I wouldn’t want to over load suggestions and I’m sure there are many good candidates.
But on a Technical level I would really like to hear:
An interview with Wyttenbach about SO (4) theory. I find his approach really fascinating.
An interview with Bob Greenyer about strange radiation tracks on surfaces materials. He has found and collated some really interesting information and data there. It’s getting pretty hard to ignore what he is finding in his current OHMA project.
Ruby is One if the stars of LENR.
Just made a donation. I’m really intrigued what she will come up with.
I wonder if as part of her interview archive if it would interesting to interview some of the others that have supported LENR in the none technical but also important areas such as publications and media. I’m
thinking Frank Acland , Jed Rothwell, Peter Gluck, the administrators of the LENR Forum, Amongst others. It would be fascinating hearing their history what first got them interested in LENR what motivated them to start their work and sites and their most interesting insights in the many years they have done this work.
robert bryant thanks if for those links.
Both links are interesting
Dr Dimiter Alexandrov’s work looks really intriguing. It’s in close resonance with some other ideas around i really feel there is convergence happening.
It’s interesting that He3 He4 increased with heating...
I think he proposes a heavy electron + deutron or proton generating slow neutrons
I wonder though if this occurs during the process if merger if these dense Hydrogen constructs themselves rather than spontaneously externally to that process perhaps reconciling the balance of states in the process allows this with out radiation... although I’m not sure how you would do with out a neutrino. Unless that’s somehow reconciled by its initially multi body aspect.
It’s interesting that it requires external heating. Normal fusion of light elements is of course exothermic. But here we have two processes an endothermic aspect of generating a neutron at the same time as merging the nuclei. So it’s not typical fusion or even exothermic neutron capture but something a bit more exotic. The net energy could be endothermic.
It would be interesting to understand what the implications are at net entropy level. Is a heavier more stable nuclei generated in this process more entropically favorable than input heat?
Also if the input heat is a direct thermal effect or indirect such as increasing pressure.
Of course we are only speculating with limited data but this kind of experiment could provide that data to support this or other explanations.... if well studied and supported. The field needs that level of support with out prejudice stigma or phobia in order to clarify what we see or not.
I do think it would be fascinating if we found different He3 to He4 ratios in LENR experiments than we expected naturally. Actually any He3 production with no associated Tritium, or Lithium for example. It would be interesting. It would imply another source maybe. We could speculate wildly what that might be... condensed matter... compound nuclei of another process involving their assimilation in nuclei. But perhaps the signature might give sue clues towards a mechanism. Eg He3 like Spectrum but not quite (due to slight differences in reduced mass)... etc.
Since it is a light element it should be able to be measured from its optical spectrum.
I see models as much like tinted glasses they highlight some aspects and hide others. But In doing so give us useful information we would not otherwise be aware of so long as we don’t assume they explain the whole reality and In doing so add complexity to try and fit actual reality. For me this is OK and can be useful.
Once in a while something different comes along a pair of glasses that instead of tints brings things inti new and clear focus. Typically these are Eureka moments or E=mc^2 moments usually distinguished by their simple elegance once understood. And usually considering things in a new and elegant space.
I think Wyttenbach is on the track if one moments. Other not fully correct models are still incredibly useful though and give useful insight when applied in the scope they were originally conceived and sometimes beyond that.
There’s a whole parallel thread to the LENR story going all the way back to the 90’s to now that I somehow missed or at least didn’t fully grasp. It does put some things in to context. There is a lot of hurt and sadness perhaps on all sides from the very beginning to now.
The best all round is for LENR to be shown. And contributors recognized.
JedRothwell Ahh I see. There is some complicated history there. I’m sorry to see that Jed. and for Gene too. I maybe naïf but I do wish disputes were resolved more simply with respect that each side is human with all the feelings and pressure, failings and complex thoughts that that entails. It’s always a shame when it gets out of hand. I try to stay technology focused but it’s sad that thing go like that from time to time.
This story though triggered me to look back in history in these blogs and it’s amazing. I’ve just realized though how far back some ideas we discuss now go and how much they were discussed in these forums. It amazes me that they become increasingly relevant in these days.
I hope some day everyone gets past differences even though that’s hard and focuses on just how truely amazing the technology history is.
Perhaps that diversity of sources and it’s complexity is all part of its story perhaps in a way all though painful for some it’s part of what gets us here today.
Yup I did wonder how he would achieve it without neutrinos
I’m definitely inclined to Wyttenbach’s models. I may misunderstand some parts of of his SO(4) theory but I can certainly see they are elegant and to me that’s a big indicator he is in the right track. But if something is happening to generate neutrons then it’s also definitely curious. Sometimes different even incomplete models can give useful insights. But they do need to be backed by data.
Interesting and good point about Deuterium.
But on a higher level it’s also very interesting the more general coincidences I think.
This is an interesting article I think in many levels.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/s…se-of-cards/#142833637346
Ethan Siegel is asking some interesting questions these days.
This one and his earlier one about relic neutrinos.
It’s hard to let go of preconceptions but this article is at least leading that way.
I wonder if he will soon be ready to see more about LENR and the huge effort against all odds in the community in the pursuit of understanding it.
I hope he does as although there are somethings I don’t agree with (which is normal I guess with these kinds of articles) but I like his writing style.
Wow 50 micro arc seconds.
Would be interesting if they could make an observation someday during a rocky planetary body conjunction. (I guess it’s out of plane though)
I wonder what the rotational velocity is of the accretion disk compared to line broadening etc. It’s polarisation properties and what that says about its magnetic field. it’s radiance etc lots to digest there I guess.
Is the disc dispersed or also dense?
Well for me Wyttenbach is right on track and ahead of all of us. He deserves credit for what he is pursuing and for doing the hard work of putting the maths in to context. The field benefits hugely from his works theoretical support.
The discussion here between Wyttenbach and Robert Bryant and the others is definitely inspiring.
4D spin geometry seems to be the bridge that pulls everything together between EM space and the nucleus . The Clifford Torus is also the simplest and most elegant expression of space time.
Mills GUTCP theory for outside the nucleus has a much better fit than QED/QCD fudging
That is a given.
but for LENR it is fitting theory with
the nuclei and the neutrons/protons that is more important.
I fully agree with this but suspect Mill’s likely understands much further. He must be curious about thd Nucleus.
I think Wyttenbach l’s theory has found the bridge between nuclear and EM realms in the most elegant way I can imagine. It fits beautifully.
I suspect the gate way though is 1D loosely coupled spin resonance between nuclear or more accurately maybe “localized particle” effects associated with spin space and it’s resonance with EM space in the near field for the wave lengths involved. I’m curious if the 3D EM Surface (or brane or what ever it is) between these realms (in which the resonances we call fermions appear) with its associated constants permitivity and permissivity in free space or speed of light is it self a consequence of internal spin and it’s Properties. The 1D loose resonant coupling is a simply the consequence of a single property in a single dimension (although internally it maybe more complex) passing through a surface resonantly the properties of that surface. This to me is the simplest thing possible and also consequently the most likely... just one property and one surface. Spin is great as it’s naturally 3D orthogonal (it’s this property and it’s resinsnce in EM space that I think can be linked to the properties and families of the particles associated in QCD). So two 3D spaces connected in 1D fits beautifully (a conjoined Clifford Torus pair?). Even “spin” it self could be a consequence of locality In different loosely decoupled spaces only connected by 1D
Anyway despite my thoughts which could be wrong, I think the search is for elegance and simplicity that explains our observations and for sure Wyttenbach’s theory is that. I’m looking forward to further experimental verifications
It’s interesting the recent finding about particles with pentaquarks are like a “composite quark molecule” of a Kaon meson and Boson.
Apparently this is associated with the Lambda resonance. If I recall correctly from previous reading about Kaons production this Lambda nucleon resonance is used in Kaon factories such as Delphi, Triumf etc. maybe a particle physicsist working in this area can correct me if I’m wrong.
I know we are talking about energies of 1500 MeV or something like that with this resonance but it does make me wonder if it relates to Holmlids work in someway. Perhaps due to collective resonance effects or something.
rubycarat It sounds like it was really great.
I have a real feeling the walls are finally coming down. And people are ready and starting to think about this.
I think many of us can identify with Carl Page’s thoughts. I certainly came to LENR with assumptions and am now astonished about the amount of material and concepts I have learned since. I think this is probably something everyone can identify with supporter and critic alike.
It’s great this event happend a wave in the right place can move a mountain.... or perhaps I should say another kind of wave can move a crowd.
rubycarat ahh another StephenC I thought I was unique! 
Thought I’d better clear that up just in case...
Curious to take look at Dr Stephen C Bannisters pod cast now though.
I hope the event went well. This is quite some anniversary.
Wow that’s quite some list of research groups and organizations.
Yup Huw is following through on his own philosophy. It’s certainly brave but the need of the times requires it.
Even if just a few % likely given the advances in understanding in physics especially at nano scale spintronics, plasmonics and materials and even new understandings in high energy physics resonances in recent years it would be foolish to not revisit and review the subject what ever are ones previous beliefs.
I wonder if it would be interesting to invite Huw and his Skeptical colleagues to your lab. He might win his bet and his colleagues if serious might also provide some useful insight.
Bruce__H. Any chance you could post your comments about the poisson statistical analysis and the graphs on ECW as well?
It’s interesting and helps keep things in perspective.
Very interesting analysis Bruce__H. Thanks for that. I’m pretty curious what the spectrum does show.
Regarding the BB spectrum I think it’s clear that it’s hard for us to see the BB signature there. more interesting is understanding what we do see I think.
I think there is the possibility that there is a strong cut off at long wavelengths but not a perfect one (as we would expect from a sampling cut off) as evidenced by the short tail after 420 nm. This is why I suspected Airy disc dispersion from a narrow aperture. I do wonder how much the spectrum is affected by how it is being measured. If there is a strong attenuation
Beyond 420 nm those peaks there (what ever frequency they are) could in fact be quite large
On the other hand this part of the spectrum is linked I think to the ionic emission part of the spectrum so maybe there are some known features in that profile. It would take a plasma specrum expert to help here I guess.
