Posts by Rigel

Zephir,

I have noticed you calling for bans on people. I am aware that you have been banned (or so I have read) on /r/physics multiple times. Is this true? I also noticed you being rather polite and to the point on r/emdrive and had a user(s) in both /r/physics and /r/emdrive where swearing or any combinations of words can be uttered. I almost defended you on the /emdrive thread when some jerks said and I paraphrase you don't know s*it about physics. Do you remember a username called f**kyou_Zeph on one of the subreddits?

This is hideous that they allow that crap.

Since you claim to be a scientist does this extend to psychology also? If not how do you explain your post? Do you recall any convos on phys.org from ghost of otto or skippy?

I ask you can we keep it where you do not say he is full of bs ? Just question ones statements and references. You both are advocates for your theories and can be educational. If you do not like someone how about blocking them? Let others speak for themselves. I would not want to lose either one of you to escalation. Don't get too wrapped up in something you would not want to happen to you okay?

Fair enough Zephir. In an hour or so I will post in the playground a response since that is the more appropriate thread. Please respond there if you wish.

axil wrote: "

I don't take kindly to being characterized as crazy. I might be wrong,
but not mentally ill. I think it is time for you to be banned."

Axil, I have bit my tongue regarding other users here. But as long as the discourse was based on information exchange and civility I do not care what is said. It should be simple for someone to make a statement provide a reference url and then defend the argument- period.

I used to goto phys.org or several reddit forums. (r/physics, r/emdrive and many others. But the ones I mentioned have users that just follow each other around throwing insults. This behavior is called bullying or sometimes trolling. I smh when I see a user that is literally abused on (reddit/phys.org etc.) come to this forum follow the same behavior.

It would be better to take the high road. But this is not the playground, even though people act like children. I honestly do not know why I expect more sometimes.

@ Wyttenbach,

"Finally you have to live with the facts that NiH LENR works very well, but the cash-in receipt is not on the table"

Do you have any urls that would provide for this statement? That NiH works?

Thanks, Rigel

Brilliant- Thank you. While it is not related. I have been looking on how they program the D-wave 2000qubit computer. Translations are moving very quickly now.

We live in amazing times (for at least the last 100 and 20 years).

I am sure you have seen the Socrates-app they have it for both android/iphone.

Why I still disagree with you on'modern society being complex'. I am not so dismissive. But this is a segue that I do not want to head towards. I am not sure of your twaddling and dark matter reference. So I will not respond. I will also listen when a link from CF to antimatter is made, but will research it and again not be dismissive. Zephir I have the benefit of having my small mind somewhat opened. The only onus that falls on us all is to prove our statements.

Zephir thanks- the old links just go to a blank page. Is anyone one else having this issue I am using FF browser. If anyone else is having the issue maybe a tinyurl will help.

But which doc in the main are you referencing? (sorry to be pain, but I read your ideas). I am interested in why you still believe in Rossi as others.

Zephir, I am glad you cited references We all need to do it more often. Except the given links do not open, any ideas? I am logged into google.

/even r

Eric,

I do not understand your comment. Can you explain? Thanks

I disagree with you here. I even find you both complimentary at times. I also note that very rarely does he respond to your comments like wise with derogatory statements. I think modern society question is a bit more complex. As far as antimatter since I do not know his mind I will not respond. On the concept of disinformation when people make a statement then provide a url we are able to judge for ourselves. This is a learning process not some conspiracy of the ignorant or misinformed, most people here with references are able to discern for themselves. We should all strive to keep it that way.

Zephir we need Axil's ideas as well as yours, the environment is richer for them. When you break the idea flow down I wonder why, he is non-conformal as well as you. He is to be recommended for being an advocate for CF. When you dismiss people as "link collectors" you are "as kind as I can say this" are not helping. Driving people away from discussions is a bad thing okay? Don't make it personal. Make it the based on the arguments.

Dewey, If I may continue, if IH paid for the 1 MW reactor, it is their property. So if it was removed then that would raise questions on ownership of the reactors themselves. If IH owns it completely they may want to recover some of the money (or not) so maybe it can be parsed up and bits sold to the folks who still believe in it. I know it would not make much money, but you never know. Being serious for a moment, it would not hurt them to give a reactor to MFMP after the dust settles in a year or two. A container is worth 2-3k , the reactors and controls maybe 5k or more. I would prefer to have some return on my investment if possible.

Thanks for the correction can. I found you posting the patent wise. Even tough my Italian needs more duolingo.

May I ask did you have an account here before the upgrade? Never mind this question after I some thought, it is inappropriate.

Thanks Dewey, I guess now we will make it a container home once we seal the roof. If I may did Rossi own the reactors or did IH? If Rossi owned the container/devices would he not want to sell it to his "next 3 customers" he would save some time now that he has one that has been validated

can,

From your provided link it is labelled 6. on Fig 1.

"characterized in that the nickel powder may contain catalysts." Is a guess from google translate.

Now that Mr. Rossi has conjectured that he will not show his latest QuarkX until maybe mid-summer (at that). And any and all conversation about his robotic plants and other customers has safely died down maybe we can speculate that since IH owns the blue container, they will donate the cats to replicators to test with.

Since this is just for fun what will you do with your cat? Reload with an exotic mixture? Use as a resistance heater in the winter? Sell it for parts on Ebay?

Thanks AlainCo..... If I may what is your top native 3 languages? You seem very fluent.

Wyttenbach,

While I respect your opinion, I do not always agree with it. But I have looked at it (Mills hydrinos) but not studied it. One thing about me (how I think) is that I never accept one concept as absolute. I think of things/theories/experimental evidence as being either primary likely, or secondary likely but needing to be verified. But since I do not know of it, I will spend some more time.

My problem is that he ties everything into hydrinos. There is no doubt that he is highly intelligent. My problem is that his current Suncell is not a year from production nor OU, so that claim is disingenuous. The reason I say that is disingenuous is that I have brought things to market, and part of this is called the "pony" show where progress is shown, then a powerpoint usually with astronomical numbers for growth revenue potential etc. is then focused on. Funding is always king.

His self sustain mode video was losing energy over time as it continued, and his method of using focused PV arrays when it is a blackbody is also suspect. But anyway I do respect your opinion you seem one of the people that stick to the point. So I will give it another shot.

Here is a link about how/where atoms are created. Not on the LENR topic but good for the playground.

We-are-star-stuff.

Thank you Dewey. If the question about Rossi's conviction is to me, all I know is what people like Mary have been saying over and over. It has been covered on websites dedicated to it such as the New Energy Times. At one time I was optimistic after the Lugano report, but TC and others* have shredded that completely. Currently I do not believe in Ni based fusion. I still believe in palladium deuterium fusion. My hope is that IH or MFMP at least do some work on this in 2017. We have lost enough time chasing Ni-H.

*the failure of any replication based on Ni