Talk-Polywell.org

*

http://www.boingboing.net/2009/01/06/ar ... uasip.html

*

Black Light Power.

You can't see the power. But it is there really. Show us the money. We will show you the power. Or possibly the door. Whatever.

Apart from the well established scientific fact that an electron can not drop below the 0 position, a neutron can fall apart in a proton and an electron?

vernes wrote:Apart from the well established scientific fact that an electron can not drop below the 0 position, a neutron can fall apart in a proton and an electron?

So true. But then did the nonsensical phlogiston theories (by our standards) mean that.... Stuff didn't burn?

Just because Mills has a bogus theory doesn't mean he isn't leveraging legitimate phenomenon.

Clearly making a Neutron out of a proton and an electron must be extremely endothermic. But then if you could make neutrons this way then, put them together into Alphas.... wouldn't that be exothermic in total?

If Mills (and the "cold fusioneers" he is copying) are endothermically making neutrons (or some wierd analog), and these neutrons are moving into nuclei and producing alphas, then couldn't this sometimes be exothermic if indeed enough alphas are produced?

vernes wrote:a neutron can fall apart in a proton and an electron?

IIRC one of the opinion leaders at the fusor.net forums thinks just that. OTOH his "neutron disintegration" opinion links into his ideas about a Maxwellian basis for cosmology which do not seem logically insane.

then couldn't this sometimes be exothermic if indeed enough alphas are produced?

Couldn't they just be fooling themselves - which is much more likely.

Couldn't they just be fooling themselves - which is much more likely.

Yes, It's got to be that most of them are. They're up to their eyebrows in wishful thinking if you take them all as a group. Yet, there is something there as evidenced by the few researchers doing good science and seeing some strange results, like the SPAWAR experiments.

I don't care much about it, because if you give them money, they're just going to do more Electrolytic cells. There just seems to be no interesting experiments to do; There are no compelling and testable hypothesis.

My antivirus flagged a trojan horse on that website.

Helius wrote:

Couldn't they just be fooling themselves - which is much more likely.

Yes, It's got to be that most of them are. They're up to their eyebrows in wishful thinking if you take them all as a group. Yet, there is something there as evidenced by the few researchers doing good science and seeing some strange results, like the SPAWAR experiments.

I don't care much about it, because if you give them money, they're just going to do more Electrolytic cells. There just seems to be no interesting experiments to do; There are no compelling and testable hypothesis.

I'm not so sure. Interesting things are happening. It would be nice to find out why. It could be useful.

The SPAWAR experiments raised possible questions. Anyone thinking about nuclear cross-sections would start with a very strong expectation that cold fusion cannot happen. And the lack of any replicable evidence after such a long time bears this out.

Still it is good to see that effort is put into answering the "possible questions".

Here is an interesting account of a repeat of the SPAWAR experiments with carefull analysis of whether observed pits could be of nuclear origin.

http://pages.csam.montclair.edu/~kowals ... lileo.html

the trouble with the cold fusion experiments is that the claimed evidence is either minute and calorimetric with many sources of possible experimental & methodological error, or unreplicatable, or interesting but not when viewed dispassionately pointing towards cold fusion.

Best wishes, Tom

tomclarke wrote:The SPAWAR experiments raised possible questions. Anyone thinking about nuclear cross-sections would start with a very strong expectation that cold fusion cannot happen. And the lack of any replicable evidence after such a long time bears this out.

Still it is good to see that effort is put into answering the "possible questions".

Here is an interesting account of a repeat of the SPAWAR experiments with carefull analysis of whether observed pits could be of nuclear origin.

http://pages.csam.montclair.edu/~kowals ... lileo.html

the trouble with the cold fusion experiments is that the claimed evidence is either minute and calorimetric with many sources of possible experimental & methodological error, or unreplicatable, or interesting but not when viewed dispassionately pointing towards cold fusion.

Best wishes, Tom

Bussard thought that fusion with such a device was not out of the question.

The thinking now is that it is a reaction between the "catalyst" and the D. Experiments with nickel (which absorbs H and D) tend to prove this out.

tomclarke wrote:The SPAWAR experiments raised possible questions. Anyone thinking about nuclear cross-sections would start with a very strong expectation that cold fusion cannot happen. And the lack of any replicable evidence after such a long time bears this out.

the trouble with the cold fusion experiments is that the claimed evidence is either minute and calorimetric with many sources of possible experimental & methodological error, or unreplicatable, or interesting but not when viewed dispassionately pointing towards cold fusion.

IMO, Bussard's take on LENR satisfies most questions and addresses all the anomalies such as nuclear ashes and nuclear-linked contaminants in the electrolyte fluid.

viewtopic.php?t=717&highlight=lenr

the article wrote:Randell Mills, founder of BlackLight Power, claims to have invented a reactor that makes hydrogen atoms drop to an energy state below ground level

Argh. Quantum physics does not work that way!