Now that I read your reply to Holmlid’s comment Alan Smith , I wonder if he even knows who or what is SAFIRE/Aureon. Smart move to float it right there!
For some reason I cannot see any comments to the paper, strange. Maybe it's because I'm not a member.
For some reason I cannot see any comments to the paper, strange. Maybe it's because I'm not a member.
Probably is that, RG requires opening an account, but is easy and free. I'm sure you can build up an independent researcher profile.
Account creation does not seem to be open for everybody:
QuoteYou may be eligible for a ResearchGate account if your role or field of work is connected to science, e.g., you're a lab technician, computer scientist, engineer.
Agree with the term 'mainstream', but keep an eye on Boron-Hydrogen fusion using CPA lasers. This is 'hot fusion' technology and very promising.
I analyzed the 11B-H fusion about 2 years ago. The activation energy is > 300000eV so quite a big hurdle. Also with a laser you cannot form a stable directed field - needed for high yield. The highly kinetic alphas have a broad statistics what it makes very difficult to harvest the energy even with Mills newest MHD device that has been built for much lower energies. Further you need a complex electro magneto optics to generates a kind of directed flux.
Do not expect anything out of this for the next 10 years!
Account creation does not seem to be open for everybody:
I think you have proven to be a Lab Technician in practice if not in formal education, can , I have seen RG pages from a range of people that has even a B Sc (as I do) but also people that probably has a less formal education but shows obvious engineering and technical skills.
Account creation does not seem to be open for everybody:
You can 'cheat' a bit with registration at ResearchGate.
After making a choice at the first entry page for registration it asks you for your employer/institute details but if you look carefully you may also click 'skip this step'.
I am using a gmail e-mail account which was accepted although they keep reminding me that my e-mail address does not match my (former) employer's domain name. It works for me.
You can 'cheat' a bit with registration.
The first entry page for registration asks you for your employer/institute details but if you look carefully you may also click 'skip this step'.
I am using a gmail e-mail account which was accepted although they keep reminding me that my e-mail address does not match my (former) employer. It works for me.
And for me.
BPIF_letter_v1.pdf
Dear authors,
I'll rebut some of these claims by the four dinosaur authors unless someone else does it first..
"
On behalf of the Board of the Section “Beam and Plasma Inertial Fusion” of the Plasma Physics Division of the European Physical Society http://plasma.ciemat.es/eps/sections/bpif/bpif-board/
L. Gremillet, French Alternative Energies and Atomic Energy Commission, France
I. Földes, Wigner Research Centre for Physics, Hungary
S. Jacquemot, Ecole Polytechnique, France
V. Tikhonchuk, University of Bordeaux, France
References: 1.
M. Fleischmann and S. Pons, Electrochemically induced nuclear fusion of deuterium, J. Electroanalytical Chemistry and Interfacial Electrochemistry
Firstly it is not a 'story'..
"recall the story of “cold” fusion that was
explored more than 30 years ago, when two scientists, Martin Fleischmann and Stanley Pons [1],
announced excitation of deuterium fusion reactions at room temperature by electrolysis of a heavy water.
However, it proved impossible to replicate the claimed results, and no explanation was found for cold
fusion mechanisms. The proponent of cold fusion did not explain how the Coulomb barrier was suppressed
in their device and the scientific interest in this controversial topic vanished. "
You can 'cheat' a bit with registration at ResearchGate.
After making a choice at the first entry page for registration it asks you for your employer/institute details but if you look carefully you may also click 'skip this step'.
I am using a gmail e-mail account which was accepted although they keep reminding me that my e-mail address does not match my (former) employer's domain name. It works for me.
Something must have changed in the process in more recent times:
I have not tried however to associate my name with the research of other people with the same name (the system asked if I was an author/coauthor of certain papers).
In any case, this shows again that the discussions referred to earlier in this thread aren't available for reading to just anybody.
Something must have changed in the process in more recent times:
Disappointing. Indeed something must have been changed meanwhile.
In any case, this shows again that the discussions referred to earlier in this thread aren't available for reading to just anybody.
We should be more careful referring to RG info here now we know registration is limited.
Does the same problem apply to linked papers as well as comments etc? I'm not sure because normally I give the link but also download and post the whole file.
The other way is being author/co author. I am sure this is why they let me in.
A few days ago I visited the RG profile of Ernos Lakatos who has one item as author, but seems to be self published as a preprint, about his idea of transmutations happening in a fluorescent tube submitted to microwaves. His methodology just used one sample as control and one as experiment, so his findings are statistically unsustainable, and I asked him if he had ever tried a bigger sample, but my point is that you don’t need to have a published paper just a paper that you have written and that is technical and written in scientific terms.
The paper was accessible; the comments and other features aren't, depending on the user's privacy setting (I would guess).
ResearchGate wants some sort of proof that registered users are either scientists working at some official institution, doing any sort of research work for a company (even if it's their own), or who have already published papers elsewhere (I don't think the bar is high, but I'm not sure if viXra counts) cited or coauthored by other researchers with a RG account.
can , I think any paper written in formal scientific language will do. The papers from Lakatos and also those by Slobodan are not published elsewhere than in RG, even the whole NPP 2.0 set of publications by Wyttenbach are not published elsewhere than in RG.
The quality of a paper does not depend in where it is published, it depends of how good the paper is in itself. The venue of publication can, of course, influence how a paper is perceived by others, but if a paper contains truth, it should be appreciated by that quality alone.
