Posts by robert bryant

Rends said “so the question arises whether this is all a coincidence, or whether it is indeed a coordinated attack”

I would say it was coincidental, the suggested network of relationships around Jones Day is rather selective..

The author could have easily extended the network to Donald Trump or Starbucks…. Who are also Jones Day clients

However humans and corporates will oppose change unless it is in their interest,
For BIG energy whether British Gas or Centrica , LENR, is a threat
Whether Rossian or non Rossian.

And now for some humor in this techno-addict forum
Once upon a time the automobile was a threat to horses..

Interesting webpage on fog production .. maybe lithium will cure my fogged up brain

https://thenewfire.wordpress.c…merican-energy-companies/

Dewey said "Stirred the animals with that one -"

Can you tone down the rhetoric please

Yet another theory for LENR .. 2011 from FM Russell et al

Anyone know an experienced quodon tracker ?

www.macs.hw.ac.uk/~chris/re09.pdf

Thanks Rizal for Bazhutof info.

Bazhutov is persistent .. 30 years of erzion R&D,, still low budget in 2016? ..... 2013 slides show
basic equipment... no particle ID equipment

hopefully 2016 expts are better funded

Once upon a thread Josh said" it’s hard to cut through the thick layer of fog"
are you still there Josh .. the fog has got thicker.. can you hear me?

to add to the new thread of psychological counselling I give you an answer from
Mahalia Jackson

Don't worry we'll look back one day... long after this June and sing

"My soul look back in wonder How did I make it over" [the fog]

I feel like shouting...

Blessings

Peter said "But that is not decay which you can associate with a half-life. "

"Spontaneous nuclear decay" has an inherent assumption that "spontaneous" means "independent of chemical, physical and temperature conditions".
Of course there have been no measurements in the combination of conditions that Eric Walker suggests, especially not the recent LENR conditions where researchers are struggling to get a stable LENR environment.

Cynically I might say 'spontaneous' is synonymous with 'miraculous' because I have seen not much theory of why it happens and any generalised mathematical calculation that shows why some isotopes have long halflives and others short.
It is a bit like the old 'spontaneous generation' that preceded Pasteur.
The word is just a sign of the depth of our knowledge of how the nucleus holds together.

Dash in his early papers did use the phrase "accelerated decay' but what he meant was 'apparently accelerated'.
I think he was just challenging a certain paradigm by using this phrasing..something to do with being from the West Coast?
Your explanation that this apparent acceleration might be due to alternative non-'spontaneous' nuclear reactions caused by changes in conditions
is plausible.
We know that U-235 with a halflife of 704 million years(measured under a limited set of conditions) can disappear in a flash given different conditions

Thanks for posting your Xray paper Rakitsa.
Fo ralmost a century we have known that Coulomb barrier is far into the Mev Range.
In 1933 commenting on his students’ fission of lithium ,by proton bombardment ,Rutherford very much had the Coulomb barrier in mind

“We might in these processes obtain very much more energy than the proton supplied,
but on the average we could not expect to obtain energy in this way.
It was a very poor and inefficient way of producing energy, and anyone
who looked for a source of power in the transformation of the atoms
was talking moonshine. But the subject was scientifically interesting because it gave insight into the atoms.”

Szilard was so provoked by Rutherford's statement that he utilised the new'neutron' to propose
neutron chain reactions and the result of this and his (Einstein said so) letter to Roosevelt
is our present poisoned chalice of actinide fission technology

Since then many have proposed going through the CB by quantum tunneling
But to get significant energy out requires keV energies in.(as explained by your paper)

Theories/techniques to pump protons to keV levels also abound.
.Your Xray paper is one of the most recent, a nascent one is Mossbauer/non Mossbauer pumping(Cook/Rossi

Others have invoked particles which ignore the CB and hence get required energies in the low eV range
Szilard’s neutron chain reaction mechanism is validated but Bazhutov’s enions and Calaon’s hyds are proposal’s
without consumation with experimental validation.

Whether its done in a garage or an academic institution
the exptal results are all that count.

HG Branzell wrote ""I think you will have to be satisfied with that."
"
and "Meaning: this is what you must accept if you want nuclear reactions."

I don't accept that. Not all nuclear reactions are equal. Actinide fissions are different in effect from Beryllium 8 fission....
just as a TNT explosion differs from a candle burning.

The financial cost of the Fukushima cleanup is estimated at $105 billion dollars. The financial cost of Chernobyl is several times more.
If you ask the citizens in these areas if they want the actinide nuclear fissions that were in these reactors reinstated they will say "Tondemonai" or simply " Nyet."

On the other hand if you say to them.. there are nuclear reactions with the light elements nickel /lithium which produce much cheaper energy and cannot spread radioactive isotopes over large land areas ...

they will say " shinjirarenai ","ya ne veryu v eto" and "prove it!"
Which is basically what this LENR FORUM is about.. finding a nuclear reaction which is cheaper and safer than actinide fissions.

HG Branzell wrote "I think you'll be happy with that"

Unfortunately the byproducts of Uranium fission include Cesium 137 and I-131
and plenty of longer lived ones

The residents of Fukushima will not be able to return home for a few hundred years.

I totally agree with Bob Greenyer's comments on discus. me156 is a bright light amid the shadows. Please keep shining.

Bob Greenyer 11 hours ago First and foremost, me356 has shared most of what he has done to date, this is impressive since he is not a native English speaker. He hosted and ran with me the Padua cell for an extended run that work has given the MFMP confidence to run our cells for longer and push them harder (for instance, GS 5.2 & 5.3) - this has led to significant discoveries.

I have put a lot of ideas out there and me356 is a fast cycler and has ran with several and read widely to add his own interpretations / additions and modifications to his experiments. He is a very intelligent guy with a broad skill set. Following the re-heat of the Padua cell, he made the very best use of MFMP equipment that he had on loan from us that would have laid idle otherwise.

It is my understanding that he will share what he has done, When I have been with him in the past, there has been a free exchange of ideas and I have reported to the best of my ability as much information as possible complete with high quality visuals.

He is a private individual that wishes, for now, to remain unidentified and we must respect that - he is not a member of the MFMP and so has no moral obligation to act in the spirit of the MFMP - that he has done so to date, and says he intends to, is something I am happy about. As an individual it is a big challenge to run so many experiments alone and run them Live.

At this time of limbo, I understand the frustration felt by many, but active, productive and open (to any degree) researchers are few and far between, so we need to respect them and not drive them underground. He is very aware, as we all are, of the significance of the body of research being undertaken.

About his equipment, he has

1. SI-14B GM tube,
2. a gamma spectacular like Mathieu in France
http://www.gammaspectacular.co...
Coupled to a NaI detector and
3. some Bubbletech Neutron detectors similar to those that we used in GS5.3.

From a radiation monitoring point of view, he is well placed to observe emissions.

Eric said "Rossi mentioned the Cherokee bankruptcies.." but actuallyRossi didn't
he no commented it
Eric( another Eric) brought it up before 'cheated investor'..see below
Fog and more fog.
" Eric May 5, 2016 at 12:05 PM
Thomas Darden needs to realize that he believes it’s perfectly okay to make our lives an endless treadmill of government interferences while providing few real benefits to our health and happiness. More than anything else, such beliefs shed light on Darden’s moral values and suggest incontrovertibly that he claims that we’re supposed to shut up and smile when he says temulent things.

INDISPUTABLE FACTS:

In 2005 the Cherokee owned company EnCap received more than $300 million in publicly sponsored bond financing for the Meadowland project in New Jersey and then filed for bankruptcy protection later in 2008 and did not complete the project.

EnCap and another Cherokee affiliate earned millions of dollars in dumping fees on fill brought to the site.

Cherokee created a whopping 27 new business entities in New Jersey alone. William Gauger, the CEO that Darden appointed was indicted by FBI for “fraudulent invoicing scheme“.

In 2003, Cherokee raised $620 million in equity for investment in projects around the world. Cherokee’s portfolio of projects included industrial, office, hotel and residential properties. The shareholders of the investment funds are primarily large pension funds.

In the meantime, from 2001 to 2004, Cherokee and its consultants had contributed almost $1.5 million to the Democratic State Committee to win the project on Petty’s Island, a $1 billion waterfront makeover intended to increase tax revenue and transform the town.

Cherokee’s law firm DeCotiis even tapped Joseph Salema, a former top aide to Gov. James Florio. Salema pleaded guilty to securities fraud in 1995.

How much money did the politically connected DeCotiis law firm and other EnCap consultants make from the pool of public financing? The Record reported during its own yearlong investigation that the Teaneck firm had billed nearly $9 million by 2004 alone.

Thomas Darden’s words sound pretty until you read between the lines and see that Darden is secretly saying that he intends to exploit public sympathy in order to bolster support for his worthless escapades.

Let me end this letter by challenging the readers to urge lawmakers to pass a nonbinding resolution affirming that Mr. Thomas Darden’s success is just a flash in the pan. Are you with me, or with the forces of aspheterism and oppression?

Folks, check your facts:"

Rossi didn't mention it..the cheated investor brought it upon the rossiblog...Rossi made no comment.. but who is the cheated investor.. intrigue intrigue?

I would agree about Fabiani closeness to Rossi..judging from Mats interview.. but its a small matter
Fabiani didn't write the report. Fabio did.. easy to confuse in the fog

here's recent light on IH Cherokee dealings within the fog of business

cheatedinvestor May 5, 2016 at 9:44 PM
Dear Dr Andrea Rossi:
Tom Darden together with Cherokee Investments Partners have filed for 2 bankrupcies in February 2016. Their investors lost 23 million dollars. Obviously all money of the investors: the money just disappeared.
http://www.postandcourier.com/…e/20160208/PC05/160209426
It appears that Mr Darden customary collects investments in companies that end up dissipating the money of the investors with the excuse that the business is not gone well. With you they just found the wrong man: against any expectation, the E-Cat works and you really want to make an industry to produce it: you have broken their rules.
We will sustain you to the end.
Never give up.
C.

Rossi declined to comment.. I guess he is more busy with fire than fog

LiAlH4 inhalation will change your mood quickly..how fast can you dial 000?

http://toxnet.nlm.nih.gov/cgi-…dbs+hsdb:@term+@DOCNO+648

LiAlH4

HUMAN EXPOSURE AND TOXICITY:
Causes severe eye and skin burns. This chemical is irritating to skin, eyes, and respiratory system.
Symptoms - spasms, inflammation and edema of larynx, and bronchi, pulmonary edema, coughing,
wheezing, laryngitis, nausea, and vomiting.
Solid will burn skin and eyes.
The hydrides of lithium react with moisture and leave behind hydroxides.
Alkali metal hydroxides are highly irritating to the skin/mucous membranes/eyes by caustic and thermal action.

Calaon asked "Why is Rossi insisting in using Wh/h instead of simply saying W? "

The electricity companies charge us in 25c/ kWhr.
Their standard unit of energy is kWhr.

I personally find the Whr and kWhr a clumsy unit to deal with,
because the standard physics unit is W.s or Joules.( but in Lenr it seems to be eV)

I have seen Rossi's approach used in school textbooks to emphasize the
fact that power is energy/time and the process of multiplying Wh/h by h to get energy.

Thanks for your advice. I calculated at 873 degrees K that for deuterium the average energy level for deuterons is higher than 14 meV but still only about 300 meV.
The staircase of small steps give a method by which terahertz radiation can contribute to giving the deuteron 100 keV.
The lower step changes are definitely in the Terahertz range.

However the higher last step changes of 15 eV for De and 9 eV for Li are definitely in the uv range.

Is it possible that a spectrum of uv laser light(80 nm to 140nm) would give similar results to these xrays?

Rakitsa said "It is enough to look at Fig.8 of the paper to see that at higher excitations .."
It does look like that.

Equation 16 = 14.2 MEV... What would the calculation be for higher T like 973?

Of course this method would not be able to test at that T.. but is great at room T for a range of hydrides, deuterides

"Why are ye fearful, O ye of little F8h ?

As regards new technology. Peer review and public exposure is post hoc or unnecessary
Lets's look at the electric motor.
https://www.eti.kit.edu/english/1376.php
Faraday's electric motor was developed in 1822
In 1896 the first AC transmission system was built by Westinghouse/Tesla in NY
Plenty of patents, controversy along the way. no peer review . most of the public had no clue.
Faraday did not live to the see the publication of Thompson's peer reviewed electron paper in 1897, 75 years later.
Peer review was very post hoc.
There was plenty of will power between 1822 and 1896.
And Parkhomov, MFMP etc have plenty of will power now.

.

Rakitsa wrote "In total, we can increase the energy release by ten orders of magnitude. This means that more research is needed."

Which is why the statement to the contrary

""Apparently, the fusion rate turned out to be too low for any possible applications of this process in energy production."

was necessary to get the paper through peer review.

Much of peer review is about preserving funding for unsurprising status-quo - research.

Despite such peer review lenr research of the last 25 years has now reached critical mass.