JulianBianchi Member
  • Member since Jun 3rd 2016

Posts by JulianBianchi

  • Covid-19 News

    Interestingly enough, the membrane protein ACE2, known as the main entry point of SARS-COV-2, is a Zn metalloprotein that acts as a ionophore of Zn itself, with quercetin and luteolin shown to bind to the exact same location on ACE2 as the spike protein of SARS-COV-2, with a better binding affinity than e.g. chloroquine. These flavonoids have also a much better safety profile than chloroquine, with a potentially harmful dose as much as 3-4 orders of magnitude higher than the assumed effective dose. I personally take a supplement of quercetin and luteolin since the beginning of February.

  • Covid-19 News

    Quote from oldguy

    https://finance.yahoo.com/news…eaningless-123550415.html

    "Confirmed Coronavirus Cases Is an ‘Almost Meaningless’ Metric …….“The numbers are almost meaningless,” says Steve Goodman, a professor of epidemiology at Stanford University......What should we be watching instead? One possibility is hospitalizations.....They argue that rate of increase in hospitalizations could reflect the growth of the disease without being distorted by changes in the testing rate......Measuring death rates can eventually track the speed with which Covid-19 is spreading — as deaths represent a fraction of cases. But there’s a lag of some three weeks between infection and death......Random sampling would help too"

    https://www.bloomberg.com/opin…almost-meaningless-metric

    Indeed. Almost meaningless. "Confirmed Coronavirus cases" is more a metric of the testing frequency than anything else. A better metric (but still not necessarily good) is the number of deaths in a village or region in comparison with the previous years. For example in the north of Italy, a village has already had 158 deaths from Jan 1st 2020 while the average of the previous years at the same time of the year is 35, with small year-to-year variations around that average. Therefore we can safely conclude that about 120 deaths can be attributed directly or indirectly to the pandemic in that village. (Not saying that the official number of deaths caused by COVID-19 was only 31 for that village...). The takeaway message is that all official stats should be taken with a grain of salt.

  • Covid-19 News

    Quote from Wyttenbach

    Switzerlands starts a large patient antibody test (blood sample) today. Let's hope it does work.

    Some don't but some do, that's good news. At my lab in Geneva we already tested many patients using various antibodies assays. Rapid tests are crap but some ELISA are good.


    The prevalence remains low. Most surprising is that the immune system is reacting fast with IgG already elevated only a few days after symptoms onset. Which is also good news.

  • Covid-19 News

    Quote from Shane D.

    https://time.com/5798168/coronavirus-mortality-rate/

    Note the numbers used in the article are bogus, at least for Switzerland, where the number shown is closer to the number of tests per day, not to the total number of tests carried until now, which is 50-100 times higher, even at the date the article was published. Here in Switzerland we do about 2000 tests a day, for a population of 8-9 mios. Also we started testing relatively early thanks to the rapid availability of the Roche RT-PCR test.


    This high number of tests may look impressive at first sight, probably the world highest per resident, however since last Friday the number of people with symptoms exceed by far our capacity not to test but to collect samples. The challenge is not about the analytical capacity (as in other countries) but about the collection capacity because collection by qualified personnel takes time with important safety precautions, not saying some pressure on the availability of nasal swabs. The reason why I'm now recommending the switch to at home self blood tests, this at least to know when people under quarantine should be discharged. China is again doing right with now using the IgG and IgM antibodies test as the main tool to discharge patients regardless if they tested positive or not to the RT-PCR test.


    This does not change though the overall message of the article that yes the mortality rate numbers do depend on the testing strategy and that current estimate by WHO at 3.4% is most likely too high given the high number of asymptomatic subjects.

  • Covid-19 News

    Many close relations positive around me. Nevertheless no chloroquine here. Because of its bad safety profile. But some quercetin, luteolin, melatonin and Vit C. And most importantly I test myself.

  • Lower than expected H distance in metal hydrides at RT

    https://phys.org/news/2020-02-…conductivity-ambient.html


    "An important question is whether or not the observed effect is limited specifically to zirconium vanadium hydride," said Andreas Borgschulte, group leader for hydrogen spectroscopy at Empa. "Our calculations for the material—when excluding the Switendick limit—were able to reproduce the peak, supporting the notion that in vanadium hydride, hydrogen-hydrogen pairs with distances below 2.1 angstroms do occur."


    What a (non) surprise. Back in 1989 many articles were published claiming that fusion was impossible because H-H distance cannot be lower than 2.1 A. This is now proven wrong. Though still not enough for fusion to occur, the qualitative limit is broken.


    Not saying that I would love a collaboration between the EMPA an ORNL with Holmlid with their technology applied to UDH. But here I guess I'm dreaming.


    Note: I was not able to locate the original PNAS article. Apparently the press release has been published before the original article.

  • Electron-assisted fusion

    Quote from Jarek

    But we are not talking abut weak/strong force here - which are negligible above a few fm distance.


    We are talking about getting to this a few fm distance, which needs investing hundreds of keVs.

    fm distance is not required for fusion to occur, pm range is plenty enough because of quantum tunneling.

  • Norront Fusion Energy AS

    Quote from AlainCo

    First, can someone explain to me how they are sure it is Kaon... (or Muons as before)... It must be physicist art with the gamma spectrometer...

    It is relatively straightforward. Holmlid determines the mean life time of the particles that decay after UDH is hit by a laser. The measured decay times are exactly those known for the kaons. No other known particle has such mean life times.

  • MIZUNO REPLICATION AND MATERIALS ONLY

    Quote from Storms

    From an atom's point of view, burnishing causes a thin layer of amorphous Pd to be applied over the Ni. Because the Ni is covered by a very thin layer of NiO, the process will remove some of the NiO layer, which is then mixed with the Pd, while some of the Pd will cover the NiO in other regions. The question is, "Why would such a complex structure support a nuclear reaction"? Nothing about such a material is similar to materials observed to support LENR in the past. What unidentified common feature can be present in both this material and in a piece of common Pd wire or sheet, such as used to achieve most examples of LENR? This is the kind of question we must answer.

    Exactly. That is why I find the formation of Rydberg matter in LENR so appealing. It is a common feature of most, if not all, serious LENR work. All these materials support the formation of Ryberg matter of hydrogen either at their surface or in cracks. A common feature compatible with your model of LENR.

  • X-Ray Laser: Dynamically assisted nuclear fusion

    Quote from barty

    This sounds similar to Holmlids approach?

    Not much, the laser that Holmlid is using is much much less powerful than a XFEL. In Holmlid's case, first there is a phase transition from Rydberg Matter of hydrogen to a supposed ultra condensed form with atoms separated by only about 1 picometer. Tunneling to fusion already happens without a laser.


    Here they still use the brute force with crazy powerful lasers to overcome this repulsion. That said, I find this approach still better than thermonuclear fusion which IMHO is the worst approach to fusion.

  • The church of SM physics

    Quote from THHuxleynew

    Not sure if you understand Bayesian modelling and how hypotheses (= theories) can be found probable or improbable based on how well they fit data, taking into exact account the number of arbitrary parameters used to get the fit. You are not showing this knowledge, if you do understand it?

    Funny that you mention Bayesian modeling because it is precisely after the application of Bayesian inference to the evaluation of LENR evidence that I became interested in that field. It just shows that the same model can lead to radically different opinions.

  • Clearance Items

    Very interesting work. A pity that they worked at such high pressure levels. IMHO working at a lower pressure would have significantly increased the chances to form Rydberg Matter of D. It is not a coincidence that they got unusual effects when the pressure was the lowest. But still not low enough IMO. The huge and rapid increase in temperature only partially solved that by transiently creating a high numbers of excited D atoms desorbing from Ti.

  • Open-air hot powder cell—costs and planning

    Steam explosion is indeed a risk if there is a phase change with increasing temperature. That can be minimized according to the salt concentration and how fast the temperature will increase around the phase change temperature.


    If you plan such ingeresting experiment, I can participate financially. Just PM me.

  • Fact Check, debunking obviously false information

    Interesting thread that reminds me the two different views that exist among quantum physicists on force carriers: the one of the dominant Feynman school (represented here by THHuxleynew ) who infer that perturbation theory and with it virtual particles are universal and apply at all time/energy/distance scales, and the one who realizes the limitations of SM, with force carriers being only a construct of perturbation theory that only applies to high energy particle physics and fails in low energy QCD, bound states, solitons, etc.., which actually represent most of our universe.


    When a new order calculation using perturbation theory leads to a change of several hundreds percent in cross section values, I do not applaud the result (which may be beautiful from a mathematical standpoint), but put into question the physical meaning of the underlying model. I'm a big fan of the like of Hestenes, Barut and Schwinger, much less of Feynman, and still less of where SM is leading us today. In French we have an expression "fuite en avant" that applies so well here.

  • Fact Check, debunking obviously false information

    Except this paper is not a review. Here is a review: https://arxiv.org/pdf/1709.0492


    Not good that cross sections calculated by perturbative QCD change so much from LO to NLO to NNLO and now with N3LO corrections. This does not give much credence to the underlying model. Furthermore, this only applies to high-energy physics, because perturbation theory and with it the concept of force-mediating particles fail in low-energy QCD, bound states, solitons, etc...