Clearance Items

  • I would appreciate it if whoever changed part of my last post to light green, that is almost illegible, would change it back to black.

    If you don't like what I wrote, how about the three posts above that were the reason for my comments?

    AA

  • Exciting news! Adrian has joined the ranks of all the folks throughout the years who have secret info (nudge nudge, wink wink) about Rossi. It must be great to be part of the in crowd.

    More fake news fro interested observer.

    There seems to be some disagreement about what constitutes a "fact". According to some people, apparently anything that Rossi says qualifies. Others have a different opinion.

    There is no disagreement, I don't know of anybody that thinks everything Rossi says is a fact. Yet more fake news from interested observer.

  • If you are not going to support claims you make, you will be ignored, plain and simple. If you do not mind that you are ignored, there is no further issue.



    I encourage you to double-check the neutron-electron mass ratio calculation and determine for yourself whether it falls outside of the CO-DATA value and error bounds; and, if so, to conclude what you will from this detail about the accuracy of Mills's theoretical apparatus.


    (1) i asked a question. i did not receive a response. allow me to repeat the question. what is my REWARD for aiding and assisting people in their research into Mill's background vis-a-vis "NMR"?


    (2) i have made no claims. please do not put words into my mouth. i have provided people with some background and insight which helped *me* to understand where Mills is coming from.


    also, there is something that you need to understand about me:


    (1) i am not permitted to change other people's belief. i have ethical rules that i am ABSOLUTELY honour-bound to follow, with severe consequences for me should i ignore them. these ethical rules are not up for negotiation, regardless of threats of "consequences".


    (2) a "threat" of "being ignored plain and simple" only works "against" me if i have anything to lose by such a threat. what will i "lose" by quotes being ignored quotes? please provide me with a list so that i can assess the "damage" and make an informed decision.



    regarding your second statement: i notice that you have made a logical reasoning flaw, which i believe falls into the "correlation is not causation" category (or similar) at the very least, you claim that "Because One Hypothesis Is Wrong THE ENTIRE 1700 PAGE DOCUMENT OF WORK MUST BE FLAWED".


    you've been here a while: you're a senior member. you *know* that's horsepoo, so please take a moment to reflect on that, ok? right now, senior member or not, you're severely decreasing the signal-to-noise ratio of this thread. as a senior member with a reputation here (i.e. lots of people who respect and follow you), you may not *like* the fact that i am making you aware of that, so, again, i invite you to reflect on that - carefully - before responding further.

  • i wrote a reply... it appears not to have been posted. i REALLY hope that this was a mistake on my part rather than censorship by LENR.


    If you are not going to support claims you make, you will be ignored, plain and simple. If you do not mind that you are ignored, there is no further issue.



    I encourage you to double-check the neutron-electron mass ratio calculation and determine for yourself whether it falls outside of the CO-DATA value and error bounds; and, if so, to conclude what you will from this detail about the accuracy of Mills's theoretical apparatus.


    let me try to keep it brief (because it took a long time the first time, and the signal-to-noise ratio is being rapidly degraded having to deal with you, eric, and is taking up a lot of my time).


    you are completely misunderstanding my motivation, eric. you are also not answering my questions, which are not rhetorical. this has not gone unnoticed. i have a goal, it is a "third person" desire: the "threat" you raise that "i will be ignored plain and simple" holds a zero weighting in the decision-making matrix by which i make informed assessments.


    the second paragraph: you may be a senior member but that does not exempt you from making cognitively-dissonant assessments. looking at the electron theoretically-derived figures: they're accurate to within current CODATA (12dp). looking at the neutron theoretically derived figures: they're not accurate to within current CODATA. all that we should conclude from this is: the hypothesis about what is going on inside the neutron is wrong. that's all


    however you do not QUALIFY your statement, you make the BLANKET statement that is interpreted as ALL of "Mill's theoretical apparatus" is bogus.


    clearly this is false, and, as a senior member, i am fairly certain that you know it's false.


    so we may logically conclude that, despite you being a senior member you are deliberately out to cause trouble, wasting both my time, your time, and the time of everyone whom you are forcing to read and correct you. the only reason i'm answering rather than hitting "ignore" is because you ought to know better. however if you continue down this path, it's quite likely that you'll be the one that's ignored. given your longer standing on this forum that may hold a much larger weight for you than it would for anyone else, so i leave you to think about that, ok?

  • Your reply was moved to the "Clearance Items."


    right. so you're now enacting censorship, is that correct? being unable to answer, and having had your inability to logically reason pointed out to you, publicly, you choose to CENSOR?


    you know what the consequences of going down that road, are, don't you.

  • I'm having a hard time having a normal discussion with you, lkcl . The reason I have not replied to your posts is because I have disengaged. It is proving difficult to establish basic points and to rely on earlier remarks having been understood and their implications grasped. But more importantly I urge you to change your tone.


    (This is not censorship, as people can see your posts and judge for themselves why they were moved.)

  • Ok Director, I am sorry for being a naughty boy. But your description was a bit meager. I was looking for a plurality of gigantic objects. The thing that you can see through the tube is only singular. If it is gigantic or not could of course be a matter of opinion. To me it isn't.


    As for Alan's recommendation to catch up on my background reading I must say that I have done enough of that to be as certain as certain can be that there is no nuclear fusion in Ross's little plasma lamp. If it were, Rossi had been long dead. To grasp how anybody can believe this requires background studies in an entirely different science than physics, I think.


    Alan, are you sure that I am the troll here? Maybe you should look in a different Direction? Perhaps I am no troll but a lonely little candle trying to spread a minimum of light in the darkness?

  • H-G, you have made some excellent points in the past, e.g., in the discussion of the SPAWAR thermography; observations for which I am personally grateful. Your tongue-in-cheek tone and your flip replies are understandably grating for some, however. I suggest your observations will be more effective, better received and less distracting for people if you restrict yourself to technical points, made without humorous embellishment.


    (The forum has started to be more strict about things, and being grating is not a good thing.)

  • i'm sorry, eric, i don't let bullies and censors get away with their actions.

    Your previous reply was moved to the "Clearance Items," as was the one above.


    that constitutes censorship, eric - it's called bullying, and it has consequences. by claiming that you wish to follow the principles of scientific and academic enquiry yet then enacting CENSORSHIP when someone points out logical flaws and cognitive dissonance, that has consequences: it means that your reputation is now completely destroyed.


    now, i do not have any reputation to uphold, and you have crossed the ethical line here which is the "red flag to a bull" for me. you can continue down this route, continuing to enact CENSORSHIP, or you can apologise - publicly - and restore all the comments that you have censored.


    this will go some way towards restoring peoples' trust in you that you have very quickly betrayed, and restoring your standing on this forum.

  • I have not been posting since i feel it would not add to what we do here. But I will defend both Eric and Alan.

    It is not a nice job. If you want to talk to someone directly you can use the chat function on this website.


    BTW

    When I get soo pissed at other members I take a break. I do not come here to listen to my own opinions about 'say' Rossi but to learn and ask questions.

    I have had my posts moved here before, I got over it.

  • Eric Walker,


    I have to balk at the term, unsupported claim. The AATIP released multiple videos along with additional supporting evidence of the encounter between two F-18 Super Hornet Fighters and one of these anomalous vehicles. They conducted a serious investigation including the collection of radar tapes, gun camera footage, interviews with the pilots, etc. To be clear here, the official conclusion of the AATIP (not some crackpot UFO organization but an actual Department of Defense program ran at the Pentagon) is that this vehicle, along with several others, represents an extremely advanced technology beyond anything known to be possessed in the arsenal of the United States or any other nation. This isn't conjecture, speculation, or some guess.


    I find it outrageous that when a Republican or Democrat know-nothing in the Whitehouse makes some politicized claim (whether it is demonizing marijuana as a brain frying drug or pushing the false notion of Saddam Hussein having chemical weapons or some other delusion) it's accepted without question. However, when an official Department of Defense program being ran by top notch experts with the help of highly educated PhD level consultants, evidence based conclusions are looked at with disdain and generally scoffed at.


    At this point there's literally not much left to happen but for Trump to have the State of the Union address in a deep dark bunker, with the Roswell craft on one side and alien bodies on the other. Literally, that's the situation! We're beyond IF there are anomalous craft in our skies. Moreover, we're beyond if they could be anything remotely conventional. These things have performance that are out of this world -- and our military ADMITS IT!


    For once, we're not being told these things are weather balloons, swamp gas, reflections, or misinterpretations. We're being told the TRUTH! However, since the population has been CONDITIONED by propaganda to think there's something inherently snake oily about UFOs, individuals like yourself still are displaying skepticsm when there's no room left to dismiss the "whole" phenomenon. Yep, there are a ton of misinterpretations out there; lots of strange lights are ordinary aircraft, ball lightning (not UFOs enshrouding themselves with spheromaks), and weather phenomenon. But now we know there's a legitimate sub-set which represent something amazing, phenomenal, and literally AWE INSPIRING!


    Are we going to let the mental brain-washing of the CIA controlled media continue to dictate our response to this issue?


    I'm not trying to be argumentative here. But if humanity's going to advance forward, when presented with such factual disclosures by top notch experts, backed by evidence we can analyze ourselves, we have to shake off our conditioning and simply tell the skeptics the truth: at this point, you're the ones who are irrational.

  • No, let's avoid all rationality. Let's just go on believing that all official admissions by our government, backed by facts, are blatantly false when they involve UFOs. Moreover, let's all just put our hands over our eyes and plugs over our ears as more disclosures take place as this year moves forward. And, not matter what, we can't allow ourselves to look even the least bit silly in the eyes of the pseudo-skeptic worshipers of Philip J. Klass.

  • Director  

    "Let's just go on believing that all official admissions by our government, backed by facts, are blatantly false when they involve UFOs."


    "...with the Roswell craft on one side and alien bodies on the other."


    Please, look for other "Phenomena-Fora / UFO" in your favourite search engine!


    NO UFOs here!

    P L E A S E !


  • So we are trying to develop and advance a revolutionary technology (LENR) but we're fearful and afraid of examining aerial vehicles that have been declared by the Department of Defense to have out of this world performance beyond all known, ordinary technology?


    This is beyond tragic.


    The only thing I can compare this to would be a preacher teaching from the Bible all his life, getting a call to look at the remains of Noah's Arc, and then instead of being curious, fleeing into a wilderness retreat for months of prayer and solitude.


    "I can't let anyone think I "really" believe that," I can imagine him saying on the phone.


  • "So we are trying to develop ...."

    Who is we?

    "... but we're are fearful?"

    Who is we?

    "...examining aerial vehicles that have been declared by the Department of Defense to have out of this world performance beyond all known, ordinary technology?"

    Source? Proved?


    Don't get me wrong!

    I'm always open to exciting new things!


    BUT:

    With your intension:

    You add religion, government, politics to this forum!


    Next:

    ('cause Crackpots like that very much, and Google robot/spider will lead them here)

    - Conspiracy theory (Everything is possible...)

    - Chemtrails (They are poising/manipulating us all!)

    - Ancient astronauts (Pyramids were build with the help of anti gravity)

    - HAARP (USA is the evil force)

    - Einstein is totally wrong ('cause he is :-)

    - No astronauts never ever on the moon! (IMPOSSIBLE, even when NASA show actual pictures ..)

    - Flat earth / hollow earth / banana shaped earth (Monty Phyton will help you with this)

    - Atlantis is located (several times)

    - Iluminati (the evil force, y'a know?)

    - Elvis is ALIVE :-) ( Jesus! We all know that already.)

    - <insert the most idiotic items here>

    You will see!


    I've investigated the UFO phenomenom and a lot of other "against mainstream" topics for over 30 years!

    In different fora, sources, literature, what ever!

    No substantial evidence found. PERIOD.

    Only Crackpots and linked fake YT video clips :-(


    So, please! Not here!


    It's not Pandora's box! No, I'm not afraid of that.

    It's in the way, that leads to absolut bullshit threads, 'cause Crackpots will find this forum, and they will invade the rest of the threads.

    Mods getting crazy!

    I've seen all this and I try to "defend" my daily common forum for LENR!

    So, again, if you are keen on this things, do that anywhere else!


    I hope, you get my point here, and sorry: English is not my native language.



  • It's flabbergasting how superb of a job the powers that be have done to keep the UFO topic seemingly taboo.


    You did not quote me ....

    So, nothing to add to my contribution?


    "flabbergasting" does not translate well into German with Google, so I don't really know what you mean.

    -> guessing: flabbergast = consternate?

    ... the powers that exist and existed to supress UFOs phenomena and it's "evidences" and succeeded with that?

    Am I right?


    ... the powers that have effort in holding back / keeping something "taboo"

    There we are! THEY! They! are doing that! CIA, Gov, Catholic church, Iluminaty, Trump, Merkel, name them?


    "...keeping the UFO topic taboo ..."

    Got that. If it's your opinion, okay! There's enough stuff and threads on the internet where you can go and post.

    But please, don't contaminate/posing this forum with that kind of stuff.


    If this reads offensive to anybody, it's not my intension!

    Really!

    This will be my last post to that "UFO"-topic and the following postings, I promise! :-)


    Keep on with THAT STUFF, I tell y'a in German:

    Das geht in die Hose! Habe ich schon zu oft erlebt, leider.

    (Zumindest Barty und Rends können bei Bedarf mit der Übersetzung aushelfen :-)

  • Polaritons exist as a symbiont of another structure. Such a structure may be a metal nanoparticle where the SPP exists on its surface. Another structure is the metallic hydrogen molecule where the SPP exists on its surface spin wave.


    But from what the LION experiment is showing us, the spins of the electrons in that SPP condensate can decouple from the structures that first produced it and become free roaming like ball lightning.


    This means that the properties of the electron and the photon can exist in a superposition where they are in two places at once, both on the surface of the original supporting structure and free roaming in the far field.


    You need to think of particles like the electron not as a fundamental unit but as a collection of characteristics such as charge, spin and orbit. This characteristics can be decoupled from the particle and exist on their own.


    As a complex waveform, the electron can be parsed into more fundamental component waveforms and added to the other waveforms parsed from other particles.


    When the electron and the photon are entangled, the photons gets spin from the electron and a tiny bit of mass and the electron nut still remain a boson.


    Inside the SPP, only the spin of the electron is present, the charge and orbit is someplace else.


    This fragmentation of particle characteristics is well known in solid state physics.


    e78_1.png

    note that the spin can move around away from the electron orbit.


    see


    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spin%E2%80%93charge_separation


    Deconstructing the electron

    https://physics.aps.org/articles/v2/78