Posts by Zephir_AWT

    The sheet of paper sounds more realistic, than the hole in the wall of neighbouring lab for me. Did you note, that the puncturing of torn hole into paper often leaves the hexagonal pattern in it? It has the same origin, like the hexagonal columns in the rock - in 2D plane the hexagon release stress in most effective way.


    /* I will assume my ignorance is based on AWT */


    AWT often deals with emergent and time-reversed phenomena, which results from cumulation of many dual effects. In our country we are saying that "road to the hell is pawed with good intentions", which can be also applied to the people who are collecting new facts and information way too eagerly.

    /* I don't want to be part of anything here but learning new ideas. And just maybe a working LENR device. */


    Your attitude is based on belief, that the correct solution wasn't bespoken yet. Even the extremely inquisitive people may become worst ignorants easily in this way - just because they get superficial. When many people who just want to hear new ideas will met together, then these good (but undeniably older) ones will get ignored and forgotten with no mercy. With such an attitude you may wait for working LENR device another twelve years without problem. Not accidentally just the teachers of physics are the most conservative guys, despite they're collecting tirelessly new ideas all the time. And Axil Axill is the master in generation of new but superficial - and distractive - ideas, so he may actually delay the progress, willingly or not.


    /* but I think it's on Murray Gell-Manns work related to the Nobel Prize */


    It's famous memorandum of Robert Wilson, the head of American Society of Physicists. It's just an official memorandum of the scientific ignorance of people, who decided to delay the progress in the name of longer research of it.

    /* The theory of hole superconductivity predicts that when a metal goes superconducting negative charge is expelled from its interior towards the surface */


    Why just the ideally conductive material should exhibit inhomogeneous distribution of potential? The charge distribution inside the superconductor would lead into very high current inside the superconductor and magnetic field - or not? The holes are really important for HT superconductivity, but these are different holes and they act in solely different way. The electrons become superconducting, when they're squeezed together - but we have no proper vessels or pipes for it, because the electrons are tiny and they would leak through atoms in their walls. Instead of it we must lure the electrons to holes in similar way, like the hungry hens to the feeder. The difference with the hole superconductivity is, these holes are unmovable by itself, because they do represent the positively charged atoms within atom lattice, not the more sparse places of electron density.


    The reason, why most of HT superconductors are formed with cuprates is just the fact, the copper atoms can be charged into high oxidation state Cu3+. Such an atoms become strongly attractive for conductive electrons and these electrons will concentrate around them. At the moment, when these holes form continuous lines (hole stripes) and the electrons form a linear crowds of condensed electrons around them, then the superconductivity is established.


    Only two people at the world really understand the HT superconductivity in this moment: me and this guy. If you understand the above paragraphs, you may be third one. The main reason, why J.F.Prins remains ignored and you probably never heard of him is just the fact, every physicist active in the field of superconductivity just wants to pursue and discuss "new ideas" - not these actually working ones.

    /* Let's keep advancing the dialogue with new ideas. */


    This is just the mindset, which delays the acceptation of many bright ideas and findings (including the cold fusion) for many decades. The physicists actually don't want to get final solutions - they just want to research them and twaddle, twaddle ad nauseum. This is job keeping attitude, not the solution oriented attitude. We don't need to deal with new ideas and findings - we need to deal with these relevant ones finally. And the Axill ideas are distracting if not downright wrong - despite they deal with concepts, which are new for many people here and as such interesting by itself. You shouldn't confuse the learning in discussion with making progress in discussion.


    /* Is superconductivity associated with a lowering or an increase of the kinetic energy of the charge carriers? Conventional BCS theory predicts that the kinetic energy of carriers increases in the transition from the normal to the superconducting state. However, substantial experimental evidence obtained in recent years indicates that in at least some superconductors the opposite occurs */


    The kinetic energy of electrons doesn't change during superconducting transition - it would lead into 1st order transition (the latent heat would evolve/consume in similar way, like during melting of ice), not 2nd order one (only the heat capacity of superconductor actually changes). It's true that inside the superconductor the individual electrons move much faster, but their effective mass gets correspondingly lower, so no actual kinetic energy changes. If some latent heat get generated during it due to establishing of longer range EM fluctuations, then it remains quite marginal. Actually the effective mass of electrons within superconductor is calculated just under assumption, their kinetic energy remains the same, like inside the normal material.


    It's important to understand, that the superconductive transition (despite its spectacularly singular manifestation with conductivity) isn't some abrupt effect: just during cooling the gradually growing superconductive areas (i.e. the pseudogap phase) within material finally merge and they will form a continuum - so that the current may pass through it. But this current can be only very subtle tightly above the critical temperature Tc and every weak magnetic field (including this one generated with current itself) will kill the newly formed superconductivity again. Therefore, if you want to load the superconductor with sufficient current, you should cool it deeply enough bellow its Tc.



    [heat capacity during superconductive transition]


    /* But it is otherwise well done. */


    The problem is, it's nonsensical, the lack of sources cited is the least problem here.


    "have now reported strong RF radiation coming from the system.." versus "..The x-ray radiation seen in the MFMP experiment.."


    So, are we reading about RF radiation or X-ray radiation? :huh: Why the electrons should be "expelled from center of conductor", once it becomes superconducting (Axil Axil probably confused magnetic field with electrons here)? Bremsstrahlung doesn't result from "kinetic energy". And what the spin wave has to do with Bremsstrahlung?

    /* It shows that even brilliant physicians are sucseptible to scam's. */


    You mean physicists? Volodymyr Krasnoholovets based most of experimental support of his theory on it too...
    If the Teslar watch generates no waves, then there is nothing to verify.

    The following post has been submitted by Axil Axil


    It makes the whole post questionable by definition. So we can start right with first sentence:


    There are at least three LENR systems now that have now reported strong RF radiation coming from the system.


    I'd expect three links here.

    Interesting is the low frequency which occurs in all (including DNA) papers


    It might be, but I still don't see any connection to cold fusion here. Do you believe, that tiny copper chip in Teslar watch could affect your body? After then you could be influenced with whatever else BS.



    So what exactly is this technology? Well the first time many years ago when I opened one of these watches up I was excited to see some gadget our super computer, but when I saw that it was what appeared to be a small square of copper metal glued to the back of the watch back I was quite confused. How could copper be called a technology in and of itself? No matter from what angle I looked at it, is was simply a piece of copper. What am I missing here? What is the 'fine-tuning' of which they speak? I am fascinated to hear from anybody that knows the inside scoop as to whether there really is 'technology' in this copper or whether this is just a brilliant marketing scam.

    For example:


    - it always works all the time
    - it self runs
    - multiple universities proved the concept
    - we made a 550W motor we keep under the stairwell
    - we can get 0.5W/cc power density
    - the world's two largest heater companies bought Hephaheat rights


    You already said here many things, but I never saw a single line of evidence from you.
    So I'd expect six links by now as an evidence - or it's just twaddling against twaddling.


    Otherwise the first claims don't differ from promises, under which the ITER, NIF and another projects are built.
    Yes, we were taught, that the hot fusion is self running and it works all the time - but did something like this actually ever happen?

    MIT Physicist Nixes Cold Fusion Funding


    ..."..However, a very famous physicist at MIT, who is involved in the energy program, found out what we were trying to do, and he cancelled the program. And he called up the vice president of the company and said some things that weren’t very polite about the research. And not only did the funding not come and the experiments didn’t happen, but my colleagues at the company were very worried about where they’re going to work next. As you
    know, there are unemployment issues currently in our bad economy, so there’s a fundamental difficulty with respect to getting support for the experiments, and what that means is that the science can be expected to go very slowly for these reasons, until a solution is found to this problem
    ..."


    This "very famous physicist" was Ernest Moniz, now the head of energetic politics of the USA, most powerful country in the world. Not surprisingly the situation with cold fusion research by now is as it is...

    /* but organized around an obvious scam, Steorn */


    I don't think, that Steorn is scam, it's just a consequence of attempt for premature monetization of breakthrough findings. Actually Steorn didn't get a penny from its failures - it just returned all money to its customers and it bankrupted its investors and it trusted its own findings. Now we can just observe, how another subjects continue where the Steorn ended (1, 2, 3), as if nothing would ever happen. The large research basis for billions of dollars like ITER or NIF are way more problematic with respect to its investors.

    /* the field has 'circled the wagons' and treats any comments from those they deem as anti-cold fusion as 'pathological skepticism' */


    Not at all, but you got over thirty of original studies, which prove the formation of helium during LENR - so I don't understand the meaning of its further doubting without another, similarly extensive experimental evidence. Even if you would somehow manage to doubt twenty publications from my list (which you didn't), then still at least ten research studies will remain undoubted.



    This is a matter of normal logical thinking.

    /* We should reject d-d fusion, not "cold fusion" */


    I don't understand, how do you want to reject d-d fusion with cold fusion experiments, if it's commonly known, that the cold fusion doesn't run via d-d


    /* BTW I am not so sure that that d+Li produces 100% helium isotopes. What about, for example, 7Be + n? */


    I don't understand, how do you want to reject d+Li fusion with 7 Be + n reaction? How do you want to falsify the existence of apples with oranges?

    kirkshanahan : OK, so you don't believe in helium formation and you have no evidence for it - why we should care? What would that imply?
    Over 60% of USA citizens still don't believe in evolution - has it some meaning to convince them about the opposite?


    I'm perfectly sure, that at least the Li+D fusion produces He in 100% yield - it was measured with current of alpha particles generated. Don't ask me for source, you got it already.


    /* Classic cold fusion error: assume that the reaction is d-d fusion, then notice that it doesn't behave like d-d fusion, then reject it. But the assumption was just that */


    This is typical mindset in dismissal of nearly every phenomena and idea in the latest century.