Posts by DnG

Quote from JedRothwell

What is it that confuses you? Are you not familiar with the usual standards of academic science? People who wish to make a claim have to publish a paper describing their work. They have to list the instruments and methods, show data, describe the signal to noise ratio, and so on. That is how it is done. Smith & George have not yet done this. So, by the standards of academic science, they do not have credibility, and no one should believe them. That does not mean they should be dismissed.

This is not controversial. I have never heard of an academic scientist who would disagree, or who would say "you should list me as a positive!" when he has not published anything. That would be like demanding a PhD for a thesis you have not submitted.

it's right from wrong JED O publish a paper to review crap..

just like working for XYZ.. as a head engineer, you get a LAMP not at patent or most times your name put to what you invented .. you get a table top lamp

The world if full of toy's that did not need review, they just do the job,

I had to read this 3 times jed... What the hell/../.,

What event happens that made palladium the clamp down of lenr?

Quote from Zephir_AWT

Does some evidence for EVOs exist in cold fusion experiments, in ECat reactors of Andrea Rossi in particular?

Seems everything will be rossi related until further notice, reminds me of my shops little red cabinet ,Every time we couldn't find something it needed to be in the locked cabinet we could not open, We realized after 10 years the cabinet needed to be the size of a battleship for taking credit for what it was hiding~

If you decide to add hematite and obsidian .a welding shop with a rosebud can make it easy. with a magnet field around the jar .

Quote from Alan Smith

Not really. Buit if you are stuck I know someone who might be able to help.

I'm stuck.. reading material in the ball park... I would be grateful.

Know of any Joule_thief regulated saw-tooth infrared or 1mm designs preferably analog?..mercury rectifier ect.

Sea water not salt water~

That's what I'm thinking, private will likely look for what type of reaction to sustain to fit the job. if its not an all of nothing reaction.

I;m speculating if a lower tier can regulate an upper tier output it would be built as a fixed value and stay away from max outputs,

but what is a sensible output if its an option..

Curious, if the goal line is reached would you set up a test city ..or replace a power plant and keep support- that infrastructure or build small sub systems,

Or go with low output- boats Ships as a test bed If the output can be regulated from the lower state reaction single phase if the output can be controlled that way.

or just go all in and cross your fingers? A free for all to everything at the same time.

Don't most using big power use 3 phase 440? with step down's?

Hopefully you can get the island worked out ~

Also touched on this..

Just something to think about

same

Quote from Alan Smith

Only information poor in this context, in other context - for an easy example a string of telemetry data - your ''a'' might be very information-rich. It is a mistake to view information as an absolute, like beauty it is in the eye of the beholder.

Equally, Hawkin radiation might contain a great deal of information leaving a black hole, the beauty and complexity of which we have yet to appreciate.

It could be interesting in ..if a DNA type membrane was used as a ...rabbit hole~ ..

I admire your loyalty Adrian

its similar to test with a mig welder changing out the gas mixes to learn what will do what. not much video and not much written. Also having a chamber to magnetically levitate the molten ball or lightning ball would take a more like a particle accelerator tube to keep it centered and not blow out a wall, its an engineers nightmare.

there would need to be a cathode flow feed.

Quote from interested observer

The views expressed here about peer reviewed journals are quite illuminating. I had the odious task of editing a section of a journal for a couple of years and was responsible for locating reviewers for articles. People with professional integrity often declined to review articles because they deemed them to be to far from their own area of expertise. They correctly thought it was manifestly unfair to have someone’s research judged by a person without pertinent expertise.

I compare that experience with people here who tell everyone to read LENR papers and if they cannot identify errors or methodology problems then they should conclude that the results are valid. What utter self-serving nonsense. If you point that out, some will say that anyone can judge a well-written paper. That is incredibly ludicrous and utterly false.

And that is why peer review is valuable despite the fact that it can be abused. If a technical paper has not been judged by qualified experts, then it has not been judged. At that point it is reader beware.

I realize this is anathema to the local group think but I haven’t heard a believable counter argument.

Display More

Doesn't seem your looking around much in todays news.. Clearly you can see Republican say up and all dems say down if the agenda is hidden or not. Hidden would be money talks and wins if your income is also hidden from view~

If any of his casing has the correct typography.. this would be my test bed.