Zeus46 Member
  • Member since Sep 22nd 2016

Posts by Zeus46

    I'm surprised you can put your clothes on by yourself in the morning. You can, can't you? PS: dead people can't sue for damages nor can anyone on the behalf. Not to mention that I am not releasing any of Papp's sordid records because I never saw any. I am not even reporting facts about Papp! I am simply reporting an anecdote about what someone told me. Hear say. Also you seem to have lost track and wandered into the wrong thread. Anyway sue me. Give it a try. I am terrified.


    Well after the barrage of insults that followed my helping you to understand the laws that surround patients' private medical information, it seems you were terrified enough to delete all the posts where you broke the law. Fancy that!

    Since the cylinder wall is a solid, the cylinder is going to vibrate equally on its interior and exterior. If there is a material that will form cavitation bubbles on the inside of the cylinder, then those materials will cavitate.


    ...Although cavitation inside the cylinder only happens in the gap between the piston and cylinder, not on the swept surface above.

    Vibrations of the cylinder wall induce alternating low and high pressure in the coolant against the cylinder wall. The result is pitting of the cylinder wall


    It's the piston vibrating sideways, causing it's lubricant to cavitate, that pits cylinder walls.



    During this increasing pressure environment inside the cylinder, cavitation bubbles must have formed


    It's not the pressure cycle from combustion that cavitates the oil... it's poor cylinder/piston tolerances.

    As an experienced librarian at LENR-CANR let me suggest that you should dismiss people such as Yugo. I know the type. Again and again they demand to be spoon-fed the data, but they never read what you suggest. They never do their homework. They are not serious. They say nothing has been published, so I point out there are THOUSANDS of papers. They whine and kvetch that thousands are too many, how can I be expected to read so many, why can't you narrow it down and point to a few??So I point to a few, which are featured on the front page at LENR-CANR.org, for crying out loud. How hard was that? Too hard, I guess.


    Hmmmm, sounds to me like you're a reader



    External Content www.youtube.com
    Content embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.
    Through the activation of external content, you agree that personal data may be transferred to third party platforms. We have provided more information on this in our privacy policy.



    yay for skeptopathy

    The image I posted says it's slide 27. I would tend to believe the label on it.


    For the ninth time... You are looking at a footnote from the 'notes' section. :D


    It only says 'slide27' to help the supposed "reader" know which part of the main text it refers to.


    That should be an easy concept to understand, no?



    And so feeble minded you don't know how to point a person to specific text or images in a paper.


    Bad memory too Mary? This was about as simple as I could make it:


    You want slide 27, which can be found hiding directly underneath slide 26.


    Also, as I mentioned before, slide 21 too ...This can be found 21 pages from the start of the document, if you don't count the title page.


    Let me know if I need to dumb the explanation down some more...


    EDIT: Just for you Mary, I will also explain that slide 27 can be found 27 pages from the start of the document, if you don't count the title page. ...Also If you manage to loose count before reaching the right slide, each slide has a number printed at the top.

    For the eighth time, the image you made is of the notes section, at the end of the document... It's essentially a footnote for (the actual) slide 27. This is one of the problems that comes with scanning a document quickly rather than reading it properly.


    You really think I am going to read 30 pages of Celani crap


    No, I don't*, I think you are a troll who revels in in his anti-intellectual stance. (US political metaphors withheld). But you should read it, for at the very least, it would help you to avoid saying really dumb things like:


    Celani is absurd. He has never implemented the most obvious suggestion made by me years ago and by others on Vortex: USE MORE F'N WIRES with the same heater wire.


    Celani is singularly unimpressive and I hate to waste time with him. He still failed to do the one extremely obvious thing which would have improved his results... if they are real... which I very much doubt.



    So to recap... You don't believe it's real, therefore it's a waste of time to read about it. But because you haven't read it, that's really just an uneducated knee-jerk dismissal. Good show. Randi would be proud.


    But when Interested Observer says: "Since I have not studied the requisite hundreds of papers required to have an informed opinion about LENR, I am quite willing to admit that I don't have one"


    I'm surprised you have the chutzpah to reply: "My position also. Perhaps IO and I are twins, separated at birth."


    Don't you see the fundamental difference between IO's agnostic/skeptic approach and your hardcore skeptopathy?


    You seriously don't?



    * And I don't care whether you do read it. You're a joke to me. An caricature whose arrogance is to be held up for amusement, as a salutary lesson to those who might in future allow their intellectual curiosity to wither to a similar level.

    :D


    For the seventh time: YOU ARE STILL LOOKING IN THE 'NOTES' SECTION. YOU UTTER PILLOCK. LOOK AT SLIDE 27.


    This whole situation is the most prolonged bout of idiocy I have ever witnessed... Must have been three weeks now?


    Why not just read the whole damn paper*? ...it's only 30 pages or so, and the text is very big. It would save you from looking so silly.



    * instead of repeatedly proving my point that 'you never read the papers you comment on'.