Posts by Alan Smith

    His suggestion is irrelevant because he does not provide an experiment where he can reproduce the data glitch he claims must be the source of the illusion of excess heat. He is just in the business of denial.


    I asked Kirk repeatedly - in this place - to give me a clear description of an experiment that could prove his hypothesis, with the intention of performing it (I had more spare time then) but I never got a proper answer.

    Hagelstein phonon - grasping at straws here - all material has phonons - how do you observe a "Hagelstein phonon". But if Hagelstein's fractionating ideas are observable i'd expect him to have experiments that check that. Paper?


    Very difficult to find this information of course. Go to Jed's library at https://lenr-canr.org/ and in the search bar type in 'Hagelstein and Phonon'. I get 163 hits - take your pick.

    I didn't made anything up. I didn't write that TG "disproved" LENR or anything else, I actually said that the authors of Nature's article "Revisiting the cold case of cold fusion" reminded us that LENR is theoretically impossible. This is the entire second paragraph of the chapter "An historical view", in which the sentences I'd mentioned have been emphasized:

    From https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-019-1256-6


    These results were met with immediate scepticism because nuclei at room temperature should not penetrate the Coulomb barrier. The probability of fusion drops exponentially as particle energy is reduced. Known fusion processes, at rates high enough to be quantified in current experiments, require particle energy greater than about 2 keV in the centre-of-mass frame, corresponding temperature greater than 20 million kelvin. However, to this day, disparities remain between predicted and observed fusion reaction rates at low particle energy (in the kiloelectronvolt range), which have been attributed to electronscreening effects that enhance the rate of tunnelling through the Coulomb barrier.

    Ascoli65


    As you are not a native English speaker I will forgive your untruthful/innacurate description of what was written in that piece you quoted. That paragraph does not say anything is 'theoretically impossible' (your words). It says it 'should not' happen. They do not say 'could (cannot) not' happen. The difference between should not and could not is same as the difference between 'possible but unlikely' and 'totally impossible'. That is the door into cold fusion and the Google gang have not shut it, they are looking to find it, characterise it and (probably) commercialise it..


    Then they go on to say  'However, to this day, disparities remain between predicted and observed fusion reaction rates at low particle energy (in the kilo electronvolt range), which have been attributed to electron screening effects that enhance the rate of tunnelling through the Coulomb barrier.'


    In other words, data shows that there is a cold fusion effect. And they say in the same piece 'Nonetheless, a by-product of our investigations has been to provide new insights into highly hydrided metals and low-energy nuclear reactions, ' which suggests that they have seen things that give them reason to continue.

    From the message boards today...


    https://uk.advfn.com/stock-mar…t-capital-WPCT/share-chat


    'Quoting from the article: Link assesses Mr Woodford’s investments at least every six months and said Industrial Heat’s “development had not progressed at the rate upon which previous reviews were based”. So what new things have Link learned about cold fusion the past 6 months? More than that, what did they think had been the significant progress the 6 months prior that warranted a 357% valuation uplift? Especially as IH are in the habit of publishing close to nothing. To me, they are more culpable, even, than NW - it’s akin to corrupt police.'

    The comparative time scale of the two events has nothing to do with it.


    Well, I only partly agree. The longer the calibration runs the more the influence of ambient conditions (like the weather) becomes visible and can be taken into account. Because of the daily temperature cycles in the lab anything less than 24 hours would be folly, and preferably a calibration run should take in several working days and a weekend. This should be done at both the beginning and end of a very long test run, to allow for seasonal changes such as a lower or higher sunshine level inside the lab.


    But there is no way it must be the same duration as the test. In a better world I would like to see a matched pair of reactors, test and control which have been exhaustively calibrated before testing begins and then run side-by side in their own calorimeters. But all this costs time, money and takes up space Mizuno might not have. Old London vernacular 'When if's and ands become pots and pans I can cook some dinner' Alternative vulgar version 'If my aunt had balls she would be my uncle'.

    RE THE POST ABOVE. LENR FORUM INCLUDES REGULAR UPDATES ON THIS ADVENTURE POSTED BY OUR MEMBER GENNADY. THEY ARE OFFERED MERELY AS NEWS, AND ARE NOT TO BE TAKEN AS A PROMOTION, ENCOURAGEMENT TO INVEST OR ENDORSEMENT OF THE COMPANY IN ANY WAY. AS ALWAYS WITH INVESTMENTS IN BLUE-SKY SCIENCE THEY ARE HIGHLY SPECULATIVE AND MAY GO DOWN.

    SPAWAR Systems Center-Pacific Pd:D Co-Deposition Research: Overview of Refereed LENR Publications. A synopsis of 20 papers collected (and presumably re-edited) by Jack Dea.


    https://www.academia.edu/83360…ublications?auto=download


    Abstract
    Scientists at the US Navy SPAWAR Systems Center-Pacific (SSC-Pacific), andits predecessors, have had extraordinary success in publishing LENR papers in peer-reviewed journals. This success hasn’t come easily and is due to severalfactors. One key reason for this success was the courage of the SSC-Pacific upper management in allowing scientists to conduct research and publish results in acontroversial field. The few journal editors, who had the fortitude to consider our work, also contributed to this success. This contrasts with the majority of their peers who, taking the path of least resistance, ignored our work out of hand andreturned manuscripts with, ‘the subject matter is not in the purview of the journal’.The reviewers also played a role in the successful publication of LENR-related papers. A multitude of reviewers, many outside the LENR field, had to put asidetheir biases and look objectively at our data. In turn, the reviewers’ relentlessconcerns forced us to tenaciously address their issues. Ultimately, the SSC-Pacificteam published 21 refereed papers in seven journals and a book chapter, spanning19 years beginning in 1989. This paper is a brief synopsis of those publications.

    Amateur diagnoses of mental health problems are totally off topic and have no place here. They are tolerated to a certain (and very limited) extent in the Rossi thread, but that is it. You can always ask the Mods for helpm such requests have never been ignored internally at least.

    Shares in under-fire money manager Neil Woodford’s listed fund crashed 10% on Friday after one of its key investment’s faced a £30m write-down.

    WPCT.L) announced on Friday morning that independent assessors had written down the value of its investment in Industrial Heat, a startup developing new energy sources including cold fusion." data-reactid="23">Woodford Patient Capital Trust (WPCT.L) announced on Friday morning that independent assessors had written down the value of its investment in Industrial Heat, a startup developing new energy sources including cold fusion.

    “an idea on the fringes of modern physics.”" data-reactid="24">Industrial Heat is one of Woodford’s biggest investments. It has attracted scepticism, with the Financial Times saying in June that Industrial Heat is based on “an idea on the fringes of modern physics.”

    READ MORE: Woodford fund freeze 'undermines trust' in whole industry" data-reactid="25">READ MORE: Woodford fund freeze 'undermines trust' in whole industry

    Woodford Patient Capital Trust said write-down is based on “a reassessment of the current progress of the business.” It will affect the company’s net asset value by about 3.4p per share, or about £30m. Woodford Patient Capital Trust’s total net asset value is £710m.

    Any concern about oil vapor getting into the turbo etc without the foreline trap? I'm in the same situation, waiting for foreline trap to arrive.


    Well, having changed the filaments, rebaked the QMS and pumped it down for a couple of days we are now at 3.4x10-8mB - and the foreline trap only arrived today and isn't fitted.


    So maybe- depending on your roughing pump you don't have to worry. They are mostly to trap water vapour anyway.