Posts by nul-points

    I think this forum would benefit if members had less 'i am right you wrong attitude'. Two posts out of three are either demonstration of own wit or an attack on the other person.

    i couldn't agree more, Max - it seems self-defeating to the intent of the forum, that when one tries to assist another genuine member against a trouble-maker this sort of interrogation follows. counter-productive and short-sighted for the well-being of the forum. sad days. thanks for your constructive contributions

    ah yes, i see exactly what you mean - ad hominem - lack of supporting reference to papers - 'strawman' type arguments - no, we don't to encourage any of that, a good point, well made, Eric

    i think it's necessary to go slightly further back in time to get a representative overview of the 'interesting points' offered from that source, Eric

    you don't have to go back very far, to find that Axil was being pressed to provide information about a reference he made to GeV energy levels n LENR

    Axil replied earnestly, at some length, posting his sources - i offered another source to augment Axil's reply

    Did this result in a round of informed discussion from the questioner? If you're interested an example of 'the merits' of his contributions, why not scroll back a little and see how interested he really was after his questions had been answered?

    You suggest some good questions in your list above - many of them are answered in the papers being noted, it's obvious that some people who visit this site are not at all interested in reading, thinking, discussing and comparing information about the evidence for LENR - instead they visit for their own sad entertainment, scoring self-satisfying points off honest & diligent 'home-students' like Axil, whose moral stature puts them to shame

    i hope i've answered your question


    ... made some interesting points that I hope people will think about and which should be considered on their merits.

    >> "If these particles can penetrate a spacecraft and an astronaut I think we should suffer such wasp stings down here too."

    is this the sort of 'interesting point' you meant, Eric? ;-)


    When one's hopes are up, it can be unpleasant engaging with skeptics. But H-G has made some interesting points that I hope people will think about and which should be considered on their merits.

    We should ask ourselves questions like these: How do we know there is strange radiation? Are the funny exposures examples of it? Is there a mundane explanation? Perhaps several for different cases? We should be curious to know.

    LOL tu brute?

    H-G Branzell : "Yet another example of a desperat attempt to avoid countering a point made. So you are stuck at nul-points, my friend."

    ...awww - is *that* the best you've got?!? ... i really hoped that you were lining up to engage with us, share the benefit of your knowledge, without prejudice, and put your expensive and privileged education to better use - instead of throwing stones through our windows



    hej H-G

    HGB >> "Nul-points, do I smell jealousy? I can assure you that there is no need to fear any competition from my side. By the way, I think that your alias is very fitting, take it as a compliment."

    well, despite what Kurt said, you certainly don't smell Teen Spirit

    i'm gutted, H-G - absolut - to realise that you've stolen Axil away from me

    my wife asked me to tell you that she's gutted too, she thought she'd finally got rid of me ;-)

    dayyum - my world is falling apart!

    ah well, at least someone is saying nice things about my username

    an amateur-radio operator seemed to think it's connected with a minima in tuned-circuits, someone else thought it was a pun on zero-point energy - but you and i - hey - we know it's an ironic taunt from the land of ABBA to their musically-challenged neighbours in Eurovision

    HGB >> "Apart from mutual exchange of courtesies, several pictures of microscopic tracks on various surfaces have been shown in some threads on this forum. For lack of other explanation they have been ascribed to "strange radiation". This is akin to assuming that any Unidentified Flying Object is an alien space ship.

    Certainly a single Strange Radiation Particle cannot generate tracks like these. It would take a beam of such particles. This beam must be deflected and perhaps also modulated to create the repetitive patterns that distinguish those tracks.

    Finely focused particle beams do not materialize spontaneously, they have to be engineered using a particle already known to science."

    interesting opinions, all, H-G - unfortunately, although you are privileged to have a serious scientific education it seems that you are more interested in baiting honest students of anomalous discoveries than you are in reading, studying and thoughtfully discussing the contents of the papers which are offered to you, and others, as sources of recorded experimental evidence when you raise issues with which you have no intention of seriously engaging

    your tutors and mentors must be really proud of your behaviour here, not to mention the disappointing, cursory and spurious debates you offer, about arbitrary 'strawman' arguments



    I don't understand how accelerating a material to hit a target is fusion by cavitation.

    hi Mark

    check out the magnitude of pressures & temperatures which can be generated in cavitation/sonofusion events - impressive - and this company claims to have designed a target geometry which amplifies the pressure (presumably focussing energy using, e.g., parabolic profiles?)

    the cool thing is that pistol-shrimps got there first. ;-)


    ...from the paper, Low-energy nuclear reactions and the leptonic monopole

    (Lochak, Urutskoev), referring to the tracks/traces produced by "strange" radiation:

    Doctor Ivoilov will present in his report some very interesting results for the traces [8]. Here are some conclusions based on the presented experimental data.

    1. The particle which left the trace in the nuclear emulsion is charged, as nuclear emulsions are insensitive to neutrons.

    2. The particle cannot have electric charge, as otherwise it could not be able to pass through two meters of atmospheric air and two layers of black paper.

    3. The particle does not have high energy, as no delta-electrons are observed.

    4. The mechanism of the interaction between the particle and the photosensitive layer is not clear. Assuming the Coulomb mechanism, the absorbed energy estimated using the darkening area equals around 1 GeV.

    5. The radiation is of nuclear origin; it interacts with magnetic fields.

    This calls for a discussion of Lochak’s magnetic monopole. Lochak created his theory 20 years before our experiments [9 – 12], that is, before those results for understanding and explaining of which we are now attempting to use it. It should be emphasized that this is a good omen for a theory. It is always suspicious when the theories are created specially to explain an experimental observation. They are like the circles drawn on a target after a shoot has been made.

    Dirac’s magnetic monopole theory is well known in physics [13]. In his theory Dirac with a mathematic ingenuity specific to him managed to relate non-integrability of the wave function’s phase to the singularity which emerges when describing the interaction between the electron and the magnetic pole. Paradoxically, the Dirac monopole is not described by the fundamental equation of the quantum electrodynamics which is named after him. This seems to be the reason why the Dirac monopole is not in the mainstream of the development of theoretical physics.

    There is one more reason for that which is related to symmetry. Writing the equation for the Lorentz force acting on a magnetic charge:

    [see paper for equation]

    we can see easily that inasmuch as Fr is a polar vector and the right-hand side of the equation is a pseudo-vector, then g, the magnetic charge, is to be a pseudo-scalar. This fact is very unusual for physicists. It means that the magnetic charge features a symmetry type other than the electric charge. Pierre Curie was the first to notice this fact. His reasoning was very simple and at the same time very wise. The electric charge is a scalar and it generates a field described by a polar vector Е.


    axil keep on doing exactly what you're doing (i know that you will anyway)

    you must be doing something right in order to catch the attention of the Dark (matter) Side so tenaciously

    (hi there, H-G, how's it hanging?)


    Touche! I truly am sorry if I said it in a sarcastic way. The problem I am trying to point out is that some here, including Axil, act as if LENR to them is a completely understood phenomenon. He says things like, "LENR usually does <such and such>" and acts like he knows everything about the subject. He never says "I think...". How can we know what LENR usually does, when there is not yet one repeatable experiment that can be analyzed using statistics to say what is "usual" LENR vs. "unusual".

    an honest apology is a noble gesture, PfD - but if you were hoping for a date with Axil, i fear your chances are now slimmer than a Plank length ;-)

    Axil, can you show us any physical argument that supports this surprising statement?

    physical argument? LOL

    you want to fight with ....AXIL?!?

    ...ok, then - but i have to warn you he's just over 2meters tall, weighs 105kilos

    ...and uses RollMop as toothpaste


    Secondly here's something to delight axil , diapads adhering to a nickel plated neo magnet which is also the cathode of a heavy-water electrolytic cell. The anode is a coil of palladium wire running around the outside the magnet.

    not long ago, axil was on the receiving end of an unworthy sarcastic taunt from the skeptopathic side of the (strange) tracks, implying his lack of experimental experience

    axil, bless him, took the taunt at face value and gave an honest reply

    and now - to the shame of the taunter - one of axil's suggestions is being tried out empirically, on the bench - we observe with interest

    distributed experimentation - a new paradigm

    thank you axil, thank you Alan Smith - there's room for all of us in *this* laboratory


    "charcuterie prosciutto, salami, pancetta, guanciale" and, coming soon....




    Axil, since you have a well established theory of how LENR works, can't you build a working device for others to replicate? I don't understand why you let people waste time trying to replicate LION when you already have it figured out. What was the highest COP you got on any of your devices?

    LOL - Cancel SETI - higher lifeforms are amongst us! ...cruising our fora, sweet-talking our kids 😯