Quote from THHuxleynew

If you think there are seldom undetected experimental errors you are probably unfamiliar with engineering!

I think a less patronising way of cautioning somebody who is a very skilled engineer might be appropriate.

The two posts above have been copied over from 'Clearance Items' where our top scout Ahlfors posted them Since they are very relevant to Mizuno's work, I thing they deserve to be in this thread also.

In 2002, Infinite Energy published a two-part article by Don

Hotson, “Dirac’s Equation and the Sea of Negative Energy”

(Issues 43 and 44). These are available online at:

http://www.zeitlin.net/OpenSETI/Docs/HotsonPart1.pdf

http://www.zeitlin.net/OpenSETI/Docs/HotsonPart2.pdf

As a casual reader of IE at the time the articles first appeared,

I did not pay close attention to the depth of the material;

however, I was motivated to read them more carefully when

Billie Westergard, an astronomer who published an article IE

#68, stated that he thought Hotson’s work might be the best

published in physics. By then, I was a technical editor for IE

and I reread the Hotson articles. First I read them through,

realizing I was missing a lot. Then I studied them, trying to

see the justification for each assertion and came to the conclusion

that Billie Westergard was probably right and these

articles might be the best material written in physics; I went

on to state this in an editorial (IE #69). Don saw my editorial

and said that I “smoked him out of his cave.” That started

a two-year effort that resulted in the third article that is in

this issue.

Hotson Infinite Energy.pdf

LDM

Thank you so much for all your painstaking investigative work on the Lugano experiment. Since it is scattered over a long time period, would you be able to write a couple of paragraphs describing your main conclusions. That would be useful to many members I'm sure.

You have a PM in 'conversations' btw.

Bump

It is indeed an excellent book, so good that somebody purloined my copy.

Quote from seven_of_twenty

The look like an artifact of the radar imaging system.

Or possibly an artifact of the interwebs. We see a lot of those.

Wyttenbach, Phillipe Hatt and Cydonia are all joined now.

You cannot see the group until you get a permission upgrade from admin. Then 'all will be revealed'.

THE NUCLEAR STRUCTURE RESEARCH GROUP (NSRG) - A tribute to the late Norman Cook.

ICCF-22 attracted an unusually strong group of nuclear structure theorists, who represented almost 25% of the 150 attendees. This group (mostly) attended an evening meeting and one of the topics discussed was the need for improved communication between group members. Currently there are a couple of LENR email-based groups which are neither convenient or well supported. Accordingly, after discussion with the LENR-Forum team it was decided to offer them a private 'sub domain' within this forum on order to stimulate the exchange of ideas and theory papers. The group will be very strictly moderated, and membership is intended to be by invitation (by other members) only. Posts made there will not be visible to non-group members, but we hope there will be a public thread where some content will be duplicated. Current members of LENR-Forum will of course be able to apply for membership, but granting access will not be an automatic process. I have no doubt there will be a lot of heavy-duty math and topology involved, so not everybody's choice of chocolate biscuit. Sensible contributors will be welcomed, people just joining to bicker will be exiled.

DID YOU GET AN EMAIL INVITATION ALREADY?

• If you already have forum membership you will hit the 'access denied' page if you click the link to the registration page. This is, because you already are registered
  In that case send one of the team a PM via 'conversations' and you will get the relevant permissions.
  We will encourage (but not enforce) the use of real names btw.
• If you are not already a member yet, you will need to register and wait for your membership and access to the private space to be approved by a team member.
• After a team member granted access permissions to you, the new space is visible on the forum main page or on the left side of the portal page called "[PRIVATE] The Nuclear Structure Research Group". When you get to the new space you will see the current threads, and you will be able to create new ones or post in existing ones - or indeed you can post in the public threads.

Insightful look at a presentation on the triple phase intersection of energy, the economy, and the environment. Film credit -Bob Greenyer, MFMP,

Quote from Desireless

I believe he found the steps in some way and understand why it is needed.

It's called 'process knowledge' - the things that experimenters (and great cooks) learn during the course of performing hundreds of experiments. Half of it may be unnecessary, something akin to superstitious rituals, like wearing lucky socks to job interviews but the problem is you can never be sure which half is required and which half is not.

Nuclear Transmutation with Carbon and Oxyhydrogen Plasma - Slobodan Stankovic

Jed Rothwell presents his 'R20' collaboration with Mizuno - filmed and posted by MFMP (Bob Greenyer)

Quote from Storms

Also, the SEM does not give a true representation of reality. Figuring out what the picture means requires more than imagination. At best, such a picture is only a rough guide to understanding and cannot alone be used as proof for anything.

That is very true - both SEM images and TOF-SIMS can lead to mistaken conclusions. Contaminants of the strangest kind can be found everywhere- but particularly in science laboratories, and the analysis pf physical features os also something that takes a very long time to develop,

Safire have attracted their own theoretician, Edo Kaal who I have met at the last 2 meetings organised by ISCMNS in Italy.

Peer reviewed papers on this topic do exist. Here's one which make the link to electron vortices on an approximation to a monopole. .

https://repository.uantwerpen.be/docman/irua/aa3f2b/8282.pdf

You bet they are real.

I like De Broglie's pilot wave theory a lot, but there's some evidence that it too is not a complete explanation of reality. See this for example:- https://www.quantamagazine.org…antum-weirdness-20181011/

Quote from LeBob

For some, but for people with higher resolution displays that can clear it up the detail is appreciated!

You can insert pictures as 'thumbnails' which conserve scree space but enlarge when you click on them. Also quite a few of our members view the site using mobile phones these days. We have to (try to) think of everybody you know.