Caveat Emptor (investors beware)

  • I cannot speak for Vladislav, but as I see it, it is some analog of muon catalysis. I think that Bazhutov’s erzion catalysis interpretation is the closest. It is a particle that is bounded with hydrogen. Energy that is required to unbound it is very small, but once it is unbound it strarts nuclear reactions until it is bounded again with hydrogen or oxygen. To unbound particle from oxygen is a much more difficult goal, requiring plasma or high temperature. Collecting erzion particle in solution might be a very interesting yet simple way to intensify outcome of elements.

    The evidence is now strong that one road to transmutation is through Kaon production via the Ultra dense hydrogen path. Kaons are strange matter and strange matter sets up a transmutation chain reaction as currently seen in the experiments by me356. These transmutation experiments are replicated by the results seen in the MFMP evaluation of LENR reactor fuel from India.

    Holmlid has shown that Ultra dense hydrogen produces kaons. Standard model theory expects a transmutation chain reaction will occur when strange matter interacts with matter.

    me356 states that his reaction can produce transmutation chain reaction that occurs continuously for 2 months.

    see post


    IMHO, me356 has produced metastable UDH that acts as continual source of kaon production. These kaons begin a strange matter chain reaction that produces increasingly heavy elements through a matter absorption process.

    The strange matter eventually decays and the heavy elements remain as a stable transmutation product. It does not look like this chain reaction is dangerous.


    "A strangelet is a hypothetical particle consisting of a bound state of roughly equal numbers of up, down, and strange quarks. An equivalent description is that a strangelet is a small fragment of strange matter, small enough to be considered a particle. The size of an object composed of strange matter could, theoretically, range from a few femtometers across (with the mass of a light nucleus) to arbitrarily large. Once the size becomes macroscopic (on the order of metres across), such an object is usually called a strange star. The term "strangelet" originates with Edward Farhi and R. L. Jaffe.[1] Strangelets have been suggested as a dark matter candidate.[2]"

  • axil before throwing hypothesis at them would you like to know first what is that they are actually doing or planning to do? If you already have an idea please share.

    Of course we can keep going till 'Emperor's new clothes' moment.

    It is important to put in perspective the experimental results on transmutation that Holmlid, Suhas Ralkar and me356 have both recently produced. There was reference to the erzion particle. It is my contention that the erzion particle meme is actually an interpretation of the behavior of the Ultra dense hydrogen nanoparticle.

    Whatever is being done or plan to be done, high pressure hydride production of Ultra dense hydrogen should be an experimental objective of that effort as shown by the experimental results of these other researchers. Being a new member, I suspect that Synthestech is not familiar with the experimental progress that has been made by the above mentioned LENR researchers.

  • axil in pure experimental science it often helps not to be aware of a scientist(s) telling you what is possible and what is not.

    Would it make you happier knowing that they are well aware of udh and many other things you are preaching in forums if you don't get straight answer to a question why they switched the area of research?

    BTW are you using some kind of bot to generate some of your posts?

  • axil in pure experimental science it often helps not to be aware of a scientist(s) telling you what is possible and what is not.

    BTW are you using some kind of bot to generate some of your posts?

    It is important that experimental science describes what is happening. That information describes what is possible.

    There is a few trigger words that shows an inaccurate understanding of the LENR reaction, those words being fusion and made up particle names like erzions, polyneurons, and that particle that Ed Storms invented, the hydroton.

    If I was using a BOT, its output would be contaminated by these unoriginal LENR words.

  • I got a deja Vu feeling about synthestech. They reminded me of joi scientific.

    Joi scientific is being very active on Twitter posting general hype about hydrogen while giving 0 details about their actual work. Good that somebody posted a patent which you need to parse in order to see they are in hydrogen extraction from water.

    To their defense I must say they do not invite retail investors.

    These guys do want to create a similar hype otherwise ICO will not yield expected results.

    That is why it is kind of naive to hope getting even 10 dollars for a cat in the bag.

  • With all due respect, I too have noted the "bot" like behavior of our most speculative member. Maybe it has discovered the means to truly model human intelligence..... polyneurons.....

    Would you be kind enough to characterize what bot like behavior entails in more detail. I do not speculate, The certainty in my views on LENR are very solid. The complexity and broad scope of LENR makes seeing the big picture difficult, but at the same time this scope makes it very exciting.

  • axil

    Iet me try to explain the bot thing.

    If you look at the structure of your posts they all start with short preamble something along the lines 'It is totally clear now! Lenr is explained by this...' then it follows by an essence of an article you must have picked up in the news recently. As an example take your recent post on ecatworld about breakthrough in subatomic fusion they predicted on paper and also proved it is impossible in the same paper. The title of the press release was very catchy though .

    I am an engineer but my basic knowledge in physics is enough to conclude that the scope of your posts are spanning the entire filed of physics from traditional to alternative. How can a person simultaneously believe in the theories which are know to contradict each other?

    Hence a conclusion that it is bot-generated.

  • Speaking of bots, going over some posts at ECW, there are several posts in the same thread that are identical but from different usernames. Usually one or two sentences. What is even stranger is that they seem to be from real people with long posting histories that go beyond ECW, and with content other than the repeated ones, that is totally un-bot like. Looks like bots using hacked accounts, and apparently only once per comment.