When I get an SEM, I will try that.
Please explain how the tracks are evidence of entanglement when the RH marks are all the same as each other (repeating in the north-south direction), and the left hand tracks are all likewise the same as each other (Post 41 image), but the RH and LH marks are not the same as each other (although similar).
Entangled particles are the same particle wave form so their action is identical.
Display MoreThis thread is too strange for me!
Parkhomov: makes claims that mean one of the following must be true:
(1) LENR at commercial levels is cracked, the world has a new energy source, P a Nobel, Yay!
(2) P is heavily deluded
(3) P is fraudulent
I guess that as with Rossi, (2) and (3) are not mutually exclusive.
And this is not big news? Welcome to 2018 LENR research, where Rossiesque claims are so prevalent they are brushed off, neither believed nor allowed to damage the reputation of those making them.
There has been at least 20 other people who show strange radiation . for example
The iconic work of Savvatimova and B. Rodionov published in 2005
Entangled particles are the same particle wave form so their action is identical.
Axil,
I seldom call you out because I can't often understand what you say.
In this case it is nonsense, "Tracks" derive from interactions with the detecting material. After the first such interaction with (incoherent) material any coherence is lost.
In fact, as those building quantum computers know, coherence (entanglement) is lost really easily, making your many statements about entanglement unphysical. This one, which I'm calling out, is just much more glaring than the others.
Display MoreAxil,
I seldom call you out because I can't often understand what you say.
In this case it is nonsense, "Tracks" derive from interactions with the detecting material. After the first such interaction with (incoherent) material any coherence is lost.
In fact, as those building quantum computers know, coherence (entanglement) is lost really easily, making your many statements about entanglement unphysical. This one, which I'm calling out, is just much more glaring than the others.
What you think is true must be overridden by experimental evidence. LENR will instruct science in very much more than they assume is true currently.
To me it looks like the marks from some sort of a knurled wheel with a zig-zag "tread". It would have to be a very small wheel... and I have no idea why or how. (Micro manipulator?)
The cracks on either side of each the individual impressions indicate high pressure relative to the media strength, from a direction roughly perpendicular to the surface.
"Strange radiation" is called "Highly anomalous" by Storms.
http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/StormsEnatureofen.pdf
Lots of reports dating since 1991 in a variety of LENR experiments.
I wonder what the Russian term for SR is?
Perhaps Alexander Shiskin's SRD can be used on Androcles in the milkshed??
Display MoreThis thread is too strange for me!
Weird illness from strange (= cannot properly be detected and become big science news?) radiation.
Parkhomov: makes claims that mean one of the following must be true:
(1) LENR at commercial levels is cracked, the world has a new energy source, P a Nobel, Yay!
(2) P is heavily deluded
(3) P is fraudulent
I guess that as with Rossi, (2) and (3) are not mutually exclusive.
And this is not big news? Welcome to 2018 LENR research, where Rossiesque claims are so prevalent they are brushed off, neither believed nor allowed to damage the reputation of those making them.
1) LENR may have already been cracked by secretive and secretive but "revealed" groups. However, we can't count on me356, Rossi, and a few other groups to reveal their know how due to inventors syndrome. However, due to what has been revealed today, I think we -- the community as a whole -- is much closer to cracking LENR as a new energy source for the world. We still have work to do, though: we need to learn how to manipulate variables to boost the COP, figure out effective ways to shield the strange radiation, and perform the standard engineering to make devices that can transform the heat into excess energy. However, on the way, I have a feeling that we're going to realize what Rossi discovered. I believe the simple truth is that working in a nearly pure plasma based system like the Quark is more efficient, simpler, and more long lasting than other methods.
2) Nope. Parkhomov isn't deluded. There have been multiple other teams that produced COPs above 1 from Ni-H and variations of Ni-H (such as adding lithium). When it comes to strange radiation, there are countless teams that have been producing and detecting these emissions for DECADES. What he has done is perform an exhaustive documentation project on them.
3) Nope. Parkhomov is not fraudulent. I'm absolutely certain he's not fraudulent when it comes to the tests he has performed. And when it comes to being able to produce these types of reactions, I don't think Piantelli, Focardi, Me356, Rossi, Songsheng, and various Russian teams were either.
With Rossi, I believe the truth about all these issues is a bit more complicated. Simply put, he has a horrible case of inventors syndrome. So even though he has a real technology (not speaking about any specific version of the E-Cat) he might be deluding himself into thinking he can achieve success while continuing to maintain such ridiculous levels of secrecy. He may be deluded about other business matters as well.
I think all of this should be huge news. The sad thing is that Rossi used to be HUGE NEWS. But his game playing and manipulations have made even some of the open minded people who have followed LENR very cynical. I feel a kind of exhaustion in the LENR community. I'm hoping this conference will put the community on a better track and restore our energy.
Alexander Shiskin's microcraters...
Max Nozin.. I can read only 'Microcraters' in russian...... that's all.
Is this his vortex-soliton presentation?
Is it about strange radiation?
Is he saying that the microcraters represent 23.6 MeV of energy??
timemark 2.28
Display MoreAlexander Shiskin's microcraters...
Max Nozin.. I can read Microcraters in russian...... that's all.
Is this his vortex-soliton presentation?
Is it about strange radiation?
Is he saying that the microcraters represent 23.6 MeV of energy??
timemark 2.28
External Content www.youtube.comContent embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.Through the activation of external content, you agree that personal data may be transferred to third party platforms. We have provided more information on this in our privacy policy.
English captions can be generated by first setting the Russian caption on then setting the English translation on
Thanks Axil
Strange radiation can be excluded by 2 cm? of borate glass?
Timemark 20.23 Irina? Savvatimova?
RobertBryant he is saying this microcraters are left by solitons everywhere : x-ray film, foil etc.
Slide says that he arrived to 28 MeV estimate by measuring microcrater volume and calculating energy needed to heat water of this volume to boiling point.
Thanks Max
Nice to see these researchers as real people
Not THHesque 'fraudulent' or 'heavily deluded' ....
Most interesting guy to listen out of all was Zatelepin. The experiements he does are simple and cerebral.
Earlier this year he did a variant of Reich experiment and also detected field of a spinning body with a torsion scale.
He raised few valid points about correct input power measurement and temperature measurement of the working reactor.
RobertBryant Zatelepin also looks like stereotypical Russian scientist 'professor'
Zatelepin.
"
A simple and illustrative experiment in the demonstration of the “ether” by
D.S. Baranov, V.N. Zatelepin
Quote.
Measurement of air temperature and samples of various substances showed a significant dependence of the measurement result on the relative position of the thermometer and the lead shield wall.
...
It was found that the temperature of the samples, measured by an electronic thermometer, depends on whether the sample is inside a metal box or outside it. In addition, the readings of the electronic thermometer significantly depend on many other factors, in particular on the time during the day.
A search in the literature has shown that the effect has been known since the 40s of the last century and is called the “Reich-Einstein experiment” [2]. Someone V. Reich, who managed to interest A. Einstein to conduct a joint experiment, drew the attention to the difference in air temperature in the metal box and outside it. According to A. Einstein, this effect can be a “bomb” in physics. The joint experiment confirmed that the air temperature in the device, consisting of a metal box embedded in a wooden box, is indeed higher than the air temperature outside the device. A.Einstein and his team explained the effect by the fact that there is natural convection of air between the floor and the ceiling in the room, and
a metal box disrupts the natural temperature distribution. Those. "Bomb" did not take place. V.Rayh did not agree with this conclusion. He believed that there is some special form of energy that accumulates in the device. Later he developed for sale for medical purposes a sophisticated modification of the device, which he called the "Orgon Accumulator". In article [2] experiments are described in which the influence of natural convection is maximally damped, but a noticeable difference in temperature inside and outside the device still remains. "
What you think is true must be overridden by experimental evidence. LENR will instruct science in very much more than they assume is true currently.
That is always possible Axil. But my comment was not arguing with any experimental evidence. I was critiquing your theoretical interpretation of experimental evidence, using the theory of entanglement in a way that contradicts very many experiments.
It is a single line of dots, however. No Photoshopping. The duplicate line is a real reflection from the CD.
Unstrange radiation
That is always possible Axil. But my comment was not arguing with any experimental evidence. I was critiquing your theoretical interpretation of experimental evidence, using the theory of entanglement in a way that contradicts very many experiments.
THH
Everybody knows that a pair of socks is entangled such that when one of the pair mysteriously disappears via a micro wormhole in the tumble dryer the remaining sock is still in contact via super luminal intra-dimensional fields based on quaternian matrices.
And yet BIG PHYSICS refuses to fund meaningful research into this phenomenon!
I am afraid the maths is a bit beyond my science education (CSE Grade 2 Domestic Science) but I am sure Axil or Rossi will be able to explain how it fits into modern theories of LENR.
