itself? Depends on how much energy it loses on impact right? It is a ‘wave’, might it not act like one at the CR-39-electrolyte interface? That suggests some of them might even get transmitted through the material to the backside, where you have the reverse transition, but where you also might get more damage. (The SPAWAR folks also see pits on the backside of their plates.)

I might add that the SPAWAR folks have also put their electrodes on piezoelectric crystals and recorded these waves, so we have proof they do exist. I simply contend one needs to consider what they might do to the CR-39 before one jumps to the conclusion the pits *must have* come from radiation. There are no studies of this extant, so we have no idea if what I say is true, but I surmise it probably is, since I believe a correct analysis of their calorimetry would show that no true excess heat is being generated, i.e. no LENR.

With regards to ‘triple tracks’, I have to ask the question “Is there a way to form what appear to be classic triple tracks via these thousands of little shockwaves impinging on the CR-39?” I can’t exclude the possibility, so I am left needing to know more information about this, but of course there isn’t any because this is the first time these plates have been used thusly (applied in an electrolysis cell). So I’m left in limbo, waiting for experiments that likely never will be done because CFers always assume that “it must be nuclear”.

So let’s summarize. SPAWAR says there are mini-explosions occurring at the electrode. They have photographed them and recorded them via a piezoelectric crystal signal. CR-39 placed in close proximity to the electrode can be etched to show many thousands of pits, some of which appear to be ‘triplets’. They assume since CR-39 can be used to detect radiation, that their pits come from radiation. They do not consider the essentially physical mechanism to nucleate etch pits. I propose the explosions *can* nucleate etch pits. They deem my explanation ‘preposterous’ to borrow a word from Abd.

You can make your own choice, but I will wait for someone to investigate this, or for someone to come up with a completely reproducible method to get CF from these systems, before I abandon my ideas.

Keie - I have you so pegged. You intentionally misinterpret and twist everything I post. My post is sincere, the opposite of a threat and intentionally well meaning. Remember - with every post - you're "The Man in the Mirror".

Everyone is in the mirror here. And we all learn something about ourselves and have to live with the cosequences of what we write. Keieueue for what it's worth I also felt uncomfortable reading that post what ever his intent. I don't know if he meant well or bad but for sure I didn't like it and did not see why he needed to write it. But if their intent is as you say then responding like you did is only playing into their hands.

I just respect Sifferkoll 100% more now what ever the story is.

Quote from StephenC

And we all learn something about ourselves and have to live with the cosequences of what we write.

Not if you use a fake name, or you are anonymous. In that case you can say anything you like with no consequences.

Quote from Keieueue

This is plain character assassination, veiled threats and abuse, how do you expect anyone who gets the undertone to respond to this?

Sifferkoll apparently wrote a book about his own condition. How can it be a threat to quote what he said about himself?

I guess when you doxx others you can't be surprised to get doxxed but two wrongs don't make one right.

Now, 3 lefts, that does make 1 right.