It's fine to downmod posts if you like but you will gain more respect if you (also) try to refute what the post says with data and evidence and conclusions of your own. How do you know IH and Woodford did any vetting of Rossi apart from the Swedish blind mice and Levi? DO you have evidence that they ever sought to consider contrary opinions? Rossi's extensive criminal record? Rossi's record of nothing but failures? No products that ever became widely accepted? The thermoelectric project fiasco with DOD? Did they even know about those? And we know that how? Did you ask Darden? I would but I am sure I would get no more answer from him than from Woodford. He is even less candid and accessible except in softball and meaningless interviews. Well... I hope we will hear him in court now that Rossi burned him.
Jed Rothwell on an Unpublished E-Cat Test Report that “Looks Like it Worked”
-
-
@Mary Yugo
Nuclear measurements are much more sensitive than calorimetry. You must consider that producing one joule of energy needs 6,24 exp 12 beta or alpha 1 MeV events. A nuclear measurement expert can detect very few particles in a second. Cold fusionists must face reproducibility problems and still insist on using calorimetric measurements. Detecting neutrons or gamma rays is very easy and doesn't require pipes, probes, wet or dry vapour. This is old, good, classical Technical Physics, very interesting and very useful, but not in cold fusion, where sensitivity matters and nuclear events are claimed.We won't see neutrons or gamma rays, but we will see muons.
Plastic or glass scintillator is mated using optical glue and shaped fittings to PMTs. The scintillators are covered with reflective material (aluminum foil works) and then with black paper and tape to make them "light-tight."They are hooked up to the DAQ which feeds into the parallel port of a computer. When a muon passes through the scintillator, it causes a few photons to be emitted by impurities in the scintillator material. These are picked up by the PMTs, converted to an electrical pulse and amplified. Each PMT sends its signal to the DAQ.
Muon Counting Experiment
When counting muons, the DAQ looks for "coincidences"—two signals (one from each PMT) which are received within a very short time. These are reported to the computer; all other signals are vetoed as likely noise from the PMTs. The computer can count the number of muons that come in over an interval to get a rate count.
-
-
It's fine to downmod posts
I usually downvote posts which express hate, or repeat silly FUD, or non qualified citations like i asked sometime somebody, what seems to be your prime qualification.
Why does Jed fear the truth? Because he knows, that he doesn't know, he has it!! In your case it's the other way round. You are the truth!
In the case of BLP: Just wait if they deliver! If you like to criticize theories, then there are much better candidates than Mill's. He is, at least, not way off.
-
@Mary Yugo
QuoteWe won't see neutrons or gamma rays, but we will see muons.
Sorry lady Yugo, I don't understand.
Where and when do you see muons? -
I am convinced that IH relied on the Swedish professors and Levi and maybe the opinion of someone like Jim Dunn of Defkalion fame or perhaps the overoptimistic Dr. Mike Melich. Obviously I don't know.
If you don't know then why are you "convinced"? This is contradictory. I suggest you say "I suspect" or "I have reason to believe" or "it seems to me." You should not be convinced of things you do not know much about. You were not privy to the discussions with Woodford. You have no idea who told who, what or when.I have slightly more information than you do. Based on that, I think you are wrong about the overall situation. That is to say, I know that I.H. was dissatisfied with Rossi at the time Woodford was meeting with them. Knowing what I know about business, I think it is unlikely I.H. misrepresented their views. I think Woodford would find out sooner or later and then he would demand his money back, and sue them if they refused to return it. As I said, if over the next few years Woodford does not demand his money back, you should consider that evidence that your hypothesis is wrong, and that Woodford was aware of the risks of dealing with Rossi.
-
@Eric Walker
I fully agree. Let me add that conversion electrons are ruled by the electromagnetic force, while beta decay is ruled by the weak force. They are completely different phenomena.Have you heard about electroweak unification?
Here is some info.
-
Quote
In the case of BLP: Just wait if they deliver! If you like to criticize theories, then there are much better candidates than Mill's. He is, at least, not way off.
Nonsense! We've been waiting more than twenty years since Mills said it would be within a year that commercial level power could be demonstrated from his reaction. Nobody within reputable science believes there are hydrinos. By the way, where can I go to buy a few? My home gets cold in the winter and I'd love to have a Rossi ecat or a Mills whatevertheycallit to heat the place up.
-
Jed, I am not questioning that IH was "satisfied with Rossi". I am saying they hired the wrong people or relied on the wrong people to get that satisfaction. ("I can't get... no... satisfaction!" )And while I have no evidence they used the Swedes and Levi, some of what Darden wrote at the time strongly suggested it. "I am convinced" is just a stronger version of "I suspect". Obviously, if I had evidence about who IH consulted, I'd tell it.
-
Jed, I am not questioning that IH was "satisfied with Rossi". I am saying they hired the wrong people or relied on the wrong people to get that satisfaction.
I do not think they were satisfied with him. I do not know who they hired, or who they relied on, or what they learned. I doubt that you know that either.One thing I have learned from life is that when you speculate about events you know nothing about, you are often completely wrong. What's worse is that you have no idea just how wrong you are. Even powerful, well-informed people make big mistakes. I have read some detailed history books describing US intelligence in 1941 and 1942, including the analyses of Japanese naval strategy. They include top-level declassified memos written for FDR. I happen to know about this subject because the people who taught me Japanese history and language in the 1970s were WWII intelligence veterans on both sides. (I mean U.S. and Japanese vets at Cornell and Okayama U.) The thing that strikes me about these top-level memos is that some of them were completely - utterly - absolutely - 100% wrong, even though the people who wrote them were brilliant and they knew a great deal about Japan.
It seems odd that people would risk $11 million on Rossi, but to people who have billions of dollars perhaps it was worth the risk. As I said, the people at I.H. agree with those who say that Rossi reignited interest in cold fusion, and in the end this fiasco may benefit them. It seems like a huge price to pay, but I am not a billionaire or a venture capitalist, and those people are. I defer to their expertise in matters relating to moola.
-
@Joshua Crude
QuoteIt doesn't matter how many times you say it's not a conspiracy theory, it *is* a conspiracy theory. It's obvious the reason you are so reluctant to describe it in any detail is because the more you say about it, the more conspiratorial it appears.
Indeed.
Ascoli65:QuoteSuppose for a moment that one entity hired Rossi.
Wouldn't that be a conspiracy? Ascoli65 may be a reductionist but he describes real conspiracies where Rossi occupies an important role. He says they are "machineries", but things don't change changing a word. -
-
Weak and electromagnetic force were separated after 10^-10 s after the big bang.
Do you think that internal conversion is ruled by electroweak force?If the presence of a high EMF field the EMF and weak force come together. High EMF fields can effect the weak force.
EMF and Weak force ubifcation happens at 100GeV.
-
Okay, okay, I made that stuff up. But heck, why not? Sifferkoll makes up stuff about me and others and posts it here, so from now on when he does that, I think we should throw this unfounded nonsense at him.)Is it really making things up to state that you and others spend your days spouting vitriolic FUD, when there are a lot of other knowlegdeable people saying that yes, Rossi has the goods? don't think so; it's merely an observation that you and others are FUDders.
But why? for hired social engineers disguised or not as false researchers, it's their job, for cultists and jealous researchers irate that Rossi is ahead (while being merely a "garage tinkerer"), it's emotional distress, but for you, who are supposedly dedicated to the LENR cause as a well-known librarian? did they convince you this field would only progress with Rossi out and gave you funding money for your projects and your friends? do they have dirt on you? did you get threatened, maybe by entities different from IH -there are precedents of people being vocal in the LENR community who got silenced, through different means, including assassination-?
You can probably understand how your behavior does not compute and raises a lot of questions, especially since the sole proof you bring is "Rothwell says", and what Rothwell says is repetitive mantras "travesty...farce...gadget...bad calorimetry..."
-
I fully agree. Let me add that conversion electrons are ruled by the electromagnetic force, while beta decay is ruled by the weak force. They are completely different phenomena.
Perhaps you're responding to something I said that led you to believe that I didn't understand that the electromagnetic force and weak force are completely different phenomena. If you could quote what I said, I'll be happy to clarify the matter for you. -
For the F&P reaction neutrons are the hallmark. No neutrons, no reaction. Looking for a few neutrons is easier than looking for millijoules. If you can measure heat easily in a F&P reactor, then you will be killed by neutrons soon.
In the fusing of deuterons, d(d,*), neutrons a hallmark. There are two main branches, as you know, d(d,n)3He and d(d,p)t. There's also the rare branch that produces a gamma: d(d,ɣ)4He. It's been a matter of speculation for decades now on the part of some that (1) the rare branch predominates, but (2) the gamma is entirely suppressed. To this day, many people still believe that deuterons are fusing somehow.If the original branches were at play, you'd get neutrons in spades; and even with the rare gamma branch, you'd get lots and lots of gammas. So scientists in the early 1990's rejected the fusing of deuterons as an explanation (correctly, in my view) both because of the missing neutrons and because of the missing gammas. You are correct, and I'm correct.
If there is genuine excess heat in the F&P effect (and there's lots of reason to think there is), the only conclusion to be drawn is that these branches aren't occurring. The solution to this dilemma is straightforward: one must look for something else. This does not rule out the rare 4He-producing branch together with the suppression of gammas. But I'm drawn to (almost any) other possibilities.
-
If you could permanently place 11 electrons inside the Pd104 nucleus, I calculate that the fission reaction you propose woulld be enhanced by 103 orders of magnitude which is still not enough to make any measurable heat.
If fragmentation is occurring by some kind of transitory electron screening, this would explain why excess heat is often not seen in PdD systems — palladium isn't the fuel in any appreciable amount, and deuterium isn't the fuel. Perhaps there needs to be something heavier lying around for significant fragmentation/alpha decay to occur.I like your idea about platinum being involved. Does the experimental evidence suggest that the palladium cathode is the sole site of heat production? It's interesting that platinum (as a heater or temperature sensor) is also used in the Ni/H system ...
Along these lines, one question I've had is where does the excess heat arise in a PdD electrolytic system? Does it arise only at the cathode, or does it also arise at the anode? This is a basic question that should have been explored early on, rather than assuming that everything happens at the cathode, although characterizing this might not be easy to do. -
@Eric Walker
QuoteAlong these lines, one question I've had is where does the excess heat arise in a PdD electrolytic system?
You can read about excess heat only in Jed Rothwell's collections and in the various ICCF. Nothing about that exists in the ordinary nuclear data banks. Jed Rothwell's accurate list has nothing to do with Generally Accepted Science represented by EXFOR. They are two parallel worlds. As for me, I only rely on Exfor.
The first excitation function for dd I have found dates back to 1946, seventy years ago.J.H.Manley, J.H.Coon, E.R.Graves
Cross section of D(d,n)3He reaction
Physical Review; Vol.70, p.101(A3) 1946Is this the first paper on this interesting and useful nuclear reaction? I don't know.
-
I was talking about the possible conflict of interest affecting the academic world and other public research institute, not the individuals (you and me included) or the private sector. These last ones are free to use their own time and risk their own money at will, they have just to respect the laws.Understood. And I'm now referring to any potential conflicts that you might have that might be influencing your public posturing on the LENR topic. You avoided my question. Avoiding or refusing to answer questions like this tends to speak volumes, at least to me. Jed refused to answer similar questions about whether IH had ever given him money or other forms of compensation in the past. Dewey kept switching my question to the present tense, i.e., such as IH *is* not (presently) compensating Jed. When I pressed a little harder about whether this had happened in the past, Dewey promptly disappeared from the forum and Jed got upset with me and refused to answer me. These words and actions mean something. And your avoidance of my question also means something. So I'll ask again in a slightly different way: do you have any conflict of interest (financial or scientific) that would impact your ability to be impartial in your views with respect to a commercially viable source of LENR energy rolled out on a massive scale?
-
Quote from "Jed"
Don't deny it! We know that for a fact.
Well, Jed. Thing is; I dont deny that I believe I will benefit from Rossi building a plant in Sweden, do I? You on the other hand is a simple dodging hypochrite...
