Shane D.
Administrator
- Male
- from Pensacola Beach, Fl.
- Member since Jan 26th 2015
- Last Activity:
Posts by Shane D.
-
-
-
-
-
Inspired by recent NASA experiment, we have built a new reaction system and obtained preliminary results . . .
I don't know what the last sentence refers to. I just asked them.I was wondering about that. Surprised no one asked about that in the Q&A. Here is that slide:
-
So I think they must read my report.
Could you send my report link to Iwamura.
I sent this but they ignore my report and it is waste of time.
Many, if not most LENR researchers are either members of the forum, or check in as guests. Therefore, I would think your theory has been looked at by at east a few of them, so you came to the right place to be seen.
If no one finds it plausible enough to comment, or contact you, there is little else we can do. Sorry. All I can say is to keep at it, and maybe you will convince someone. I will give you credit for perseverence. Good luck.
-
Display More
Here is another independent replication. Again, it is independent because of COVID-19.
Progress of Reproducing the Mizuno’s Experiment in QiuRan Lab
Hang Zhang and Si Chen
Email: [email protected]http://ikkem.com/iccf23/orppt/ICCF23-OA-03%20Zhang.pdf
Here is the video:
Is this a new replication? We talked about Zhang before as one of the first to successfully replicate Mizuno.
-
The french Longchampt has been dead for so long, we should stop Mc Kubre from spending money on his outdated concepts. .
The only French people who died too long ago, who could have contributed so much to the Lenr are De Broglie and Kervran and no one else, at least not Biberian, McKubre's great friend !
McKubre must be stopped in his negative influencer position.
There is much to be frustrated about with LENR. 32 years later and we are still talking about the same old experiments, with little to show in terms of improved results. There is still no viable theory, with none on the horizon.
But that does not mean we cant be thankful for those like Biberian, McKubre, Nagel, Miley and the many others who have kept the science alive. Would we be better off had they simply retired, and let the field wither on the vine?
To their credit, the old guard understands the science needs some fresh new blood to spark new ideas, and have tried for years to make that happen. Miley being one of the notables with his scholarships at the University of Illinois.
And now we have Trevithick and his Project Charleston teammates (can't get used to that name), who have helped lower the barriers for new students to take up the study. Plenty to be thankful for IMO.
-
-
-
JP Biberian video from the ICCF23. It appears to be dated, but is from a collaboration with Forsley/Mosier-Boss/GEC. Very hard to hear:
-
-
-
-
as Shane D. already has commented, PC through Trevithick, declined to replicate it.
I said he did not commit, not that he declined to replicate. That is not at all unusual for someone in such a public position. We went on to talk about other things going on.
He stated in his presentation that no lab work was done at Google, so it may not be so easy to get done as you think.
-
I would like a clarification about TG which would be criticized for having made his soup without the old guard ?
My understanding being complementary to the opposite Matt trevithick being very close to Mc Kubre,
I had the impression that his shadow was everywhere regarding TG works, am I wrong ?
As you can see, TG did enlist the old guard. And yes, McKubre and Trevithick are tight. Their relationship goes back to when Trevithick had his own LENR experience before moving on to Google. Like everyone, he was unable to replicate it.
-
The best option would be that LF staff selects a few members that have sufficient professional skills to form an advice team and then work out some advice in a restricted group.
That has been tried here before and it comes with it's own drawbacks.
Trevithick's question has been posited before by the likes of McKubre, Nagel (unsung hero of LENR), and many others. So can't hurt IMO to get everyone in on it this time. There won't be a consensus like you say, but a TG2 (Team Google 2) and other's in the community looking for direction can certainly get some good ideas from hearing what others think.
-
They should do their own homework. There is no clear solution yet that is reproducible in a simple way. Study and follow this forum, do a proper patent application landscape and pick a few candidates that have fairly robust data presented.
I believe TG were accused of that after their Nature paper came out. Turns out they did do their homework in prepping for their deep dive into LENR, culminating in the Nature paper, as Matt explained last night. Another critique was that they had not tapped into the old guard for help, but that was laid to rest last night also.
Akito Takahashi's approach is also promising but using materials in powder form will probably not be suitable for real commercial applications due to the too high risks of sintering of the active metals
Yes, this is promising, but TG heavily explored powders also, and did not see any anomalous effects.
BTW: Did anyone catch Trevithick's last comment about this possibly being a "quantum effect"? I found that interesting, and wonder if he has plans to explore that further. He and Google are investing in quantum computing, so if anyone would see a connection, it would be them.
-
Check your spam file. Spam files auto-delete so it may be gone.
Thanks, I just found my invite there.
-
Shane D. , I think the LEC could be an excellent experiment for team Google, can you get them in contact?
We talked about that a few days after Gordon's LEC hit the news. Asked if he could spare a promising grad student to try and repicate, but he would not commit. So he is well aware of it. Not that he needed me to tell him, as he and his team keep up on LENR news.
