Talk-Polywell.org

I especially liked the bit on entropy.

http://newenergytimes.com/v2/government ... rkshop.pdf

Joseph Chikva wrote:

Kahuna wrote:Here are some ecatplanet.net links for you (as well as links to the Nelson and Zawodny presentations):

http://newenergytimes.com/v2/government ... rkshop.pdf
http://newenergytimes.com/v2/government ... rkshop.pdf
http://newenergytimes.com/v2/government ... rkshop.pdf

Would you like to say some not ecatplanet.net links?
And would you like to say that NASA considers Rossi as serious researcher?
I have not time now and also wish to read long texts. Please quote.
Thanks.

Yes, I left out the "Not" as in "some links not from ecatplanet.net" that I thought you were looking for. I'm agnostic on Rossi/ecat though so I'm equally happy if you read/don't read these although I must say they are not long nor complex.

Kahuna wrote:I'm agnostic on Rossi/ecat though so I'm equally happy if you read/don't read these although I must say they are not long nor complex.

So, name "Rossi" is not mentioned in any NASA report?

MSimon wrote:I especially liked the bit on entropy.

http://newenergytimes.com/v2/government ... rkshop.pdf

Actaually slides 19,20,21,22 seem to be quite interesting.

It is a very logical way of testing this spp mediated theory.

I wish I could have been at the talk.

Kiteman may not be as crazy as he looks!

I hope that the heat measurements on sample 20 have good controls.

A quote from msnbc.com:

"Today, the United States Department of Energy, academic journals and the U.S. Patent Office all consider cold fusion machines to be hoaxes."

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/45557227/ns ... t3c0lbbDRQ

Crawdaddy wrote:Kiteman may not be as crazy as he looks!

I didn't go crazy till I came here and found all these "believers" mascarading as scientist types.

KitemanSA wrote:

Crawdaddy wrote:Kiteman may not be as crazy as he looks!

I didn't go crazy till I came here and found all these "believers" mascarading as scientist types.

So, are you admitting that you are indeed crazy?

KitemanSA wrote:

Crawdaddy wrote:Kiteman may not be as crazy as he looks!

I didn't go crazy till I came here and found all these "believers" mascarading as scientist types.

I still find it hard to imagine that a plasmon can concentrate it's energy enough to generate 10^11V/m fields.

So your plasmon theory is still slightly insane.

Giorgio wrote:

KitemanSA wrote:

Crawdaddy wrote:Kiteman may not be as crazy as he looks!

I didn't go crazy till I came here and found all these "believers" mascarading as scientist types. :D :wink:

So, are you admitting that you are indeed crazy? :D

After a long and eventful life I have come to the conclusion that there are no sane people in the world. I would be the first to admit that I'm one of the crazies.

I actually like being wrong from time to time. It keeps me humble. Somewhat.

Giorgio wrote:

KitemanSA wrote:

Crawdaddy wrote:Kiteman may not be as crazy as he looks!

I didn't go crazy till I came here and found all these "believers" mascarading as scientist types.

So, are you admitting that you are indeed crazy?

Only while dealing with the believers mascarading as scientists for any length of time.

Crawdaddy wrote:

KitemanSA wrote:

Crawdaddy wrote:Kiteman may not be as crazy as he looks!

I didn't go crazy till I came here and found all these "believers" mascarading as scientist types.

I still find it hard to imagine that a plasmon can concentrate it's energy enough to generate 10^11V/m fields.

So your plasmon theory is still slightly insane.

Heck, if I'd claimed theory status I would agree with you. But the limited numbers I HAVE been able to put into it work out.

By the way... surface excitons are bosons too so it would be plausible that they are the particles that condense in a BEC, providing the transport and energy extraction means rather than a SPP. It might also explain the "catalyst" in that excitons are spin stablized electron/hole pairs and the "catalyst" might actually be the dopant in the lattice that results in the deveoplment of said "holes". Thus, if the "catalyst" was 1 part in 1000 of the lattice, the critical temperature of the BEC would be about 500K. Just a thought.

Crawdaddy wrote: I still find it hard to imagine that a plasmon can concentrate it's energy enough to generate 10^11V/m fields.

Why would it need to?
By the way, what is the field of an electron?

KitemanSA wrote:

Crawdaddy wrote: I still find it hard to imagine that a plasmon can concentrate it's energy enough to generate 10^11V/m fields.

Why would it need to?
By the way, what is the field of an electron?

In the NASA presentation, the theory of their device is that the terahertz plasmons propagating on their nanopatterned substrates interfere with each other to generate super high fields that can generate "heavy electrons". The "heavy electrons" can screen the nickel nucleus from the proton.

At least that is my understanding of the slides (I might have misinterpreted the presentation).

Essentially it is Windom Larsen theory from what I can tell. I can't judge whether there is any merit to the presentation. But they certainly put some effort into their experiments. I estimate at least a 3 or 4 man years of postdoc level research in those slides.

Krivit has a couple of new posts up. They are worth the visit.

http://blog.newenergytimes.com/author/sbkrivit/

especially this one that he linked:

http://scienceblogs.com/startswithabang ... why_we.php

Reading the comments is also useful.

Another plasma physicist that believes plasmas react the same as condensed matter. Oh well.