ICCF-22 (Sept. 8-13) News/reports/opinions

  • To those who attended or those who have reviewed all the posted ICCF papers... (Been busy and have not read all the posted proceedings)


    Did IH (or any IH sponsered researcher) make any presentations at ICCF?


    I assume there were IH representatives there?


    Thanks.

  • Bob#2

    Yes, there was Bob Higgins and Dewey Weaver.

    I have long corresponded with Bob on technical subjects about he was much better skilled than me.

    However seeing him follow Dewey like a little pet really saddened me. Hence my angry insulting blow here, sanctioned fairly by Shane D.

    Dewey just arrived for poster session, I can't imagine he came only to check if there weren't too many people around my Rossi's poster ?


  • I've posted a complete SEM/EDS report on the observed transmutation of Indium from ultrasonic cleaning.

    https://bit.ly/2mExg52

    It's a comprehensive document that will take some time to review. The first image on page 1 shows the crater about 2 mm wide that appeared following a 3 minute ultrasonic cleaning of pure Indium foil. We analyzed about 30 spots in and around this artifact using the Bruker Q75 EDS system's Esprit software. An area outside the artifact was also analyzed to confirm the purity of the material as received.


    AlanG

  • Bob#2

    Yes, there was Bob Higgins and Dewey Weaver.

    I have long corresponded with Bob on technical subjects about he was much better skilled than me.

    However seeing him follow Dewey like a little pet really saddened me. Hence my angry insulting blow here, sanctioned fairly by Shane D.

    Dewey just arrived for poster session, I can't imagine he came only to check if there weren't too many people around my Rossi's poster ?

    Thank you for the response.


    However, I must admit, I adamantly disagree with your biased view of "follow Dewey like a little pet" insult.


    I followed Bob HIggin's posts in the past and have the utmost respect for him. He certainly is his own man and your insult is quite telling of your blind bias.

    My understanding is that Bob Higgin's does not need to work on any projects as he is retired and fully vested. He works where his interests lay and where he thinks the best opportunities for success are and where actual research is going on.


    You do great discredit to a very intelligent, capable and good man, stating that IH / Dewey has some type of "control" over him. It is this type of ignorant attitude that smears much of LENR's name. First people defending Rossi and then smearing legitimate researchers such as Bob Higgins. This truly shows incapable judgment. :thumbdown:


    If I am to use other's statements and reactions to base my opinion of IH on, who should I use? .... someone who supports the proven fraud and deceiver Rossi or the legitimate and multiple researchers such as Bob Higgins..Cravens..and others who have ACTUALLY worked closely with IH?


    It is a clear and easy choice! I would choose Mr. Higgins, Cravens et. al every time! They are quite content with IH, the only ones who are not are those who Rossi has blinded.


    Just look at the Woodford thread! Who would care about an investment firm here on LENR, EXCEPT that the few Rossi supporters get some type of imagined victory in seeing Woodford fail. When in truth, they have nothing to do with the legitimacy of IH. Yet beggars cannot be choosy when there is nothing else to hang onto concerning Rossi! And now an attack / insult on the integrity of Bob Higgins because he works with IH. This is simply pitiful! <X


    I suggest you should apologize to Bob Higgins.

  • The control is named IH-NDA! Nevertheless Bob is a fine guy as you said.


    There may be NDA's. However, Rossi has ALWAYS shouted NDA's,.... ones that HE put in place. I have never seen any Rossi supporter denounce him over his NDA's!

    I am sure that many researchers have NDA's... written or simply enforced by other means, such as the AE project here. Do you disagree with that approach as well?


    In any case, there was no basis for Cydonia to insult Bob HIggins as a "little pet" of IH. Bob Higgins is not only a "fine guy", he is a legitimate researcher that goes about his business in a legitimate way. If he and others are fine with IH, people should take note of that. It is a very POSITIVE attribute towards IH against the railings against them here. (Of which a very large part is simply the political position against capitalism and nothing to do with true research)


    Again, if those very credible and legitimate researchers are happy with IH, we should take note of that as a positive. Rossi believers only put down IH and associates because they revealed Rossi's true dealings and nature during the court depositions. That is unacceptable in supporters eyes. A few others will not say anything good about a capitalist, regardless of the good they are doing... it is a personal political agenda.


    Can anyone give factual evidence of mis-conduct by IH otherwise?


    Perhaps "Rossi's team" is as credible as Higgins, Cravens, et. al.....:!:   :whistling:

    • Official Post

    Is there any further activity from "Team Google" as a result of ICCF22 or the support of LF Forum? Does anyone know? Thx for posting.


    Something concrete, and positive did take place at ICCF22, due specifically to the communications established between Google, and LF via the Team Google thread. Whether something good comes from it remains to be seen. I can say no more about it, nor can the other member who helped make it happen, or the staff who were kept in the loop.


    I can say that open, transparent communications between all parties can make things happen, that otherwise would not. Certainly there are valid reasons for secrecy, but that has to be weighed against the lack of major progress the field has suffered from for 30 years. Obviously, as McKubre touched on, "keeping secrets from each other" does not seem to be doing the science any favors. And it is certainly not helping mankind.


    Communicate, communicate, and communicate is what it will take to get to the finish line IMO, and that is where LF is playing an important role. There are other sites designed to speed up the discovery process; none however with our reach into the community, ease of use, talk format, and competent staff standing at the ready 7/24/365 to keep the discussion moving, and civil.

  • So presumably, we are finding neutrons/transmutations from ultrasonic cleaning? Could this be some piezo-electric proton acceleration reaction as in;


    Compact electrical neutron generators are a desirable alternative to radioisotope neutron sources. A piezoelectric transformer system is presented which has been used to achieve neutron production. The two primary components of the system include a piezoelectric transformer plasma source (PTPS), which produced a deuterium plasma for ion extraction, and a high voltage piezoelectric transformer (HVPT), which generated an accelerating potential in excess of 100 k V. The system was operated at a pressure of 700 μTorr with an external gas supply providing controlled deuterium flow to the differentially pumped PTPS. Synchronized AC signals were used to independently drive each of the piezoelectric devices in burst mode with a 1 Hz rep-rate and 10% duty factor. A timing offset between the two signals was used to decrease electrical loading effects and increase neutron flux. The mechanism for neutron production was the D(d, n) 3 He nuclear reaction, occurring when deuterium ions from the PTPS accelerated toward and impacted a deuterium-impregnated Pd or Ti target adhered to the output terminal of the HVPT.

  • My suspicion is that if transmutation occurred, it was induced by cavitation shock impacts on the material. The foil is 0.33 mm thick, with half-wave phonon resonance through the sheet of ~1.8 MHz. That is sufficiently above the ultrasonic stimulus that direct mechanical effects are not likely. The ~1.5% cleaning additive contained Sodium, Sulfur and Nitrogen, but no Calcium or Silicon. Those elements could have been from a contaminant inclusion in the foil, so their detection is not proof of transmutation and further study is needed.

  • Indium has along living magnetic state that certainly can be triggered by cavitation reactions as all solvents contain traces of deuterium.


    But what are the most likely products ? 113In --> 114,115 Sn?


    The other question is the solvent that contains a rich mixture of low Z elements.What might happen to them?


    magicsound : I would first run a blank run with e.g. just some quartz(-sand) and look at the quark surface. This would allow to subtract some peeks that might be just elements from the solvent.


    The solvent contains much EDTA which is able to hold almost any metal in a complex. It certainly will transport any metal from all surfaces the solvent reaches. Thus a dummy blank run is a must in my opinion.

  • Or a more simple theory from A. Widom...


    We have employed the standard model of weak interactions along with the known theory of piezoelectric materials to explain the experimental evidence that fracturing piezoelectric rocks produces neutrons. We have also explained why such fracturing processes produce microwave radiation. The elastic energy micro-crack production ultimately yields the macroscopic fracture whose acoustic vibrations are converted into electromagnetic oscillations. The electromagnetic microwaves accelerate the condensed matter electrons which then scatter from protons to produce neutrons and neutrinos. This work also may have implications for a better understanding of radiative processes associated with earthquakes [24, 26].


    So maybe no need to invoke deformed space-time?

  • We have also explained why such fracturing processes produce microwave radiation.


    I also often use the term explained if either nothing concrete can be calculated or the calculation delivers the expected exact result but the model is not yet fully proven. In W-L's case the model is such that it can calculate anything if you just vary the assumptions..as SM always must do or as said : Nothing concrete (based on first principle) can be calculated.


    Only to tell people that explained is weak term, but can be important to get on the way for a stronger deduction.