These old guard still adhere to the ridiculous idea that the LENR reaction requires huge pressure and heat ala the H bomb to produce transmutation of elements.
I am pretty sure that very few people in the field think so. You are getting mixed up with the hot fusion crowd, surely?
I am pretty sure that very few people in the field think so. You are getting mixed up with the hot fusion crowd, surely?
The LENR fusion mechanism must be gentle enough and energy constrained enough so that bacteria can produce it. Theory is validated at the extremes.
The treatment that Bob Greenyer received at this years ICCF is troubling. He was not permitted to present his opinions because his opinions are too extreme for the old school LENR gatekeepers to accept.
Not permitted? What is that supposed to mean? Do you think it is possible to shut up Bob Greenyer? Evidently, you don't know him.
Did he complain to you? If he did not, where did you get this idea?
No one at any ICCF conference is ever "permitted" or forbidden from presenting an opinion. The battiest opinions are presented. No one subjected Greenyer to any "treatment." There are no gatekeepers, old school or new. If you think there are, I conclude you have never been to an ICCF conference. You have a strong imagination. That is to say, you often see things that do not exist, and this is one of them.
If you mean he was not permitted to give a presentation, please note that he did not submit an abstract or ask to give a presentation. Note also that 42 other presentations were in poster sessions only, including some from Hagelstein and Storms.
Bob Greenyer did not know until the last minute if he would be able to make it to ICCF or not.
While he was not speak in any of the session, he had many comments and questions at the microphone after talks, and had a long presentation in one of the poster sessions which he recorded and has made available online.
The treatment that Bob Greenyer received at this years ICCF is troubling. He was not permitted to present his opinions because his opinions are too extreme for the old school LENR gatekeepers to accept. These old guard still adhere to the ridiculous idea that the LENR reaction requires huge pressure and heat ala the H bomb to produce transmutation of elements.
What on earth do you mean by this Axil? What makes you think that Bob was not permitted to present his opinions or that the old guard (presumably including me) believes that LENR reactions require high pressure? Both ideas are (from my perspective) completely wrong but I presume you are basing the on something. What?
What on earth do you mean by this Axil? What makes you think that Bob was not permitted to present his opinions or that the old guard (presumably including me) believes that LENR reactions require high pressure? Both ideas are (from my perspective) completely wrong but I presume you are basing the on something. What?
The complete post as follows:
QuoteDisplay MoreThis is the entire subject of this video recorded on 5th June at ICCF-21. Dr. Parkhomov has excelled himself and, if verified, deserves deep praise for determination, ingenuity and openness. After being told that there was the opportunity to do so, and having just secured permission to do so, I offered to present this data in empty slots during ICCF-21 since I was told there were some people that could not make it or had withdrawn their papers. When speaking to the gatekeepers, I was told that the slots had been filled and they were sorry - this confused those that thought they were still open. Afterwards I was told by other parties that there was some fear that I might go and talk about anti-gravity or something - though I only have this third hand, it was not in the slides as you can see.
The data, if accurate, and I have had confirmation by a third party that said the excess determination was good, is extraordinary and a watershed since this is the only reactor reported that apparently had exhausted the fuel it started with. In my view, this means that all the atom isotopes in the active zone are in balance, there is nothing to be gained from further re-arrangement.
I was told by Bill Collis (Head of ICMNS) that Piantelli had once reached the MeV level of accumulated excess heat from 'Ni + H' ( Though as I realised and revealed in the attached video, he had 7% Boron trioxide in the entire internal structure of his reactors which were machined from Macor ) - this reactor of Alexander's appears to have produced nearly 4 times that excess level.
The ash may also provide deep insight into the mechanism, say if the end point is in balance.
Bob should be getting more respect than what he has been getting, and he really does not mention Rossi much either.
it seems obvious that Axil did not attend but just saying what "someone says" instead of first hand information.
it seems obvious that Axil did not attend but just saying what "someone says" instead of first hand information.
Well. Bob is giving his presentation on a chair in the hall. That is easy to see. The information from Parkhomov is cutting edge and deserves to be included in the agenda of the conference. Parkhomov is also being disrespected. His level of progress in experimentation is in the first ranks of what is happening in LENR research. His findings should not have been confined to a chair in the hall. This is an obvious put down and it does not involve "someone says" , It is first hand information produced by ones own eyes.
Bob Greenyer is quoted:
"I offered to present this data in empty slots during ICCF-21 since I was told there were some people that could not make it or had withdrawn their papers. When speaking to the gatekeepers, I was told that the slots had been filled and they were sorry - this confused those that thought they were still open."
That isn't how it works. As I said, 42 other submitted abstracts were relegated to poster sessions. If a slot opens up, one of them gets it. Conference chairmen do not give open slots to people who have not submitted an abstract or prepared a presentation.
There were plenty of informal opportunities to present information. Anyone can put up a poster and discuss it. There were conference rooms available, where after-hours theory sessions were held. Between sessions, just before the break, anyone could ask Dave Nagel to announce an informal conference room session.
"Afterwards I was told by other parties that there was some fear that I might go and talk about anti-gravity or something - though I only have this third hand, it was not in the slides as you can see."
Told by who? Who are these parties, and how do they know? In any case, without an abstract, perhaps he might have talked about anti-gravity or something. There were some strange topics discussed. If the conference organizers approve anti-gravity that's their business, but I think it is unreasonable to ask them to approve a talk without an abstract where there is no way to know what the speaker intends to say.
Parkhomov is also being disrespected. His level of progress in experimentation is in the first ranks of what is happening in LENR research. His findings should not have been confined to a chair in the hall. This is an obvious put down and it does not involve "someone says" , It is first hand information produced by ones own eyes.
Axil,
I think you are talking about when Parkomov attended the ICCF at Padua, to present his poster? If so, I think he refused a time slot to present, and chose instead to do his poster, because he is exceptionally shy, and only speaks Russian. His granddaughter accompanied him on the trip as his interpreter.
And keep in mind that Padua was after BG had flown to Moscow at Parkomov's invitation for a test that was a failure.
Display MoreBob Greenyer is quoted:
"I offered to present this data in empty slots during ICCF-21 since I was told there were some people that could not make it or had withdrawn their papers. When speaking to the gatekeepers, I was told that the slots had been filled and they were sorry - this confused those that thought they were still open."
That isn't how it works. As I said, 42 other submitted abstracts were relegated to poster sessions. If a slot opens up, one of them gets it. Conference chairmen do not give open slots to people who have not submitted an abstract or prepared a presentation.
There were plenty of informal opportunities to present information. Anyone can put up a poster and discuss it. There were conference rooms available, where after-hours theory sessions were held. Between sessions, just before the break, anyone could ask Dave Nagel to announce an informal conference room session.
"Afterwards I was told by other parties that there was some fear that I might go and talk about anti-gravity or something - though I only have this third hand, it was not in the slides as you can see."
Told by who? Who are these parties, and how do they know? In any case, without an abstract, perhaps he might have talked about anti-gravity or something. There were some strange topics discussed. If the conference organizers approve anti-gravity that's their business, but I think it is unreasonable to ask them to approve a talk without an abstract where there is no way to know what the speaker intends to say.
You'll make the rules. You also break people that are interested in LENR. but just don't fit in to the way things are done. If you'll don't think they are worth enough or threaten or offend you'll, or disagree with you'll then they are dispatched to the dust bin. I understand, it just human.
We might have finally gotten to hear what 'O-day' is all about.
Do you think that a discussion at this level can make any meaningful contribution to advancing LENR on a public or academic level?
Failure makes all the difference.
Should have said "negative", instead of failure. I must be possessed by demons. Sorry.
We might have finally gotten to hear what 'O-day' is all about.
I have a felling that O-day is indefinably postponed due to the crap storm that will certainly ensue. Such is the consequence engendered by the disrespect for differing opinions. Sometimes, the better part of valor is to keep your thoughts to yourself.
Do you think that a discussion at this level can make any meaningful contribution to advancing LENR on a public or academic level?
The great virtue of this forum is that we are all permitted to speak openly and freely without the fear of recrimination. The freedom of speech is the greatest freedom of all.
The great virtue of this forum is that we are all permitted to speak openly and freely without the fear of recrimination. The freedom of speech is the greatest freedom of all.
But this was not my question
I have a felling that O-day is indefinably postponed due to the crap storm that will certainly ensue. Such is the consequence engendered by the disrespect for differing opinions. Sometimes, the better part of valor is to keep your thoughts to yourself.
I have much respect for BG, and I do not see him delaying O-Day due to any "crap storm". He is as tough as they come, and combined with a very creative mind, he, and MFMP will be big contributors to the field going forward.
If O-day never arrives, it will because the pieces do not fit. Hopefully, in that case he will fess up.
I have much respect for BG, and I do not see him delaying O-Day due to any "crap storm". He is as tough as they come, and combined with a very creative mind, he, and MFMP will be big contributors to the field going forward.
If O-day never arrives, it will because the pieces do not fit. Hopefully, in that case he will fess up.
If what you state is in fact the case, way weren't the rules of the conference suspended as a courtesy in light of the high respect that is being universally afforded to Bob and his open source organization?
