Posts by RobertBryant

Ne ahle Mann steht vür der Wirtschafftsdür,

der su jern ens ene drinken däät,

doch he hätt vill zu wennisch Jeld,

sulang he uch zällt.

In der Wirtschaff is die Stimmung jrus,

äver keiner sück der ahle Mann, doch do kütt ene mit enem Bier,

und sprisch en enfach an.

Refrain:

Drink doch ene met,

stell dich nit esu ann,

du stehs he die janze Zick erüm.

Hässt du och kei Jeld,

dat is janz ejal,

drink doch met unn kümmer disch net drümm.

Su mansche sitz vielleisch allen zu Huss,

der su jern ens widda lachen dät.

Janz heimlisch, da wat hä nur darup,

dat ene zu imm säht

2x Refrain:

Drink doch ene mit...

https://www.songtexte.com/song…och-eine-met-bc7e96e.html

Walter Pegeto wrote:

the excessive numbers of Rossi related posts that "taint" the forum

Maybe Rossi is getting saucy underwear for Christmas??

gio06 wrote:

the_real_proton.pdf

In SI units, the CODATA value of μ_p is 1.4106067873(97)×10⁻²⁶ J⋅T⁻¹( 2.7928473508(85)

μ_N.)

Bergman's 1991 proton ring model gives for the proton magnetic moment

µ = 9.284832 x 10-24 divided by 1836.15 = 0.505668 10⁻²⁶ J⋅T⁻¹.. are my calculations correct?

other models give more accurate calculation of the once socalled anomalous proton moment.

Was wondering how this would apply to Holmid's/Wyttenback's/Mills' work or if it discredits it.

The azimuthal 5th force is speculative since 2001..

There may be other valid but speculative explanations related to the Meissner effect..

Mills has some explanation..in GUTCP

Holmlid quotes Hirsch 2010, quotes Nikulov 2001,

https://link.springer.com/cont…7%2Fs10948-009-0531-4.pdf

Nikulov [9] correctly recognized that this is a fundamental unanswered question in the conventional theory of superconductivity.

He postulates the existence of an azimuthal ‘quantum force’ Fq that acts on the superfluid electrons
when the system is cooled below Tc, that forces the canonical momentum to change to satisfy the quantum condition equation (38)

(or equivalently, that forces the macroscopic wave function to be single-valued)

, given by Fq = pω (39)
with ω−1 the time scale over which the canonical momentum change..

interested observer wrote:

It is quite impressive how Rossi can be working around the clock

It is quite impressive how Sam12 and others keep hourly tabs on Rossi..

We don't know the color of his underwear yet

This may be pertinent to LENR.

Create a new thread for Rossi junkies

call it "I've got Andrea on my mind"

Positron is not positive enough to go to phase2 NASA

Krypton 79 is not easy to remake.

Wyttenbach wrote:

Its always a surprise that people start a paper with assumptions that never could be verified what is = measured.

Between hadrons (protons) the strong force is not working

Curbina wrote:

This allowed them to make predictions that could be checked by experiments. In particular, with regards to the fundamental hadronic interaction, more commonly known as the strong nuclear force,

The DST predictions don't appear to be clearly stated in any place free

... perhaps any theory that uses the 4th and 5th dimensions can be manipulated

t0 predict low energy piezonuclear reactions

https://www.researchgate.net/p…ty-in-five-dimensions.pdf

Curbina wrote:

The results are what I am trying to highlight,

More results .. reducing the apparent halflife of Ni63 from 101 yrs to 79 yrs

DST theory .. but the same ultrasonics method..

https://www.semanticscholar.or…f022169a4c83ba6473e19fd8d

Replication should be relatively easy.

Dr Richard wrote:

in SAFIRE? The electrical discharge promotes gamma release from the D/H plasma

I don;t think there is much gamma release from the SAFIRE reactor.. but I could be wrong..

Such wonderful Italiano..Fabio Cardone..

Graci, Curbina

I am not so sure about the sentiments about " l'intelletto italiano"

TM3.20

Instead we first comprehended why..

The we moved from the why to the how

This is what distinguishes the Italian intellect from the intellect of the peoples of the world…

For me the low energy transmutations to a swathe of isotopes are amazing…the DST why is debatable…

More Italiano and piezo nuclear reactions here

True ...10 Mev =116,045,886,000 K

Perhaps that is why there is not much interest in replication by other scientists,

on the other hand the voltages in the SAFIRE fields are at `1000V max

and look to be down at ~100V in glowmode tm 2.05

Mishinsky and Wisniewski,Didyk have been doing transmutations for the last 8 yrs..in Russia/Poland

They are generally ignored by other scientists,,

Gold has been observed .. but requires palladium/D2

The article is a review of the experimental results obtained by the authors over the past 8 years on the synthesis of chemical elements in gases compressed up to 3 kbar with its long (up to tens of hours) gamma irradiation in the presence of cylindrical samples of metallic palladium

Thus, a dense plasma with a high electron temperature is created in the irradiated volume.

Consequently, the production of "extraneous" elements in the chamber is associated with the creation in its volume of a non-equilibrium dense plasma "

"It is noteworthy that the most impressive experiments are experiments, just with the irradiation of palladium in a condensed deuterium atmosphere. In these experiments, such chemical elements as titanium, silver and lead were synthesized in macroquantities. From scientific literature it is known that cold nuclear fusion reactions are accompanied by transmutation reactions − the transformation of some chemical elements into others. "

https://www.researchgate.net/p…origin=publication_detail

sam12 wrote:

Where is Mizuno?

Sam12..where are you?

Iowa .. hot off the astrophysics news front

https://www.sciencedaily.com/r…/2019/11/191104112823.htm

"

In a new study, the researchers confirm Voyager 2's passage on Nov. 5, 2018, into the ISM by noting a definitive jump in plasma density detected by an Iowa-led plasma wave instrument on the spacecraft. The marked increase in plasma density is evidence of Voyager 2 journeying from the hot, lower-density plasma characteristic of the solar wind to the cool, higher-density plasma of interstellar space. It's also similar to the plasma density jump experienced by Voyager 1 when it crossed into interstellar space.

"In a historical sense, the old idea that the solar wind will just be gradually whittled away as you go further into interstellar space is simply not true," says Iowa's Don Gurnett, corresponding author on the study, published in the journal Nature Astronomy. "We show with Voyager 2 -- and previously with Voyager 1 -- that there's a distinct boundary out there. It's just astonishing how fluids, including plasmas, form boundaries."

It might take a while for Gurnett to speak the word Birkeland

Walter Pegeto wrote:

Aharonov Bohm theory paper is well known, but the electric Aharonov-Bohm effect has never been experimental verified

Thankyou Walter for resolving the 2019 Pegeto controversy...there is no need to publish in Physical Review now

Maybe Pegeto wants to publish in Physical Review... a NOT high ranking journal

thesis,, :"Aharonov Bohm theory paper is well known, the effect is controversial."

Please adjust your blanket statement

It is wrong... classic Pegeto wisdom

"Aharonov Bohm theory paper is well known, the effect is controversial."

THHuxleynew wrote:

'm not sure the AB effect is controversial

How dare you doubt Pegeto physics...

Walter Pegeto wrote:

Please use wikipedia and keep us entertained!

please adjust your loose English Walter

"Aharonov Bohm theory paper is well known, the effect is controversial."

The effect is not controversial .. except in Pegeto physics.

The Aharonov–Bohm effect is a fundamental issue in physics. It describes the physically important electromagnetic quantities in quantum mechanics. Its experimental verification constitutes a test of the theory of quantum mechanics itself. The remarkable experiments of Tonomura et al. [“Observation of Aharonov-Bohm effect by electron holography,” Phys. Rev. Lett 48, 1443 (1982) and “Evidence for Aharonov-Bohm effect with magnetic field completely shielded from electron wave,” Phys. Rev. Lett 56, 792 (1986)] are widely considered as the only experimental evidence of the physical existence of the Aharonov–Bohm effect. Here we give the first rigorous proof that the classical ansatz of Aharonov and Bohm of 1959 [“Significance of electromagnetic potentials in the quantum theory,” Phys. Rev. 115, 485 (1959)], that was tested by Tonomura et al., is a good approximation to the exact solution to the Schrödinger equation. This also proves that the electron, that is, represented by the exact solution, is not accelerated, in agreement with the recent experiment of Caprez et al. in 2007 [“Macroscopic test of the Aharonov–Bohm effect,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 99, 210401 (2007)], that shows that the results of the Tonomura et al. experiments can not be explained by the action of a force. Under the assumption that the incoming free electron is a Gaussian wave packet, we estimate the exact solution to the Schrödinger equation for all times. We provide a rigorous, quantitative error bound for the difference in norm between the exact solution and the Aharonov–Bohm Ansatz. Our bound is uniform in time. We also prove that on the Gaussian asymptotic state the scattering operator is given by a constant phase shift, up to a quantitative error bound that we provide. Our results show that for intermediate size electron wave packets, smaller than the ones used in the Tonomura et al. experiments, quantum mechanics predicts the results observed by Tonomura et al. with an error bound smaller than 10−9910−99. It would be quite interesting to perform experiments with electron wave packets of intermediate size. Furthermore, we provide a physical interpretation of our error bound.