Wyttenbach Verified User
  • Male
  • from Switzerland
  • Member since Jan 15th 2016
  • Last Activity:
  • Portal

Posts by Wyttenbach

    When you understand that this Figure shows excess heat without energy input for a extended period of time while the electrode is deloading of D, several concepts fall in place, and denying that LENR is real just becomes a personal agenda.

    Why at all do you discuss with our forum clown? Either he is a very dumb guy - what we can exclude - or he is an alimented spin doctor with some twisted mind that likes to piss at others and enjoys the reactions. He is like a marquis de Sade of LENR....

    found some information on transition of H to H(1/17) by using H(1/4) as a catalyst, releasing enormous 3.48 keV,

    As already said. single H(1/17) hydrinos cannot exist. Mills formula is just a mathematical fantasy that neglects basic physics like charge conservation.

    Clusters of H*-H* can reach more deep bonds but then they fuse to 4-He in a very nasty process. Also a fusion to 12-C is possible that exists only as a matrix and then decays to 3-He, 4-He,D etc... See IAEA tables.

    On the other side we have so called Halo nuclei where a proton exists close the nucleus as Dufour did show. Here so far we have no calculations that give exact energies as it would depend on the nucleus too.

    Please be aware that there is no strong force that will attract the proton and fuse it with the nucleus even if it touches the surface. Its all a matter of EM flux interaction and fusion most of the time needs a complex flux reorganization.

    With the SO(4) physics model I can approach the flux structure and make predictions which reactions could run. But here we walk on new ground. At least the Nickel model shows that it (some even isotopes can be stimulated by pulsed fields).

    and Helium

    Mills has no solution for the Helium except a numerical interpolation for the spin pairing. The spin pairing force is 1FC the electroweak flux compression (force) constant.

    The first three ground states of Hydrogen are 3,2,1 wave bonds and cannot be given with a potential only.

    The more tricky stuff is the electron quantization (classically dielectric repulsion) you should used for higher states...

    U.S. renewable electricity surpassed coal in 2022

    How Bankruptcy Helps the Coal Industry Avoid Environmental Liability
    Jeff Hoops built Blackjewel into the nation’s sixth largest coal company by acquiring bankrupt mines. When it declared bankruptcy, he pivoted to other…

    Repairing the Damage: The costs of delaying reclamation at modern-era mines

    What they leave behind is the classical image of the US state mafia at work.

    Take out all money. Total damage of environment, overwhelmed communities. Its the famous Sackler league people than run USA since the roaring twenties ...

    An offshore wind turbine leaves behind a new riff - biotope ...

    Original source…die-kohle-nach-der-kohle/

    I still think the underlying science is important, much more important than the patent which was seen as an alternative to your favourite peer-reviewed publishing route..

    The main issue of the patent was to stop anybody from patenting LENR. The patent covers the whole reaction mechanism that also Storms explains since years just with far more details.

    The hearing process was very revealing as I learnt that USPTO must have many hidden patents about catalysts in chemistry that work with the H*-H* conversion energy. So I had to exclude all chemistry.

    But then IH sent them all fake info about the Nickel process to force them to ask even more deep questions which I didn't want to answer.

    I started discussing an even more detailed patent but as long as all idiots claim physics is standard model they can always cheat you.

    So my goal now is just to deliver a working prototype.

    So be aware that there are many patents that never have been granted but entered and most new LENR patents are invalid as prior art exists...

    Especially true when NIST measurments are infected with corrections instead of maintaining two tables a corrected and uncorrected.

    Thanks to the old Nist 2000 values of the to low alpha particle mass I got the decisive hint for the exact SO(4) gravitation constant formula. 4/9 of the spin paired orbit do not gravitate. (The electron share).

    Now the 4/9 are gone due to QED fake from Argon-36... This is alchemy not physics.

    We shouid discuss this in the standard model church thread...

    The feedback from expert reviewers will be of value to you.

    Did you ever ask a cow about abstract painting?

    Most "experts" just know the old garbage and classify material based on garbage.

    Only somebody with deep basic knowledge and able/willing to restart thinking will able to contribute.

    Classically parallel EM flux is not attractive. Parallel charge flux is only attractive due to magnetic interaction that drags the electrons...

    But what we see on nuclear level is totally different. Parallel EM flux of same size starts a new rotation. It looks like something generates a topological charge the bends the flux.

    You should study the SO(4) model as it is so far the only consistent model for particles. All classic ideas are nice math, but totally unphysical like the famous QM orbits/probability surfaces.

    Simple things like "why should a charge occur at a certain point" when it is also at all other points at the same time...Why is QM charge not repulsive...

    And finally what is charge in reality. Latest here all classic models fail.

    So as I said. Don't waste your live time with Kindergarten Physics.

    I suspect that you with the suggested model I take here be able to motivate why Mill's math is not so bad after all.

    I mentioned it some years ago already. Mills current loops suffer from the same error as QM. He obviously didn't get it too. Current loops can never cross as charge is repulsive. So you cannot superimpose loops on an unstable surface like a sphere Mills & QM do. The only surface that can carry two loops in a homogeneous manner is a torus.

    Of course the 3 D torus is not stable in respect to EM interactions but the first two criteria (stable/homogeneous flux) are fulfilled. So if you use the torus for Mills loops i looks quite OK.

    As I said. Almost all physicists never studied any logic. None know the basics laws of mechanics and postulate a 3 rotation anti symmetric stress energy tensor. Just wet dreams...

    Sorry but the world is brutal against anybody daring to question the dogma, especially in physics.

    Yes we are back at 1984 Orwell's truth ministry.

    See also :: How deep state supported the suppression of real info and did help to spread fake info like an RNA immune therapy is a vaccine and would protect you from getting Covid what was 100% fake since the beginning as this is impossible from a medical point of view...

    Same for basic (particle) physics. 100 years fake models believed to be great just because after Sommerfeld only people did go to physics that had no clue of basic physics. Cheating is the oldest survival model and the worst you can use for a so called exact science.

    I studied all branches of logic or discrete math something most physicists miss.

    Just one of the oldest cheats is the so called double slit experiment where nobody grasps the real facts....

    All particles have spin up/down at the same moment its only a function of time when they hit the slit. (only a field fixes the spin to a certain extent but still not up/down) The rest is standard scattering = adsorption/re-emission, together with the Goss-Haenchen effect...

    But the tradition is to celebrate a mass on a common catechism.

    Original source reference:…-wirksam-erscheinen-kann/

    This is also about how the Israel/Pfizer Dr. Mengle camp cheated the world about "vaccine" (Pfizer crap) efficiency

    In randomised trials, applying the fully vaccinated case counting
    window to both vaccine and placebo arms is easy. But in cohort studies, the case‐counting window is only applied to the vaccinated
    group. Because unvaccinated people do not take placebo shots, counting 14 days after the second shot is simply inoperable. This
    asymmetry, in which the case‐counting window nullifies cases in the vaccinated group but not in the unvaccinated group, biases estimates.As a result, a completely ineffective vaccine can appear substantially
    effective—48% effective in the example shown in Table 1.

    an helix will be of this kind and also a positive with and negative helix of the same pitch inside would also be of this kind.

    About 6 years ago I started with the same logic as you, but after finding all the silly conceptual errors in QM/QED,4 potential I decided to forget all classic solutions as after 100 years of no success the probability to have it is 0.000000000000000000000000000x...

    Further Mills approach did deliver some new reasoning that sadly also Mills did not understand. Like the magnetic energy of the e-p bond that falls out as it is already is given by the reduced mass. So he failed to understand that magnetic energy is not just a radial effect its a cross product of 2 dimension...

    The final SO(4) physics solution is damn simple the classic one Mills like is also exact. But today the data inside the NIST database has been spoiled by QED followers that believe their model has some value to fudge experimental data...

    I recommend to go back to mechanics and study force free coupled rotators something the US army after WWII confiscated as war prey and locked it in for military use only...

    All allowed, symmetric solutions for coupled mass leads to toroidal energy surfaces certainly not spheres as QM simply has forgotten the second spin axes.

    But if particles only would have 2 spin axes our matter would behave quite strange when you e.g. follow a curved path. So by simple logic reasoning you ultimately understand that matter must have >= 3 rotations. Hence the dimensionality of matter is at least 4D without time.

    As I wrote this already many times just the conclusion: The first allowed surface for mass is the Clifford torus. Its a stable minimal Lagrangian (with helical paths homogeneous flux). Why all the idiots doing physics for the last 100 years failed to understand that e.g. S3 or S2 are not stable minimal Lagrangians is astonishing.

    So I can only repeat myself once more. Do not waste your live time with last century's crap.

    Reading the conclusion of the report it seems that Iron would be a must better choice, see text snippets below.

    Yes after 30cm.... So for a big reactor iron performs better but for a LENR lab its a no go as for the first 30cm it multiplies the neutrons... Even research lab use "thin" lead walls what is OK for thermal neutrons but not for the 14MeV's ones.

    And last: The pet bottle wall costs 0$....A serious neutron detector cost 4k $ You only must protect the space angle where you stay/sit.