COLD FUSION NOW!

  • I don't understand why he does this, or what he hopes to accomplish.

    It is well defined by dictionary.com


    https://www.dictionary.com/browse/troll#


    Digital Technology . Informal .

    to post inflammatory or inappropriate messages or comments on (the Internet, especially a message board) for the purpose of upsetting other users and provoking a response.

    to upset or provoke (other users) by posting such messages or comments.

  • Quote

    demonstrate that cold fusion works - at the Mega-Watt excess heat scale.

    The most doubtful skeptic is not that exigent, not nearly. 100 W or so long enough to exceed either stored or chemical energy by a factor of ten would be fine. But it has to be done so it's simple, clear and credible. JedRothwell will probably tell us it's been done n times. But it can't be by the usual suspects using the cryptic method of isoperibolic calorimetry. It has to be done with an infallible method of calorimetry (mass flow for example), extremely cautious calibration, meticulous blanks (dummy runs) and sufficient power ratio out/in that Shanahan's much argued error sources become moot, again by a huge factor, say for example 10. And you have to be able to do it pretty much on demand. But a megawatt? Fun for sure but no way needed for proof of concept. I bet you knew that Director .

  • The most doubtful skeptic is not that exigent, not nearly. 100 W or so long enough to exceed either stored or chemical energy by a factor of ten would be fine. But it has to be done so it's simple, clear and credible. JedRothwell will probably tell us it's been done n times. But it can't be by the usual suspects using the cryptic method of isoperibolic calorimetry. It has to be done with an infallible method of calorimetry (mass flow for example), extremely cautious calibration, meticulous blanks (dummy runs) and sufficient power ratio out/in that Shanahan's much argued error sources become moot, again by a huge factor, say for example 10. And you have to be able to do it pretty much on demand. But a megawatt? Fun for sure but no way needed for proof of concept. I bet you knew that Director .

    Skeptopath moving the goal posts, as per usual. 153 peer reviewed replications by the ~100 top electrochemists of the day isn't enough for them, but it is ONLY for this branch of science.

  • Shanahan's much argued error sources become moot

    I wondered why this was so.


    When I read Shanahan's 2 original papers on Acta I figured out why. Reading is of course a challenge for SOT.


    Reading explained why his original papers are never cited by any of his fellow physical chemists

    even though he maintained they were widely applicable in physical chemistry not just in LENR.

  • Perhaps you could spare us breaking our teeth on cracked pots and tell us why & how it is not applicable, and why no one cites his papers?

  • The most doubtful skeptic is not that exigent, not nearly. 100 W or so long enough to exceed either stored or chemical energy by a factor of ten would be fine.

    How about a factor of 10,000? Oh wait, that's been done.

    But it has to be done so it's simple, clear and credible.

    Since the world's leading experts in calorimetry at places like Los Alamos and Texas A&M did this, it is clear and credible. Perhaps not simple.


    JedRothwellwill probably tell us it's been done n times. But it can't be by the usual suspects using the cryptic method of isoperibolic calorimetry.

    I don't need to tell you this. The literature tells you this, which is why you refuse to look at it. Isoperibolic calorimetry was developed by J. P. Joule who is not usually considered "suspect," but in any case this has also been shown with flow calorimetry, Seebeck and ice calorimetry (phase change calorimetery). The latter was developed by Lavoisier to measure the heat of metabolism in guinea pigs. I suppose you consider Lavoisier a suspect as well. You and the French revolutionists in the Reign of Terror.


    Basically, you say that any positive result is suspect, and anyone who publishes a positive result is added to the list of suspects. Even when the person is the world's leading expert in tritium measurements or calorimetry, or a commissioner in the French or Indian AEC, he becomes a "suspect" not to be believed the moment he publishes a positive result. Again, your method is to move the goalposts, dismissing an extra 10 orders of magnitude or the expertise of any number of people you have never heard of, about whom you know nothing. Off with their heads!


    Shanahan's much argued error sources become moot, again by a huge factor, say for example 10.

    Shanahan's "errors" are imaginary. They have not been detected in any experiment, at any power level, not even milliwatts. So, any positive result exceeds them by a factor of infinity.


    You might as well demand experiments that exceed the margin of errors induced by unicorn farts.

  • These events are extremely important in advancing the science, and almost equally important is that what is said in presentations, and informal chit chats, be chronicled and then reported on for others to peruse, and history to record.

    My thanks to Ruby...such a lot of work

    Who's Dr. HYSEN BLLOSHMI... should he/she be added to the Who's Who?.

    https://coldfusionnow.org/wp-c…ention_2019Colloquium.pdf

    In Sydney we could use LENR water distillation NOW

    it would reduce my water bill...the silly climatophobes stuck in an expensive desalination unit as a standby.

    "

    In 1 liter Erlenmeyer flask put 1000 ml seawater, 10% NaOH, 10% monomer, two nickel electrode we can produce:

    More than 10,000 liter steam per day, and more than 3,800,000 calories.

    We can use this energy for a "Home Boiler" or for MED DESALINATION, at lower temperature 70 gr/c ( 158F ).

    WITH PRODUCING EXCESS HEAT WITH THE COLD FUSION REACTION, WE FINISH THIS STUDY, AND THIS IS THE END OF MARATHON 30 YEARS FOR COLD FUSION

    .

    Dr. HYSEN BLLOSHMI


  • I think we will be adding many names to Alan's Who's Who list. Every time it seems we have accounted for all, another name pops up we missed. Good sign as Ruby says, that the field is on the right track.

  • Shanahan as a crackpot


    My experience with Shanahan is that he cloaks his extreme reworks of data with smoke

    as in.

    "Thus there seems to be nothing particularly unreasonable about the computed constants, suggesting that this interpretation of the data is as valid as any other.The resulting excess power curve showed significantly reduced excess, but still contained residual signal. This is possibly due to one or more other factors, such as the need for a more sophisticated calibration model, other physical/chemical process affecting the apparatus, or perhaps the actual presence of an excess power source (of reduced magnitude). More sophisticated analysis was not attempted here, as it simply complicates this analysis without adding insight."


    His interpretations of data are not as valid as any other. .no way,, unfortunately the peer review at Acta trusted the smoke...twice

    His tribalistic and obsessive hostility against cold fusion was never scientific

    May Shanahan rest in seminary..

  • From MIT via Ruby

    https://coldfusionnow.org/wp-c…ght_2019ColloquiumMIT.pdf

    J. P. & M. J. Wallace wrote

    "Einstein was Right.


    The most important problem confronting physics is to understand the nature of the quanta.His two efforts were on target:

    1.1936 EPR showed quantum mechanics to be incomplete


    2. 1940-50s He searched for a method to unify the four forces...

    Gravity ) Fermion core void of the self-reference frame is eliminated in the lab frame curving space, and producing a


    gravitational mass.


    Who is wronger or righter in physics is decided by data.

    I might ask the Wallaces' about their modelling of the gravitational constant G


    was there anything new from 2014 .. except Yes Virginia

    nice quote "don't ever send a paper to APS"

  • https://coldfusionnow.org/wp-c…masLRDI_ColloquiumMIT.pdf

    Thomas Grimshaw, of the UOT, Energy Institute, is starting an "LENR Research Documentation Initiative". Should be a nice addition to LENR-CANR, in helping to collect, preserve, and make available the material for whomever is interested. I believe also, the University of Utah still has an extensive library dedicated to LENR? The more the merrier, and another sign the field is maturing.

  • I am having troubles finding any substance in MIT materials despite solid effort to catalog them.

    Phone, dense hydrogen, muon catalysts from same usual suspects.

    B. Ahern tells his old story about overunity engine.

    C.Page slide deck is mostly environmental propaganda with few slides telling that he actually is for new fission nukes.

    Brand new report about electrochemical water desalination so poorly written so it look more like a biblical story.

    Party crushed by a relativist from MIT propaganda machine.

    A professor from Texas trying to create a web site to complement lenr-canr.org effort. Web site creation seems to be a major milesstone which is hard to reach.

    Did I missed anything?