Clearance Items

Quote from AlainCo

the Library of Alexandria of the domain

In memoriam 48 BC

Got backup?

"Forbidden Nuclear Reactions" [eg impurity assisted nuclear second order processes] - https://arxiv.org/pdf/1902.04398.pdf

[with the aid of "Quantum Theory of Dissociative Chemisorption on Metal" - https://www.researchgate.net/p…ve_Chemisorption_on_Metal]

Quote from JedRothwell

It is not clear whether they followed a known successful setup. Some experts say they advised Google but Google ignored them. Others seem to think Google may be close to success. There is not enough detail in the paper for me to judge.

If they did ignore the literature and experts, they screwed the pooch. I would suspect ill intention in that case, but Hanlon's law may apply: "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity."

For sure, none of the Google researchers followed the best known successful setup: the boil off experiment performed by F&P in April-May 1992 (1). Had they done so, they would surely have obtained the exact same behavior documented in the following video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mBAIIZU6Oj8

However, Google people knew that this experiment was the most reliable among those performed by the CF pioneers and that it was widely praised by the old guard and by all LENR supporters until recently. In fact, ref.12 in Nature paper cites the article published in 2009 by Krivit and Marwan, which presents the 1992 F&P experiment in this very positive way (2): "By 1993, Fleischmann and Pons had developed such control of their experiments, particularly the cathode material, that they had the confidence and ability to set up a row of four cells side by side and initiate anomalous-heat reactions on all four at will."

So, if Trevithick's intention is really to solve the mystery of cold fusion, all he has to do is asking Google to fund an adequate replica of this single crucial experiment. It's not at all difficult, nor too expensive. There is plenty of documentation on this experimental setup. They can replicate it very accurately. Replicators should just add a simple instrument to continuously monitor the cell weight in order to directly measure the electrolyte mass, so that they can derive the correct trend of the energy lost by evaporation along the whole experiment.

The running of the 1992 setup will certainly exhibit the same experimental behavior reported by F&P in their ICCF3 paper and documented in the various available versions of their lab video (3).

But …

But when Google replicators will recalculate the heat balance based on the actual trend of the water mass inside the cell, they will not find any excess heat at all, contrary to what reported by F&P in their ICCF3 paper and subsequent documents. At that point they will realize the true reason of the "subsequent failures to reproduce the effect" mentioned in their Nature's paper and will understand why the FPHE is just a foamy illusion.

(1) http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/Fleischmancalorimetra.pdf

(2) http://newenergytimes.com/v2/l…ivit-S-ANewLookAtLENR.pdf

(3) FP's experiments discussion

PS - If they start preparing the setup right now, they might be able to show the results at the next ICCF22 in Assisi.

As so often happens in Russ George's blog, technical detail is minimal. His discussion of the Nature article largely involves personal reminiscences that portray him as already having explored much of the territory that the authors of the article are now publishing on.

Has Russ George published any of this work? He says he has given talks and so on, but these are ephemera. Has he published any of it?

Kinda like how e-catworld doesn't upset the peace with Rossi?

Quote from Bruce__H

Has Russ George published any of this work? He says he has given talks and so on, but these are ephemera. Has he published any of it?

He has published 7 papers as far as I know. The most recent one was in 2000. See:

https://lenr-canr.org/wordpress/?page_id=1081

In the "All Authors" box, enter "George, R." The paper 2014 is by another person George, Robert.

The 1994 paper is an interview with Srinivasan. I recommend it.

L

Quote from Alan Smith

Thanks Jed. Bruce knew that - or perhaps he has a short memory.

It must be a short memory. How would I know?

Quote from Alan Smith

Just ask Matron.

I phrased my question awkwardly. I'll try again.

Why would you think that I know what papers Russ George has published?

Quote from Bruce__H

I know what papers Russ George has published?

You know now.

Russ G has cold fusion in his bones.

Quote from Bruce__H

It must be a short memory. How would I know?

"You could look it up." - Casey Stengel

"That's why God gave us the Internet and the MySQL index file system -- so's you can look it up." - me

Quote from Alan Smith

Thanks Jed. Bruce knew that - or perhaps he has a short memory.

I still don't understand this comment. Did you previously mention George's publications to me? Is that what I have forgotten?

Quote from JedRothwell

He has published 7 papers as far as I know. The most recent one was in 2000. See:

https://lenr-canr.org/wordpress/?page_id=1081

Hi Jed. I hadn't appreciated that your database is so user friendly. It's terrific!

Among the Russ George publications ... what is the nature of the ones that do not have links? They also do not show have citation information. I am thinking of the ones between 1995-97 with record numbers 1362, 1363, and 1341.

If anyone is still interested, I am continuing the discussion of blood testing from a drop of blood and Theranos here. The claim by one or more posters was that there are ways to do hundreds or thousands of tests on a drop of blood. As I responded, that is true but sort of trivial. These are not every day clinical laboratory tests but rather immunoassays or DNA SNIP identifications. See for example: https://medicalfuturist.com/wh…blood-testing-stand-today and https://www.genalyte.com/6-blo…g-startups-next-theranos/

The multi billion dollar prize will go to whoever is the first to perform on a single drop of blood the actual tests used to evaluate health in a clinical laboratory setting. According to Scripps Health, these would include (in no particular order):

Comprehensive metabolic panel (see below)

Vitamin D 25-Hydroxy,

TSH (thyroid stimulating hormone) test

Complete blood count (CBC)

HbA1C (blood sugar)

Occult blood in stool and urinalysis

HDL and LDL levels

High sensitivity C-reactive protein

NMR Lipoprotein testing (advanced cholesterol test)

Prostate specific antigen – PSA (men)

----------

The comprehensive metabolic panel (CMP) is a frequently ordered panel of 14 tests that gives a healthcare provider important information about the current status of a person's metabolism, including the health of the kidneys and liver, electrolyte and acid/base balance as well as levels of blood glucose and blood proteins. Abnormal results, and especially combinations of abnormal results, can indicate a problem that needs to be addressed.

The CMP includes the following tests:

Glucose - energy source for the body; a steady supply must be available for use, and a relatively constant level of glucose must be maintained in the blood.

Calcium - one of the most important minerals in the body; it is essential for the proper functioning of muscles, nerves, and the heart and is required in blood clotting and in the formation of bones.

Proteins

Albumin - a small protein produced in the liver; the major protein in serum

Total Protein - measures albumin as well as all other proteins in serum

Electrolytes

Sodium - vital to normal body processes, including nerve and muscle function

Potassium - vital to cell metabolism and muscle function

CO2 (carbon dioxide, bicarbonate) - helps to maintain the body's acid-base balance (pH)

Chloride - helps to regulate the amount of fluid in the body and maintain the acid-base balance

Kidney Tests

BUN (blood urea nitrogen) - waste product filtered out of the blood by the kidneys; conditions that affect the kidney have the potential to affect the amount of urea in the blood.

Creatinine - waste product produced in the muscles; it is filtered out of the blood by the kidneys so blood levels are a good indication of how well the kidneys are working.

Liver Tests

ALP (alkaline phosphatase) - enzyme found in the liver and other tissues, bone; elevated levels of ALP in the blood are most commonly caused by liver disease or bone disorders.

ALT (alanine amino transferase, also called SGPT) - enzyme found mostly in the cells of the liver and kidney; a useful test for detecting liver damage

AST (aspartate amino transferase, also called SGOT) - enzyme found especially in cells in the heart and liver; also a useful test for detecting liver damage

Bilirubin - waste product produced by the liver as it breaks down and recycles aged red blood cells

https://labtestsonline.org/tes…nsive-metabolic-panel-cmp

The above are the tests in common use world wide in clinical labs. If you know of a company contemplating making a machine which can perform a worthwhile subset of these on a drop of blood, I'd love to see the reference and the link. And I would certainly invest if credible testing had been done and appropriately reported. But then again, so would every venture capitalist be willing. Yet, this is what Theranos was implying they could deliver. Why else would they have been valued in the billions? For performing esoterica?

Quote from seven_of_twenty

These are not every day clinical laboratory tests but rather immunoassays or DNA SNIP identifications.

The multi billion dollar prize will go to whoever is the first to perform on a single drop of blood the actual tests used to evaluate health in a clinical laboratory setting. According to Scripps Health, these would include (in no particular order):

Comprehensive metabolic panel (see below)

Vitamin D 25-Hydroxy,

TSH (thyroid stimulating hormone) test

Complete blood count (CBC)

HbA1C (blood sugar)

Occult blood in stool and urinalysis

HDL and LDL levels

High sensitivity C-reactive protein

NMR Lipoprotein testing (advanced cholesterol test)

Prostate specific antigen – PSA (men)

Display More

It would seem that all the tests on the comprehensive metabolic panel can be performed by immunoassay nowadays - even blood counts. For TSH, immunoassay is now the recommended testing method, and the others are either regular tested by immunoassay, or such tests are being assesed for accuracy by researchers.

And is the "NMR" lipoprotein test really all that necessary, or are Scripps Health just trying to cash in with expensive tests? The Havard Medical School seems to think so:

"It sounds like you had advanced lipoprotein testing, which is a more detailed and also more expensive version of a standard cholesterol or lipid test. In general, I'm not a fan of this type of testing, because there is no solid evidence that the results are useful in any concrete way or provide information that can improve a person's health." https://www.health.harvard.edu…ipoprotein-testing-useful

I would imagine that Genalyte already use several immunoassays from the above list in the 60 or so tests they currently perform.