Piantelli theory - avoiding absorption

Quote from Zephir_AWT

I didn't link anything about superconductivity in this thread. Could you be more specific, please?

Axil's post that you quoted contained, "the whiskers provide a one direction superconductive current flow ..." in association with SPPs on whiskers. As I said, superconductivity is useless at high frequencies which includes SPPs (the Meissner effect is a DC effect). Given the extrapolations of room temperature superconductor behavior based on performance of high temperature Type II superconductors (80-100K) compared to Type 1 superconductors (4-40K), it is not hard to understand why RT superconductivity would be hard to detect. The extrapolation suggests that room temperature superconductors would be worthless in ordinarily conceived uses. There may be new uses for a RT superconductor, but its properties will be crappy compared to what we think of as superconductors.

Sometimes I think Axil's posts are coming from a computer that has access to physics books - where the computer makes up ridiculous stories from clips in the books. That computer would not pass the Turing test.

Quote from BobHiggins

Given the extrapolations of room temperature superconductor behavior based on performance of high temperature Type II superconductors (80-100K) compared to Type 1 superconductors (4-40K), it is not hard to understand why RT superconductivity would be hard to detect. The extrapolation suggests that room temperature superconductors would be worthless in ordinarily conceived uses. There may be new uses for a RT superconductor, but its properties will be crappy compared to what we think of as superconductors.

@Bob: I guess you will soon have to revise your jugement. One parameter people often overlook is the pressure. Low pressure is far more important than low temperature as it comes to a surface! I suggest you to buy an ultra vacuum pump.

May be you know the following paper. It's a good sunday afternoon starter for a "Aha Erlebenis", as Germans say...

http://vixra.org/pdf/1405.0015v1.pdf

Quote from BobHiggins

[quote='Zephir_AWT','https://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/index.php/Thread/4442-Piantelli-theory-avoiding-absorption/?postID=40521#post40521']

Sometimes I think Axil's posts are coming from a computer that has access to physics books - where the computer makes up ridiculous stories from clips in the books. That computer would not pass the Turing test.

The Axil computer has made a prediction that pure lithium 7 is required to produce the LENR reaction. If you discount the axil computer, then MFMP will not be sucessful in producing the LENR reaction. So sad.

/* Sometimes I think Axil's posts are coming from a computer that has access to physics books */

@BobHiggins Axil simply ignores / doesn't remember the context: he just promotes the idea, which he did listen last week. And I also linked his post from the same reason (i.e. out of context of this thread). AxilAxil just labeled my comment about whiskers as a "word salad" - so I linked his own comment, where he favors this idea instead. This doesn't imply, that I support the text cited in some way.

/* The Axil computer has made a prediction that pure lithium 7 is required to produce the LENR reaction. */

Negative. Norman Cook has a theory involving Li-7, but he never required its isotopic purity.
BTW Where did you predict it (link)? N. Cook has published it 6 Apr 2015... You're on the internet, man - everything is checkable...

Quote from Zephir_AWT

/* The Axil computer has made a prediction that pure lithium 7 is required to produce the LENR reaction. */

Negative. Norman Cook has a theory involving Li-7, but he never required its isotopic purity.
BTW Where did you predict it (link)? N. Cook has published it 6 Apr 2015... You're on the internet, man - everything is checkable...

If I spent all my time feeding you links, I would just be feeding your intellectual laziness. You are not worth that investment. so sorry. Well, you can lead a horse to water, but you cannot make him drink.