Posts by Rigel

Dewey - I placed a large bet on CSC (Computer Science Corp.) back in the 'very old days'. Something about the Shah and the CIA and 80% of CSC's real assets at the time were in Iran when they were nationalized. I was pissed. Oh I get it. But now is the time for helping us understand this mess from your point of view. So anything that gives more honest info would be appreciated.

Quote from Dewey Weaver

IHFB - I don't make stuff up. Have you ever asked that question on Planet Rossi about anything?

A 40 year career and display of greed, avarice, disdain for the environment, disdain for humanity and disrespect for almost everything is coming to a close.

Dude on this day of days you are harshing my mellow.

Dewey you have to be beside yourself today watching the show. This board is hot today. Any more predictions?

Jed,

Agreed. I wanted you to read the pdf as it shows the usage and the balance of wind/hydro/solar/gas-turbine/oil for a large region in the report and how a large recovery works. I personally am a believer in a mix and that includes nuclear( warts and all for now) has to be part of it. I would imagine you know how well solar can work (and upset the apple cart) and how hard we they are trying to kill it. I am reading your paper now btw. But lets face it today is a great day for watching the Rossi channel show!

Jed,

Take a look at the recent 2016 outage in Adelaide_Outage. It's a wikipedia, then goto the references and download the AEMO pdf. The windfarm collapse (due to the storm) caused the total outage as the feeders could not recover. I mention this as not to argue, but to get you to look at the report. It is very interesting reading quite educational.

It shows what/when/how/why.

@Jack Cole,

Jack it is great that you are working with Jones Beene he has great insight and I follow him on Vortex.

My earlier question to you, was not heading that direction about me personally getting your setup. Sorry if this was misleading or confusing.

I was thinking to just get a baseline on breakdown of the cost to see if we could crowdfund some of the folk here that are more theoretical than applied who also wish that they could test for themselves.

My thoughts ran along the line that they could use the calorimeter box that you have setup so they would have a decent way of verifying the output. But upon reflection as you have said LFH has similar things available.

My original thought was that if your kit was dormant, to reuse it somewhere in the local community. Just to keep the dream alive.

Thanks R

@Jack Cole,

When you did your effort to duplicate Rossi's work how much did you spend on it? Do you still have the calorimetry devices that you used? (the box and TC's)

So I am clear do you want to part with them? I am thinking that if you have satisfied your desire to test in the NiH arena the test setup could be used again for another type of test such as Pd or maybe Homlid? (or even to satisfy someone who wants to test a new NiH device) My thoughts are to see if others would want a setup, and put an amount on your effort so you can recover $. Or if you want to keep it JIC maybe layout a parts/cost/supplier/howto . I remember it was very sweet setup.

*if you wish you can send me a pm or a chat.

Take care.

Zephir_AWT said about fellow forum member Axil above:

Quote from Zephir_AWT

How this half-educated troll with zero background and results in physics can even afford to criticize the active physicists and researchers from Los Alamos National Lab with hundreds of publications goes over my head - but I'm not obliged to understand everything...

And then in the Playground post #1390 Zephir_AWT said:

Whereas me and Jed in particular are scientists, "who are forced to read

well minded but naive thoughts again and again and separate them from
pure informational noise."

But then Zephir gave me a link to another forum where then he said:

"And I'm not scientist and I never claimed so. I'm just more consequential." Linky-to-Zephir_AWT_quote for those who want to see it.

This is just an observation after you provided some links the other night. I really think you just like to argue and you are welcome to when you provide proof. But you are now just harassing Axil among others.

So you are as above either a Scientist or not a Scientist in your own words (unless you deny my quotes linked above). I have noticed you hunt and insult Axil. You argue without any independent references 80% of the time, just a snide remark. Maybe you are not very happy IRL, but that is speculation without proof. See how that works?

I am not a scientist, but have worked with all kinds over the years. A scientist is one who follows scientific method period. Do you know why? They will not get recognized unless their theories are published and peer reviewed (and of course funding or promotion or raises). And in applied physics the language of peer reviewed scientific work is math.

I will ask you again to please stop with this Axil hunt insult thing you have going on. Please it is not healthy for you. Disagree all you want but skip the insults. Please pretty please!

Zephir said:

"

I don't know, what you call scientific method, I even don't know, what you call correct.

So is the ignorance of facts, because they cannot be certain or
because they even have no formal model developed the scientific method
or not?

"

Well there is a common definition of scientific method. So that would be what I call correct. Your comment above of "ignorance of the facts" etc. is to me a non sequitur therefor.

So since it does not matter what I call it. As we say "It is what it is".

As I said before I follow your ideas. I spent some time trying to understand them given your link last night. To me there is first hand and second hand knowledge. You have said you are both a "scientist and a programmer" first hand. Second hand knowledge based on the link that you provided is not valid unless it is confirmed. I don't get off denigrating someone. I seek knowledge. One thing that I was convinced of after all the reading and looking at Reddit is that it is a hard forum to read LOL, but also is the need for references and the use of math as the common language of choice in providing arguments.

Zephir,

You are correct from my knowledge base. Thanks for your response.

Zephir,

I have a exam. I would like everyone here to consider it.

What is a scientist?

1) Someone with a deep understanding of subject matter combined with an advance degree from an accredited university?

2) Someone who shows advanced understanding of the topic at hand and possibly published?

3) Someone who follows scientific method?

4) None or some of the above or a combination or other?

-Thanks in advance to everyone!

@Alan Smith said "

" Is the USA getting on board with this?"

I doubt it.

Energy rich states such as Wyoming and states that import power such as Hawaii are trying to ban it.

I read the article that it uses natural gas to hydrogen electrolysis. Currently do to fracking (good or bad) we have maybe 100 years of gas alone years inside of the US alone without Canada.

You see we are a advanced society and technology superior -> /s

/s = sarcasm just in case

Now I am sad, your life experience and teachings and beliefs are similar to mine when I was younger. So I am sad for myself now as well as you. I will not talk down to you as changing a belief system is one of the hardest things to do. As I said I will not talk down but suggest you re-read and think about things in a different light.

Mr SS,

Thanks for the response. Please take the comment in the other thread as being constructive. In regards to your (being in the same boat with space/eq/$$) it may be possible to get some people to transfer the required equipment to you. After all people want replicators.

Alan has been graceful offering some sponge that he has aquired. I think that there may be a box type calorimeter available. I think you are committed but time is probably more expensive than cash. It would be an uphill battle without resources but today with crowdfunding it is doable. I am just saying.....

Go Dan, Please complete this idea on how the reaction would be started/stopped and what would take it to happen. U B tink'n sweet

Mr. SS,

I have just read the above and have said this before to someone else. You may not be a bigot but what you said above was bigoted. I am not a liberal by any means. I am totally aware of islamic fundamentalism. But you are off topic on this and since you have previously presented your religious belief system, consider it in the larger picture.

BTW batteries may also someday be made of a completely new tech such as a fueled vane driven engine coupled to a Al or Mg hybrid battery/capacitor. We have had cars since the 1950 (I think chain drive Opel cadet) that got over 200 mpg on the shell sponsored mileage challenge.

@MrSelfSustain,

Thank you for your detailed response. As you say "I won't argue or debate these issues." I can respect that. I also like the way you manage expectations of your submitted threads. This is key and somehow after all these years we have lost that civility. I would like a response to the "do you know of Moray King?" as he is a kindred soul on sonofusion. I am sure that you are aware of RWG (Russ Gries). So would value your opinion regarding his CF experiments or his replication of Papp. And if you have read the T.C. rebuttal to the Lugano report?

While I am really just interested in finding your opinion, I am trying to find reference urls on peer reviewed or replicated NiH CF. I know of these well ALL of tests you referenced. I also at one time had a belief in dogbone type nickel reactors, but do not hold it any longer. I also followed ME356 but at some point I became unconvinced of NiH so am seeking any multiple reactions based on the more or less exact same setups with definitive COP above noise levels. If it helps I believe the work of LENR advocates such as you and others are key to getting LENR off the ground TIA for your response.

@JedRothwell,

In keeping with Alan's wishes I will frame it this way. Do you think that Trump and energy policy will consider that NiH CF works? If so are there any papers on the lenr-canr database that you feel support NiH based CF? Even the latest findings in the BEC report from SRI is within error/noise bounds. So do you believe we have verified NiH CF?

-Thanks Rigel

@Alan Smith,

Alan this is in regards to Can's post on stirring. If you feel that the reaction is concentrated (assuming all other variables are the same "heat/water temp/mixture etc.") and you can duplicate the reaction, it would be wise to consider stirring or possibly using a membrane flow device to see if you can duplicate the process. Why? Other than to test variables it would be to see if varying the concentration is effective in strengthening the reaction. Maybe even add a sonic bubbler to stir for a sono effect. Have you considered pressurizing the device?

@MrSelfSustain,

Hi, I am interested in some of the things you have said. May I ask a few questions? I notice that sometimes you feel antagonized by some of the responses here. Mine are not intended as that, but just to get more information. First thanks for your work on ME356 it has lead to others e.g. Bob G. confirming that he is a real person. As you may know I am quite skeptical of Rossi's Lugano claims after the T.C. report available on the http://lenr-canr.org/ library. While I find that while ME356 is real and has done real experiments he may not be correct in his calorimetry. Thanks for your diligence regarding ME356. So my questions and my motivation is simple, to discover if NiH CF works. So who do you personally believe has achieved NiH fusion and why? (Note after MFMP's failures to reproduce I am skeptical here) So any references to peer reviewed papers would be great. Any regarding an earlier comment based on Mike Fid, have you heard of Moray King? (this is in regards to sonofusion) . Thanks Rigel