LENR-forum News March 2024 (mailchi.mp)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LENR-forum News March 2024 (mailchi.mp)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@Shane
Who should be nice about what? Too many words to read through. Data costs too much.
Yes, it is (too much to read through)! But this is his own thread to play with as he likes. We all come here knowing that, so hard to then complain Gennadiy's posts are redundant and long. However, as far as I am concerned, once he posts on other threads and does the same, then he is fair game.
Now, now boys. be nice.
Duncan TTU:
.... "Attempts have been made to replicate the results of Steinetz, et al.
Our initial tritium level measurements are well explained by D(n,g)T alone
We do not yet see evidence of Steinetz, et al.’s results" ...
Do you have a date on this? In Sept 2023 you also posted this RE: NASA’s Lattice Confined Fusion (LCF) about a failed attempt by TTU (Duncan's team) to replicate NASA's LCF, and curious if your post today is something new.
Detailed information coming March 4.
Here is a brief recap (by one source) of his impression of the Mar 4 presentation by the lead LK99 author:
This is a condensed version of MFMP's "overview of Russian Plasma Physicist Anatoly Nikitin’s observations of Ball Lightning (Plasmoid) phenomena and a presentation of his established Ball Lightning Model including equations" narrated by "Alchemical Science". Simple enough for public consumption, and much, much shorter (hint, hint) than the original!
THHuxleynew suffers from a bloated ego
I will say he seems to be using "we" more often...as in being part of the team trying to get to the bottom of this. That is a start, and we can work on that bloated ego later on.
As said the old guard had enough connections to secure all money and thus you will never get any info as the old guard has no clue of CF. Of course they understand how to set up experiments, same as my wive that knows to cook a Chinese or Japanese meal.
Perhaps you could set an example for CleanHME to follow, and release your data? It has been quite a few years now.
And here is their team: Team members – CleanHME I see some of the old guard, but many new (some young looking) faces. Judging by their progress report teppo linked to, I would say the combination of old and new is paying off. Those are very strong words they have to say -as THHuxleynew reminds us, and I doubt they would say such things if they didn't have the results to prove it.
LENR-forum News February 2024 (mailchi.mp)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Another possibility is that the types of persons that are early adopters of electrical cars have a much higher level of aggressive drivers than the typical ICE car owner group.
From the article:
"The rubber also literally meets the road faster on an electric vehicle. Electrical motors can produce peak power, or torque, almost instantly, unlike mashing the gas pedal of a regular car, which requires gas to flow and burn in cylinders and a bunch of mechanical parts to start moving."
I am interested in exploring models that can be inferred locally and trained on websites and documents that can aid research in the LENR field and answer newer members questions.
By this do you mean develop our own "local" AI here for forum purposes? As Alan mentioned, there are others already doing that for the field. The forum though has a wealth of info, but it is basically lost because the "Search" function sucks. A scaled down AI would be nice...if available.
I have a question about ENG8: how similar the approach is to A. Klimov's (Russia?) device and S. Böddeker's (Germany?) device (two different things?) ?
Is it the same base tech knowingly or these are totally independent (re)discoveries?
Good catch.
Chapter 5 in Jonathan Phillips Substack series "The Hydrino Hypothesis"
The Hydrino Hypothesis Chapter 5 - Hydrogen Revolution (substack.com)
LENR-forum News January 2024 (mailchi.mp)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Have the Brits discovered Alien life? This is getting around the net, and sounds serious:
Have we just discovered aliens? | The Spectator
It’s one of the greatest puzzles of the universe, and one that has vexed humanity ever since we first gazed at the stars and thought of other worlds. Is our Earth the sole place that harbours life, or might it be found elsewhere, among the trillions of planets, star systems and galaxies? As Arthur C. Clarke put it: ‘Two possibilities exist: either we are alone in the universe or we are not. Both are equally terrifying.’
QuoteThe fact that they are all British, and all using similar language, suggests they are referring to the same thing
The revelation that we might be seriously close to an answer is, therefore, momentous and surprising; even more surprising is that the revelation occurred on Jools Holland’s New Year’s Eve 2023 ‘Musical Hootenanny’, in between performances by Rod Stewart, the Sugababes, Joss Stone, and the Mary Wallopers.As is his wont, whenever the music subsided Jools Holland skittered boyishly between his BBC TV guests, asking them for comments on the year just gone, and the year to come. One of these guests was Dame Maggie Aderin-Pocock, honorary research assistant at University College London’s world-famous Department of Physics and Astronomy.Sitting next to Dr Aderin-Pocock, Holland asked the noted astronomer for her expectations of 2024, and she replied, candidly and baldly: ‘I think we’re going to discover alien life.’ Slightly startled, Holland asked for some clarity – e.g. are we going to meet them on planet earth – to which she further said: ‘Alien life is definitely out there’. Note: not here, there.\
If this was just a one off, we might dismiss it. Perhaps the BBC was unusually generous with the English fizz in the green room. But Aderin-Pocock is not the only person ending 2023 with startling predictions of alien life discovery. In a YouTube video broadcast a few days ago, popular UK astrophysicist Becky Smethurst added some detail to all this, by saying: ‘I think we are going to get a paper that claims to have strong evidence for a biosignature in an exoplanet’s atmosphere very, very soon. Let’s just say it’s on my bingo card for 2024’.
Likewise, in a CNBC interview broadcast the first week of 2024, UK astronaut Tim Peake was asked to speculate on extra-terrestrial life, and he said ‘Potentially, the James Webb telescope may have already found [alien life]… it’s just that they don’t want to release or confirm those results until they can be entirely sure, but we found a planet that seems to be giving off strong signals of biological life.’
What does it all mean? It is possible the three space-heads are referring to different discoveries, but the fact that they are all British, and all using similar language, suggests they are referring to the same thing: namely a scientific paper, probably British in origin, perhaps still being peer-reviewed, which will provide firm evidence of alien life on an exoplanet (a planet outside our solar system), using biosignatures, which generally means gases and chemicals in the atmosphere which are highly likely to emanate from organic creatures. These biosignatures might be combinations of methane and oxygen, or methane and CO2, and so on.
Not surprisingly, this sequence of statements has set the space-rabbit of speculation running hard. Dedicated UFO-bods on Twitter/X are, for instance, claiming that this is merely stage one of ‘disclosure’ – the act of carefully educating humanity about alien life, without destabilising the world.
The supposed disclosure plan goes like this: first, the powers-that-be will casually tell us that a planet a squillion miles away probably harbours a few bugs in the clouds – i.e. something profound, but non-threatening. Once we’ve grown used to that, we will be told we’ve encountered a ‘technosignature’, indicating intelligent non-earth life, maybe broadcasting radio waves or sending out probes (which is worrying but, hey, we coped with the microbes).
Finally we will be informed that non-human intelligence walks among us, and has been doing so for a while – which is deeply threatening, but seeing as we got used to the space bugs then the space radio signals, what does it matter if we have space beings on Earth?
That all sounds quite mad – but then, lots of UFO-ish revelations these past few years have seemed quite mad. And, anyway, we don’t have to go too deep down this rabbit hole to find these tantalising British space-hints highly stimulating. Will the paper identifying these biosignatures be widely accepted? Or will it be challenged by other scientists, and end up rather lost in ambiguity and dispute?
Perhaps it won’t be taken all that seriously (this happened to recent discoveries of phosphine gas on Venus). Alternatively, the anticipated paper will prove definitive, and will be accepted into the scientific consensus. Thereafter, we will all nod and understand that yes, there are other life forms out there, beyond our terrestrial home. Should that happen, Jools Holland’s 2023 Musical Hootenanny will likely go down in history – and not just because it showed that Rod Stewart can still belt out a banging tune.
2024 ARPA-E Energy Innovation Summit | Early Bird Registration Deadline Extended! (mailchi.mp)
|
|
|
The Technology Showcase is a fan favorite aspect of the Summit. This year’s Showcase will feature more than 400 exhibitors displaying the nation’s transformative and disruptive innovative energy technologies. Summit attendees have the opportunity to see and interact with impactful ARPA-E funded technologies and speak with the innovators, researchers, and scientists developing them.
The showcase also features:
The ARPA-E Summit’s Technology Showcase is primarily comprised of ARPA-E awardees. However, the Summit also offers an “Apply to Showcase” option for external companies and organizations to apply to exhibit their disruptive technologies alongside ARPA-E-funded technologies.
For additional details, click HERE. Deadline is January 29, 2024
The Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy (ARPA-E) Energy Innovation Summit is an annual conference and technology showcase that brings together nearly 3,000 experts from government, academia, and industry to think about America’s energy challenges in new and innovative ways. The ARPA-E Summit offers a unique, three-day program aimed at moving transformational energy technologies out of the lab and into the market. Join other energy industry experts, thought leaders, and decision makers at the 2024 Summit to:
Naysayers are a dime a dozen. Here is one saying ocean seeding is a waste of time:
Iron Fertilization Isn’t Going to Save Us | Hakai Magazine
by Jack McGovan
January 12, 2024 | 1,000 words, about 5 minutes
Last year, global carbon emissions from burning fossil fuels reached an all-time high. As the world heats up, many influential bodies—such as the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the governments of China and the United States, and especially fossil fuel companies—are calling for the development of carbon removal technologies. These techniques pull carbon dioxide, a potent greenhouse gas, out of the air or water and lock it away in an inaccessible form. At a big enough scale, these technologies can theoretically counterbalance emissions and help cool things down—or at least slow the rate of warming.
That’s why, in November 2021, Edwina Tanner, a marine scientist at the Australia-based biotechnology company Ocean Nourishment Corporation, dumped a mix of nutrients from a boat into the water in Botany Bay, on the south side of Sydney, Australia. As waves rocked the craft, currents pulled the red-dyed slurry in every direction, permeating one tiny patch of the world’s largest carbon sink: the ocean.
The limiting factor for the abundance of life at the ocean’s surface is often the availability of essential nutrients like iron, nitrogen, and phosphorus. So when a glut of nutrients arrives in the form of volcanic dust, wildfire ash, water upwelled from the deep, or a lab-made mixture, the sudden bounty allows tiny photosynthesizing phytoplankton to flourish. Like plants, these single-celled organisms use sunlight and carbon dioxide as fuel. The important thing for those concerned with climate change is that when these phytoplankton die, some of them sink, dragging the carbon in their bodies to the seafloor where it becomes trapped.
Oceanographer John Martin first proposed the idea of manipulating the ocean’s nutrients to store carbon in the late 1980s. There have been a few experiments since, but in general, says Tanner, getting real-world data on how well nutrient fertilization works is incredibly challenging. The public doesn’t have a big appetite for large-scale climate experiments at sea, she says.
The last large-scale attempt was a decade ago and, to Tanner’s point, it was spectacularly controversial. So in recent years, scientists have instead turned to laboratory work, computational models, and smaller field trials to better understand ocean nutrient fertilization. Modeling published in 2017, for instance, suggests that adding nitrogen and phosphorus to the ocean could lock away up to 1.5 gigatonnes of carbon per year from the atmosphere.
Tanner and her team at Ocean Nourishment Corporation are among the many scientists striving to learn more. Although she hopes to run larger field experiments, it’s difficult to get permission from the Australian government for trials exceeding 2,000 liters of the nutrient mixture. In the Botany Bay experiment, the researchers added only 300 liters of their nutrient mix. Working with such small quantities makes calculating the consequences very challenging. To circumvent the restrictions, they’re building a bioreactor to test how different mixes of nutrients stimulate phytoplankton growth and affect the rate of carbon storage.
Other researchers, too, are digging into nutrient fertilization. In 2023, for example, Joo-Eun Yoon, an applied mathematician at the University of Cambridge in England, conducted experiments with a team in the Arabian Sea off Goa, India, to find out how to best deliver nutrients to the ocean. Maximizing carbon storage, it turns out, is not as simple as just dumping nutrients overboard.
Yoon says nutrient fertilization could potentially be made more effective. The key is whether scientists can stimulate the growth of bigger—that is, physically larger—phytoplankton species. Bigger phytoplankton “are very heavy,” she says. “[They] sink quickly onto the seafloor, and so they can reduce carbon dioxide more efficiently.”
Yoon is hoping to learn more through her work with the international Exploring Ocean Iron Solutions research consortium, which is aiming to run its own iron fertilization field experiments by 2025.
Yet even if nutrient fertilization can be made more efficient, Alessandro Tagliabue, an ocean biogeochemist at the University of Liverpool in England, is skeptical of its value. He says that even at its peak performance, the technique just can’t store that much carbon.
Modeling work published by Tagliabue that looks into ocean iron fertilization—a scenario where just iron is added to the ocean—shows that by the year 2100, the amount of carbon we could trap and store through this technique would amount to about 78 gigatonnes. For context, over just the past four years, the world has emitted about 75 gigatonnes of carbon.
In practice, inefficiencies and unforeseen complications mean iron fertilization would likely lead to even less carbon storage.
For example, setting up a large-scale nutrient fertilization project would require mining the minerals and building infrastructure to get them into the ocean. These activities would emit carbon, lowering the overall carbon sequestration potential by the time the nutrients hit the water. Even at its most efficient, says Tagliabue, “it buys us a handful of years.”
Worse still is the potential for negative side effects. Scientists already expect that nutrient stocks in the upper ocean will decrease as ocean temperatures rise. Tagliabue’s research suggests that the flurry of phytoplankton growth triggered by iron fertilization could also use up the available nitrogen or phosphorus, ultimately leading to a drop in animal biomass in the upper ocean.
Tagliabue didn’t study what would happen if a geoengineer added nitrogen and phosphorus to the mix, too. Doing so could presumably avoid throwing the ocean’s nutrient balance as far out of whack as only adding iron, he says. But increasing the complexity of this marine multivitamin would mean more mining and more infrastructure, complicating the process and likely further reducing the carbon that’s captured and stored.
Other modeling suggests that adding nitrogen and phosphorus to the ocean could reduce oxygen levels and increase the global volume of low-oxygen dead zones by 17.5 percent.
Like Tagliabue, Tanner doesn’t shy away from sharing the fact that ocean fertilization will only be able to counteract a couple of years’ worth of current carbon emissions. She says the technique is only one in a broader suite of potential carbon sequestration technologies being looked at, like storing carbon in seaweed.
There are going to be a mix of approaches that will transition us along the way to net zero, she says. Ocean Nourishment Corporation will not solve the climate crisis, she adds, “but we will provide part of the answer.”
Tagliabue is less enthusiastic. If iron fertilization can only capture a few years’ worth of emissions, he says, that’s “not useful in terms of global climate change.”
Display MoreIn the process of finding more reactions to the paper on the web, I found an interesting one from a Researcher Named Reginald Little, from Florida, who was really happy to see his research, published in 2006, being, in his opinion vindicated by bjhuang and team.
LinkedIn comment by Reginald Little:
https://www.linkedin.com/posts…-7148188345322414080-V6Ju
2006 Article:
https://academicjournals.org/j…ull-text-pdf/4C2970811602
This is a really long and detailed article, and albeit it has not anything to do with cavitation, the research took place by analyzing both the deionized cooling water and the metals of high powered CuAg alloy coiled electromagnets (45 Tesla), and found isotopic changes both in the metals and in the water. I am really baffled that it took so long to me to become aware of this research, as I have been actively looking for research like this for many years now.
I remember RBL. He wrote a few posts on ECW during my Ecat News days: