Now the list of trolls is self completing. Just one more is missing! 
Trolls always write in correct and polite English. This is enough to get job in a Swiss bank but in science you cannot hide behind made up polite garbage.
Wyttenbach
Verified User
- Male
- from Switzerland
- Member since Jan 15th 2016
- Last Activity:
- Portal
Posts by Wyttenbach
-
-
Wyttenbach, calm down, please.
No its fun to read clownery. For somebody that did never read the original P&F paper you are very creative. Putin will honor you!
-
We still wait for our clowns/trolls to explain the 3 hour after boil of heat production.
If you know the total volume it is easy to calculate the evaporation rate at a given temperature. (Leads to halve dry, empty)
Conclusion:: Both trolls never did read the original papers. One troll did watch a faked video - a copy of a copy of what?
The papers answer all questions also a voltage graph is included. Only clowns invent fake voltages...
-
In fact THHuxleynew is really a bashing company, with several people who " are working" one after one under this pseudo.
Differential linguistic analysis did show that at least 3 different person contribute to THH posts... This is enough to delete the account.
-
There is an intriguing experiment with ultrasonification of mercury
Mercury is highly LENR active due to multiple magnetic states. Its not a good candidate unless you can fix it in a matrix e.g with Br.
-
When will the critics here explain the 3 hours after evaporation heat production???
-
And please don't feel insulted by the use of the term "pseudo skeptics", I don't mean in with ill intention,
It's more close to
idiotor as many think paid troll.... -
Did anybody (of our clowns) read the original paper in electro analytical Chemistry 1990 287, p293?
OR even better the paper in ICCF3? that shows the graph (fig.8) of extended >3 hours heat production after cell is dry?
-
This is about the 10th Forum thread dealing with US and LENR. Russ George and Stringham did prove transmutation from US already 30 years ago. Please read the literature and stop producing noise (useless posts).
-
Obviously Homlid made some basic errors. 3,4 (H(0)) clusters cannot produce mesons...Basically you need about 52MeV for forming kaons.
-
California (USA) now is the leading Dr. Mengele terror state::
Rebuttal to California's bill AB 2098 muzzling doctorsAs some are probably aware, California’s Legislature just passed an obscenity of a bill titled “AB 2098” which calls for the state’s medical board to revoke…www.thedesertreview.comAs some are probably aware, California’s Legislature just passed an obscenity of a bill titled “AB 2098” which calls for the state’s medical board to revoke the license of any physician who expresses an opinion “contradicted by contemporary scientific consensus to the standard of care.”
USA is catching up with Putin. Free world just for profits for fraudsters like Pfizer/Biontec owners (JF mafia..) !!
-
No, LF loves skeptics who are truly open minded,
LF (laugh forum) urgently needs more clowns that can three through the beer bubbles....
-
The loosely-bonded (and very large) superfluid chain clusters, the ones that Holmlid et al. suggest in the paper linked earlier to be the source of reactive H atoms in catalyzed reactions, do not seem to be involved.
Chains are just magnetically connected H*-H* as Mills did show in an impressive video. H*/D* always occur in pairs. There is no single=free H(0)/D(0) .
Holmlid claims that his reaction comes from regular clusters like 13H*,19H*, 31H*. For 4-He fusion with muons you minimally need 9H*.
The spectra from H*/D* are quite different as Holmlid said in a private communication especially in respect to muons.
-
Several of the catalytic industrial processes also listed in the paper linked above use gaseous reactants.
Styrene catalysts have pores what leads to a diffusion layer shielded from kinetics.
The question is whether you want to have clusters of H*-H*/D*-D* or single molecules. Especially for H*-H* as seen in industry this never leads to H-H fusion. It only delivers the catalyst energy.
-
In-situ geonucleosynthesis is pretty damned obvious, with a bit of sensible thought, so it's unfortunate that we are forced by our education systems to look for our own individual hypotheses.
The problem we still face today is that physics is dominated by a religious (standard model) sect, that claims everything can be explained by fields. Everything these folks invented is bare nonsense and pure mathematical fantasy.
The solar corona has a temperature of 1 mio C the surface just 6000C. So elements are produced in the intense fields around the sun.
-
Yes, 2 things seem strange about Iwamura's results. Apparently the oxygen "generated" AND the rate he found around 20%...
This isn't strange at all if you know the exact structure of Nickel and how it reacts in CF. Only 61-Ni can react the classic way. All even isotopes form chain reactions e.g. 62-Ni -H*-H* - 62-Ni - H*-H* -- and form larger compounds that then break off in multiple stable cluster including H/D. The most stable points are 16-O, 28-Si, 42-Ca later Zr, Pd. Of course this are just center of masses and thus most stable isotopes are produced by such chains.
-
The paper on the catalysts for UDH production by Holmlid et al. suggests that it is formed even at many bar of pressure, since it is possibly directly involved in catalytic processes in ordinary industrial reactors.
Here you mix up liquid and gas. Please just start to think about the difference in speed of a free gas atom and a liquid molecule, then you have the answer...
-
UDH (H*-H*/D*-D*) only forms under high vacuum condition. Spins must be able to align in para state.
-
Therefore, I do not give much credence to people who insist that malice is involved in LENR's difficulties.
This is OK as all of them so far failed to deliver new physics...
But CF was such a big gold nugget on the tablet of a few people that cheating started some weeks after the P&F presentation. You have to know some people to get the real insight.
I personally think that today most folks involved in LENR/CF are greedy and don't want to share even their mistakes...
My approach was to publish as many facts I could find to stop anybody to make blocking patents. In face of a dying planet there are no words to explain how stupid most people are.
-
I just assumed this particular reviewer was not familiar with biological processes at all. Albeit specialization is generally necessary, it can create a lot of blind spots, and this may be one example.
Such things happen due to the cellar effect. If to many bottles (=dumb heads as we say in German..) make it to prof.. it ends up in a wine cellar. Today peer review means promote your phd's and your (fake-) fame.
