Posts by StephenC

    Hi Paradigmnoia , whilst I agree there is a lot to be understood in that spectrum. I think the peak you chose in that plot for the comparison is at a wave length some way bellow the one used for his calculation which was at 357 nm I think? If I’m correct that peak corresponds to the much smaller broader feature to the right.

    It’s much more likely the peaks you noted are from emmision lines from the surface of the plasma or surrounding gas in the line of sight I think . Clearly it’s not from an optically thick region. I’m curious what they tell us though.

    I guess we also need to take in to account the absorption of the containing material.

    I’m very curious what you and Can come up with with that spectrum. There is a lot of structure there and it seems pretty dynamic.

    Are there any indicators of specific spectra lines such as for Helium 3 or 4, Lithium etc?.

    What could explain the two broader features that seem to Apear? Would this be two separate regions experiencing different scattering? Or is there absorption from the casing playing a role?

    Is it comparable to spectra from other plasma lamp assemblies etc?

    Wyttenbach just to clarify. It’s not my paper... I’m not nearly so smart as to be able to do that 😉. This Paper is from RIKEN...

    But I did post the link from the internet article here.

    I wish I could study this stuff in detail though it’s really interesting and somehow really elegant. Your work is facinating.


    I wonder what we will find at Ultima Thule if LENR is present. Would be cool if some predictions played out.

    Regarding a dusty atmosphere as you describe?

    1. Would this be micro meter particles suspended in a haze density and limited in extent related to their respective nearfield radiation?

    2. Would it exhibit particulate EM emmission bands. UV, IR, RF.

    3. Would we see heavy elements. That are hard to explain at these distances. A dusting of Iron or Nickel say on the surface or suspended in the atmosphere?

    Well In a few days we may find out.

    I suppose most likely it’s just a snowball. But if it turns out to be more in the year 2019 of all years. It will be somehow poetic.

    Happy Christmas and New Year to all..

    JohnO . If I recall correctly there were 3QX in the device used at Stockholm.

    If the oscillations are driven by the reactor behavior rather than the supply. Could slight mismatch in oscillating frequency between the 3 devices. Result in the observed beat pattern?

    If designed that way could an applied power supply wave form help drive and sustaine the resonance of the oscillations in a more controlled way than if just one is used?

    Are other Plasma (or Acoustic) waves implicated such as Alfvén waves. This could lead to density fluctuations at certain points that perhaps could enhance interactions in this locations.

    Hi Bruce__H I think it is also most likely an artifact or visual impression biased by the current graph.

    If it looks similar outside the range or during the calibration I think there is not to much point going further. But if it is only visible at these times then could be worth considering.

    It’s Interesting that there are mathematical tools to look for these kinds of correlations though.

    can can I make a strange request?

    Could you make a similar scale plot of the active run when there is no strange current effect.

    Also one if the same scale during the calibration run?

    I have a couple of reasons for asking the first normal the second a bit strange.

    The first is it might be interesting to see if we see similar 23s in some smaller structure may be bumps in the plots elsewhere that might point to a sampling effect.

    The second is... I was looking at the radiation curve above . But to my inexpert eyes there was a small what could be regular oscillation the broader variations. That could match that 23s frequency. I think maybe Each time we may have a little oscillation peak we have a spike down in current but it doesn’t look always true though. Now I appreciate it is noisy and eyes can play optical tricks when comparisons with under lying patterns are there. I guess it most likely that. But I thought it was curious.

    Could the oscillations if really there be an artifact of the current? Or is there a sample rate effect impacting both sets of data? Or is this different detector some how being similarly effected?

    It could be interesting to also see a zoom of the full data set over the time frame of just a few current spikes. It’s interesting that each spike does oud not just one value. Although not completely regular or identical they do seem to have something regular about them.

    Another question do we know whether the various sensors are sending digital data using connectors close to the device or sending analog data that is digitized in a separate more distant processor? I suppose the current is measured at input though...

    Hi can thanks a lot for these plots. I’m still not sure what to make of them. There is a lot going in there.

    I’m curious about the radiation behavior. The significant and persistent drop in value after the device is hot in the active run. And recall you have recently been doing quite a lot investigation background radiation etc.

    Do you have any ideas what could cause the change in the graph here? Are there outside causes of indirect causes from the experiment that could cause the observed change

    I’m also curious if any one Has ideas about what is happening with the current values.

    There are apparently frayed nerves my own included.... and I’m Just a bystander in this incredible story.

    My own impression of the time of testing was that every one was supportive in all sides. And did their upmost best at what they do. It was one of the best times if LENR collaboration I witnessed. It was good work. Even If still one in progress maybe.

    We are in a very critical chapter in the realization of LENR. On all fronts. The next few months and the Cold fusion anniversary next year are a unique opportunity for everyone in the field. It’s time.

    I can only ask you to not let difference or people who like to exploit differences in opinion break that. Difference in opinion are good and a strong resource when mutually respected.

    I hope that didn’t sound shallow minded on my side. I have only huge respect for all parties in this story.

    I’m very curious now about Lion 4.

    Once LENR is understood and if it is found to be associated in some way to 4D EM models and experimental data. I imagine the next big thing on our radar will be what this implies for fundamental physics.

    Experimentally evidence for particle physics comes down to energetic resonances after all.”

    What underlies the particle families,QCD, resonance's and apparent constants in the SM. What does it tell us about what underlies other apparent Quantum behavior such as entanglement and duality. What does it tell us about relativity and space time. I’m pretty sure it will introduce a new window on theory along with data and constraints.

    There are some interesting ideas already from concept level to more established theory touch on the topic.

    For example there are magneto electrodynamic models of nucleon structure that quite well model nucleon resonances. Such as the Ceshire cat model.


    there are also EM models of neutrinos although they are still not well understood.

    I’m curious where if all leads some of the nucleon theories already touch on some of the SO(4) concepts mentioned by Wyttenbach I think so it very curious to see where this is going.

    I have a whole bundle of intuitive questions and maybe insights maybe red herrings... that I’m trying to answer for my own curiosity. Which I won’t confuse you all here with. But I suspect the answers will be found in these developments.

    Rjzk . Interesting thread. I totally missed this before. Really glad to see it now.

    Is this the first place Wyttenbach mentions 6D space? And it s quotient of two 3D spaces nature?

    I’m curious about this concept and if and how it relates to his recent 4D and 6D descriptions

    I wonder if there is a coupling between 2 3D spaces. Perhaps through spin? Or if each 3D dimension is split in two some common 4 th dimensional source. And what kinds of vector or scalar spaces it relates to. And how that explains time. Probably it’s deep in the maths but I wonder if there is a simple visualization?

    (I like the idea of a coupling of two 3D spaces 3D seems quite fundamental consequence to me in spinning or rotating systems. Would the two 3D spaces need resonances to couple. And could it imply resonant coupling in the near field is required when they occur?)

    Bruce__H yup I had similar thoughts about it. I’m not sure if the duration in Geosynchronous orbit. I’m more familiar with low earth orbit and Heliosynchonous polar orbits where the eclipse is a more significant fraction. Even with thermal inertia and longer integration times though I would expect a more intermittent behavior from eclipse in geosynchronous orbit.

    As you say the apparent gradual maybe sinusoidal evolution does seem to point to a more directional aspect.

    This feature must be very well known to the instrument specialists. I wonder how they explain it.

    Hi magicsound

    (Sorry edited for the right Alan)

    Actually much of my post I was meant for Johny Five. I was thinking pictures from one of his successful runs could be a good reference.

    Alan what you’ve done with this live honest and thorough test is already amazing and already a lot of work. And I only have thanks for that.

    But point taken.... It’s easy to sit on a back seat and make requests when someone is doing the hard work and that’s true for my request to Johny too.

    It’s really great what you are doing. Really intriguing results too.


    Yup I’m curious too.

    On another point I wonder if next time you make a test run if you could do something that while not technical might help replicators with their tests. And help them check if they are on track or making early mistakes.

    I can appreciate providing technical data can be difficult and also maybe brings things too much into focus or could be distracting to proper independent replication.

    But something more empirical might help a lot.

    I’m wondering if next time you run your test if you could take pictures of the contents of your beaker. Once every hour or so or if that’s too frequent once every few hours? And then maybe provide them in a time line.? This could be useful to “see” if the evolution of the materials. The electrodes and fluid are behaving in similar ways in the different replications to the tests you perform. If something is wrong early on in the test or weaker or stronger in its results it might also provide interesting empirical reference data. And good thing about pictures is they may show something we did not think to look for or measure in the data.