Anthropocene Institute Video Promotes LENR as Climate Solution (GreenWin)

The following post by GreenWin was posted on the Always Open thread in reference to the attached video published by the Anthropocene Institute.

It is interesting that the Anthropocene Institute is the first of the climate gang to publicly acknowledge LENR. And openly critique the failure of ITER. ITER is the subject of a scathing review by hot fusion founder (and former Director U.S. Atomic Energy Commission) Dr. Robert L. Hirsch – linked in my post below.

In year 2000 Carl Page (Larry Page’s older brother) sold eGroups to Yahoo for $432M. He is reported to have attended ICCF 19 in Padua Italy. Anthropocene, based in Menlo Park, CA confirms Silicon Valley is waking up to the LENR revolution.

Website for the Anthropocene Institute: http://www.anthropoceneinstitute.com/

  • Mats002

    Wake up, wake up, time to wake up!

  • Mats002

    Wake up, wake up, time to wake up!

  • fact police

    Among the mistakes in this video, the most important is claiming that LENR avoids the need for high energy to overcome the Coulomb barrier by making neutrons with electron capture — a process that requires 10 times *more* energy.

    • GordonDocherty

      From Lattice Energy LLC: “weak interaction-based W-L theory posits that ultra low momentum neutrons and neutrinos are created from protons and heavy-mass surface electrons in very high electromagnetic fields found on surfaces of H-loaded metallic hydrides. Unlike charge-particle D-D fusion, there is no Coulomb barrier to ultra low momentum (ULM) neutron capture by nuclei.”

      The important point is, again, the environment. As you say, in “free space” it takes a lot of energy to make neutrons from Protons and electrons, but that is free space.

      Again from Lattice Energy LLC:

      “Lewis and Wolfenden studied a reaction catalyzed by uroporphyinogen decarboxylase, an enzyme involved in the synthesis of porphyrins such as heme, the cofactor in hemoglobin, and the chlorophylls. They were able to model the reaction and determine that the rate of spontaneous decarboxylation is 9.5 x 10-18 s-1, which corresponds to a half life of 2.3 billion years” This happens a bit faster (!) in our own bodies and in the plants we rely on for our food.

      So, just because it’s one way in free space, it does not mean it is that way in an engineered or biological environment involving catalysts (hence the “Cat” in e-Cat) – otherwise you would not be here!

      I recommend looking over the excellent slides from Lewis Larsen (co-creator of the Widom-Larsen theory) :

      http://www.slideshare.net/lewisglarsen/lattice-energy-llc-surprising-similarities-between-lenr-active-sites-and-enzymatic-catalysis-march-20-2015

      and, more generally:

      http://www.slideshare.net/lewisglarsen/lattice-energy-llc-hyperlinked-index-to-documents-re-widomlarsen-theory-and-lenrs-september-7-2015

      and

      http://www.slideshare.net/lewisglarsen/

      From these slides, it is clear that the W-L theory builds on firm foundations and is a lot closer to (the theories behind) other catalytic activities occurring “every day” in nature than may at first be supposed and is, indeed, a close relative of them.

      So, LENR may not be so outlandish after all…

      • fact police

        Gordon Doherty wrote:

        As you say, in “free space” it takes a lot of energy to make neutrons from Protons and electrons, but that is free space.

        It takes the same amount of energy to make neutrons from protons and electrons whether in free space or in a solid. The mass of a neutron is larger than that of a proton plus electron, and it takes energy to make the mass. WL hide this need for energy by talking about “heavy electrons”, but it takes the same energy to make a “heavy electron” capable of producing a neutron. That energy is 780 keV. It is inescapable. Overcoming the Coulomb barrier (via tunneling) requires only tens of keV. Therefore, as Thieberger says, the WL theory jumps from the frying pan into the fire.

        I recommend looking over the excellent slides from Lewis Larsen (co-creator of the Widom-Larsen theory) :

        I have seen them, and find them to be cluttered and obscure and naive. The WL theory has been disputed in documents by people like Thieberger, Ciuchi et al, and Tennfors (Eur Phys J Plus 128 (2013) 15).

        • GordonDocherty

          It takes the same amount of energy, but that energy is now in-situ – the analogy of a frying pan is a good one. To cook an egg sitting on a cold table in a cold room, you can either:

          1. heat up the room until enough heat from the room transfers to the egg to cook it
          2. cook it in a frying pan – the room is still cold, but the frying pan is now hot

          One takes a lot less energy overall to cook the egg, although it does, indeed, require that the same amount of energy be transferred to the egg to cook it.

          It is not just about the energy in the egg in other words, but how the energy in the environment is distributed such that it can be transferred to the egg.

          Having said this, overcoming the Coulomb barrier requires less energy and, indeed, this too can occur, provided the energy is properly directed – and the nuclei are in alignment with one another – and therein lies the reason why ULM neutrons play a part, as their cross-section is so much bigger, so the chance of collisions greatly increases – at least, according to current thinking…

          • fact police

            Gordon Doherty wrote:

            It takes the same amount of energy, but that energy is now in-situ

            But that’s a different argument. It’s one thing to argue that the solid state is better suited to finding 780 keV to make neutrons than it is to finding a few tens of keV to penetrate the Coulomb barrier, but that’s not the case the video made, and if it had, its intended audience would not have understood it. The claim that 780 keV electrons are possible in the solid state (particularly without Bremstrallung X-rays) can be disputed as well, but the video does not even admit that they are needed.

            Instead the video argues explicitly that the need for high energy can be avoided by making neutrons, and that’s the error I identified.

            That kind of misleading argument is understandable if the video makers only pay attention to one side of the controversy, since Widom & Larsen are similarly misleading in their papers. In addition to the quotation you provided, in their Eur Phys J C article in 2006, they write:

            “Note the absence of a Coulomb barrier to such a weak interaction nuclear process. It is this feature that makes the neutron induced nuclear transmutations more likely than other nuclear reactions that are impeded by Coulomb barriers. In fact, a strong Coulomb attraction that can exist between an electron and a nucleus helps the nuclear transmutation proceed.”

            This is a clear attempt to hide the fact that the weak interaction they are talking about requires 10 times more energy than DD fusion, and is therefore, on that basis, less likely, not more.

            the analogy of a frying pan is a good one

            It’s a metaphor, and it’s idiomatic, and you didn’t understand it. A bug trying to escape the discomfort of a frying pan will increase its discomfort by crawling out into the fire.

            Likewise, in trying to avoid the need for high energy to penetrate the Coulomb barrier, WL propose a reaction that needs ten times more energy.

          • Obvious

            The trick, IMO, is to heat the whole room a little bit, then spontaneously trigger an event where the room collectively donates a small portion of heat from everywhere at once to the egg in the pan.
            That doesn’t solve the lepton conservation problem, though.

          • Axil Axil

            Just say that the Widom-Larsen theory is invalid.

          • bachcole

            I have to say that anyone with the handle “fact police” is automatically discounted by me as being anyone with any sense. I generally do not read your comments simply because of your handle, fact police.

          • Michael W Wolf

            Yea B sounds like someone like the Spanish inquisitor. Where facts end up becoming Dogma. Dogma police should be his name, he just may not know it yet.

          • GordonDocherty

            thanks for the clarification.

        • Axil Axil

          Widom-Larsen theory violates how the weak force works.

  • pg

    Hi Frank,
    Is it correct that Carl Page is the founder of the Anthropocene Institute?

    If he is, there’s no way that at Google they are not researching LENR.

    • fact police

      It may be that the writer (GW) is trying to give this impression by association. But the text, parsed carefully, only says that both Carl Page and the Anthropocene Institute are in Silicon Valley.

      • GreenWin

        In fact Officer fc, the text, “parsed carefully” says nothing of Mr. Page’s presence in Silicon Valley.

    • Frank Acland

      Yes, that’s my understanding pg.

    • JeffC

      Carl Page is currently the President of the Anthropocene Institute and also on the advisory board of Brillouin Energy (Berkeley,CA). Brillouin’s IP includes innovative integrated circuits used to trigger the LENR reaction.

      http://brillouinenergy.com/about/leadership/

  • GordonDocherty

    From Lattice Energy LLC: “weak interaction-based W-L theory posits that ultra low momentum neutrons and neutrinos are created from protons and heavy-mass surface electrons in very high electromagnetic fields found on surfaces of H-loaded metallic hydrides. Unlike charge-particle D-D fusion, there is no Coulomb barrier to ultra low momentum (ULM) neutron capture by nuclei.”

    The important point is, again, the environment. As you say, in “free space” it takes a lot of energy to make neutrons from Protons and electrons, but that is free space.

    Again from Lattice Energy LLC:

    “Lewis and Wolfenden studied a reaction catalyzed by uroporphyinogen decarboxylase, an enzyme involved in the synthesis of porphyrins such as heme, the cofactor in hemoglobin, and the chlorophylls. They were able to model the reaction and determine that the rate of spontaneous decarboxylation is 9.5 x 10-18 s-1, which corresponds to a half life of 2.3 billion years” This happens a bit faster (!) in the body or in plants.

    So, just because it’s one way in free space, it does not mean it is that way in an engineered or biological environment involving catalysts (hence the “Cat” in e-Cat) – otherwise you would not be here!

    I recommend looking over the excellent slides from Lewis Larsen (co-creator of the Widom-Larsen theory) :

    http://www.slideshare.net/lewisglarsen/lattice-energy-llc-surprising-similarities-between-lenr-active-sites-and-enzymatic-catalysis-march-20-2015

    and, more generally:

    http://www.slideshare.net/lewisglarsen/lattice-energy-llc-hyperlinked-index-to-documents-re-widomlarsen-theory-and-lenrs-september-7-2015

    and

    http://www.slideshare.net/lewisglarsen/

    From these slides, it is clear that the W-L theory builds on firm foundations and is a lot closer to (the theories behind) other catalytic activities occurring “every day” in nature than may at first be supposed and is, indeed, a close relative of them.

    So, LENR may not be so outlandish after all…

    • fact police

      Gordon Doherty wrote:

      As you say, in “free space” it takes a lot of energy to make neutrons from Protons and electrons, but that is free space.

      It takes the same amount of energy to make neutrons from protons and electrons whether in free space or in a solid. The mass of a neutron is larger than that of a proton plus electron, and it takes energy to make the mass. WL hide this need for energy by talking about “heavy electrons”, but it takes the same energy to make a “heavy electron” capable of producing a neutron. That energy is 780 keV. It is inescapable. Overcoming the Coulomb barrier (via tunneling) requires only tens of keV. Therefore, as Thieberger says, the WL theory jumps from the frying pan into the fire.

      I recommend looking over the excellent slides from Lewis Larsen (co-creator of the Widom-Larsen theory) :

      I have seen them, and find them to be cluttered and obscure and naive. The WL theory has been disputed in documents by people like Thieberger, Ciuchi et al, and Tennfors (Eur Phys J Plus 128 (2013) 15).

      • GordonDocherty

        It takes the same amount of energy, but that energy is now in-situ – the analogy of a frying pan is a good one. To cook an egg sitting on a cold table in a cold room, you can either:

        1. heat up the room until enough heat from the room transfers to the egg to cook it
        2. cook it in a frying pan – the room is still cold, but the frying pan is now hot

        One takes a lot less energy overall to cook the egg, although it does, indeed, require that the same amount of energy be transferred to the egg to cook it.

        It is not just about the energy in the egg in other words, but how the energy in the environment is distributed such that it can be transferred to the egg.

        Having said this, overcoming the Coulomb barrier requires less energy and, indeed, this too can occur, provided the energy is properly directed – and the nuclei are in alignment with one another – and therein lies the reason why ULM neutrons play a part, as their cross-section is so much bigger, so the chance of collisions greatly increases – at least, according to current thinking…

      • Axil Axil

        Widom-Larsen theory violates how the weak force works.

    • Axil Axil

      Just say that the Widom-Larsen theory is invalid.

  • Jarea

    Nice to see that video. He put the finger in the wound of the hot fusionist. Good explained. I would like to see google helping the world with a moonshot for LENR.

  • Jarea

    Nice to see that video. He put the finger in the wound of the hot fusionist. Good explained. I would like to see google helping the world with a moonshot for LENR.

  • Alan DeAngelis

    A few weeks after the F&P announcement Larry A Hull (in a letter to Chemical and Engineering News, May 15, 1989, page3) proposed the mechanism of a deuteron capturing an electron to become nn, “dineutronium”.
    http://www.e-catworld.com/2015/03/05/allan-widom-on-working-for-clean-nuclear-power-llc-video/#comment-1889631912

  • Alan DeAngelis

    A few weeks after the F&P announcement Larry A Hull (in a letter to Chemical and Engineering News, May 15, 1989, page3) proposed the mechanism of a deuteron capturing an electron to become nn, “dineutronium”.
    http://www.e-catworld.com/2015/03/05/allan-widom-on-working-for-clean-nuclear-power-llc-video/#comment-1889631912

  • GreenWin

    Just as important as The Anthropocene Institute’s support of LENR is the recent critique of ITER published by U.S. National Academy of Sciences – Issues in Science and Technology Summer, 2015 issue :

    “[ITER]…tokamak fusion power will almost certainly be a commercial failure… The likelihood that a tokamak would be prohibitively expensive is supported by the experience of ITER thus far. The current estimate for the cost of the project is over $50 billion, about five times early estimates, and the project is still more than 10 years from expected completion.”
    Former Director U.S. Atomic Energy Commission fusion research, Dr. Robert L. Hirsch

    http://issues.org/31-4/fusion-research-time-to-set-a-new-path/

    • Alain Samoun

      “tokamak fusion power will almost certainly be a commercial failure, which is a tragedy in light of the time, funds, and effort so far expended”
      With the EPR – the new fission reactor made in France – and ITER built also in France . They are certainly commercial catastrophes!
      One thing that maybe surprising is that these monsters continue to be built even that nobody really can say when they will be finished and, worst, if they will be able to produce more energy that they consume.
      In my opinion,one can answer that there are so much interests, especially for the corporations engaged in their construction, that no one wants to take the decision to stop them. A very sad state of affairs in regard of the lost of human resources which could be used to develop renewable energies and LENR

      • GreenWin

        At a minimum, the predicted failure of hot fusion tokamaks like ITER should direct R&D funding toward technology of predicted success – i.e. LENR. LENR and alternative fusion projects require far lower budgets and can keep just as many corporations “busy.”

        Dr. Hirsch’s article is titled “Fusion Research: Time to Set a New Path.” If the ITER budget was redirected to renewables & alternative fusion technologies especially LENR – we are likely to see far greater reward than continuing down the tokamak black hole. In the U.S., Senator Feinstein who oversees ITER, already has grave doubts about the value of this boondoggle. Dr. Hirsch’s article should be circulated to every politician responsible for funding ITER.

        Hot fusion has failed humanity for 65 years. It IS time to set a new path.

        • Alan DeAngelis

          Give those hot fusion scoundrels more tax payer money to research LENR, the very thing they disparaged for a quarter of a century and turn it into another intractable bureaucracy? They can go pack groceries at the
          supermarket (if they don’t displace any decent people who already work there).

          • Alan DeAngelis

            PS
            Let’s not fall into the same old trap.
            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z0FlffdQmA4

          • GreenWin

            Alan, if ye say: “Men don’t follow nobles… they follow courage.” We have a good and decent man in Andrea Rossi – and his angels. IMO. 🙂

          • Alan DeAngelis

            Yeah, Rossi’s the man.

          • GreenWin

            Alan, I fully understand your sentiment. But most fusion scientists are puppets of the system they were indoctrinated to believe in. They are soldiers who take orders. If we are to evolve amicably we will provide amnesty to the “soldiers” – in exchange for their testimony re the “officers” who knew better.

            Those “officers” will be the grocery baggers – the destiny of those who seek to exploit the human race.

          • Alan DeAngelis
          • Alan DeAngelis

            OK, but I would prefer to see scientist with different skill sets have a crack at figuring out LENR before any more money goes to these bang
            things together guy.
            http://vignette2.wikia.nocookie.net/dragonsdogma/images/a/a9/Cyclops.png/revision/latest?cb=20131030165830

            “Nuclear and high energy physicists seem to be unaware of the fact that phenomena in materials are not always as reproducible as are phenomena in their field. Transistors are a good example of variability in
            solid state devices.”
            Brian Josephson

            http://coldfusionnow.org/michio-kaku-informed-on-new-developments-in-cold-fusion/

            I like to see some funding go to someone that has never done nuclear physics before. For example (off the top of my head), maybe Dr. Anirban
            Bandyopadhyay could be given some funding to see if he could get some transmutations to take place in his microtubules.
            https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=8&v=VQngptkPYE8

          • Alan DeAngelis

            Pardon me.
            …bang things together guys.

  • GreenWin

    Just as important as The Anthropocene Institute’s support of LENR is the recent critique of ITER published by U.S. National Academy of Sciences – Issues in Science and Technology Summer, 2015 issue :

    “[ITER]…tokamak fusion power will almost certainly be a commercial failure… The likelihood that a tokamak would be prohibitively expensive is supported by the experience of ITER thus far. The current estimate for the cost of the project is over $50 billion, about five times early estimates, and the project is still more than 10 years from expected completion.”
    Former Director U.S. Atomic Energy Commission fusion research, Dr. Robert L. Hirsch

    http://issues.org/31-4/fusion-research-time-to-set-a-new-path/

    • Alain Samoun

      “tokamak fusion power will almost certainly be a commercial failure, which is a tragedy in light of the time, funds, and effort so far expended”
      With the EPR – the new fission reactor made in France – and ITER built also in France . They are certainly commercial catastrophes!
      One thing that maybe surprising is that these monsters continue to be built even that nobody really can say when they will be finished and, worst, if they will be able to produce more energy that they consume.
      In my opinion,one can answer that there are so much interests, especially for the corporations engaged in their construction, that no one wants to take the decision to stop them. A very sad state of affairs in regard of the lost of human resources which could be used to develop renewable energies and LENR

      • GreenWin

        At a minimum, the predicted failure of hot fusion tokamaks like ITER should direct R&D funding toward technology of predicted success – i.e. LENR. LENR and alternative fusion projects require far lower budgets and can keep just as many corporations “busy.”

        Dr. Hirsch’s article is titled “Fusion Research: Time to Set a New Path.” If the ITER budget was redirected to renewables & alternative fusion technologies especially LENR – we are likely to see far greater reward than continuing down the tokamak black hole. In the U.S., Senator Feinstein who oversees ITER, already has grave doubts about the value of this boondoggle. Dr. Hirsch’s article should be circulated to every politician responsible for funding ITER.

        Hot fusion has failed humanity for 65 years. It IS time to set a new path.

        • Alan DeAngelis

          Give those hot fusion scoundrels more tax payer money to research LENR, the very thing they disparaged for a quarter of a century and turn it into another intractable bureaucracy? They can go pack groceries at the
          supermarket (if they don’t displace any decent people who already work there).

          • Alan DeAngelis

            PS
            Let’s not fall into the same old trap.
            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z0FlffdQmA4

          • GreenWin

            Alan, if ye say: “Men don’t follow nobles… they follow courage.” We have a good and decent man in Andrea Rossi – and his angels. IMO. 🙂

          • Alan DeAngelis

            Yeah, Rossi’s the man.

          • Michael W Wolf

            How did the Nobles become Noble? They took it with the tip of their sword. Ecat is Sir Rossi’s sword.

          • GreenWin

            Alan, I fully understand your sentiment. But most fusion scientists are puppets of the system they were indoctrinated to believe in. They are soldiers who take orders. If we are to evolve amicably we will provide amnesty to the “soldiers” – in exchange for their testimony re the “officers” who knew better.

            Those “officers” will be the grocery baggers – the destiny of those who seek to exploit the human race.

          • Alan DeAngelis
          • Alan DeAngelis

            OK, but I would prefer to see scientist with different skill sets have a crack at figuring out LENR before any more money goes to these bang
            things together guy.
            http://vignette2.wikia.nocookie.net/dragonsdogma/images/a/a9/Cyclops.png/revision/latest?cb=20131030165830

            “Nuclear and high energy physicists seem to be unaware of the fact that phenomena in materials are not always as reproducible as are phenomena in their field. Transistors are a good example of variability in
            solid state devices.”
            Brian Josephson

            http://coldfusionnow.org/michio-kaku-informed-on-new-developments-in-cold-fusion/

            I like to see some funding go to someone that has never done nuclear physics before. For example (off the top of my head), maybe Dr. Anirban
            Bandyopadhyay could be given some funding to see if he could get some transmutations to take place in his microtubules.
            https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=8&v=VQngptkPYE8

          • Alan DeAngelis

            Pardon me.
            …bang things together guys.

  • gdaigle

    Media-wise, the video is a nice visual… but the voiceover is of very poor sound quality and has one very poorly done insertion. I would never have released it if it were mine. The website for the institute is also bare-bones, has numerous deadends with copyrights not updated since 2012 or 2013. Really, blogspot? If one of my students I would have graded it a “C”. Come on, Mr. Page. If this is really something you believe in please do a much better representation of your commitment in the media (which, after all, “…is the message”).

    • Michael W Wolf

      It’s about numbers and money. Meaning more people and more money would make for beautiful videos. Hang in there, they are both coming to our party soon brother. 🙂

  • GordonDocherty

    I like the Anthropocene Institute video – and this one from DrBob:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F3xPbY_gOwU&feature=youtu.be

    I particularly like it when, in the video, it is pointed out that Muon Catalyzed fusion, occurring at low temperatures, is accepted by mainstream science, whereas LENR is rejected as no form of nuclear reaction can occur at low temperatures… a logical impasse, I think

    • Axil Axil

      There is a common mechanism that produces each and every one of these disparate forms of energy. This mechanism is the EMF black hole or under another name, Dark Mode SPP.

      • Why not “Rydberg State Hydrogen Green Cold Plasma Fire” ?

        • Axil Axil

          How does this cause fit in with cavitation?

          • GreenWin

            Simply add “Water Enabled” before what Doc Bob said.

          • Axil Axil

            How does “Water Enabled Rydberg State Hydrogen Green Cold Plasma Fire” theory explain muon catalyzed fusion?

          • GreenWin

            Er… you got me Axil. 🙂

          • I do not know – I just look for similarities.

            Many of these technologies form Deuterium, or Tritium, and then it seems logically to give the following lazy explanation that Quadrum (hydrogen with 3 neutrons) can form, which would implode to become Helium, while helping additional reactions with heat, pressure(implosion), and formation of additional particles.

            On the other hand:

            In miniature, cavitation and the shape of the implosions reminds of a quasar, or a black hole.

            As for a Rydberg Hydrogen Atom, and a Hydrogen Atom with a Muon, they can I maybe very easily both loose their negative charge (?), as well easily bond with other atoms?

            All these technologies deal with very small atoms, so I suppose that the chance that Quantum Tunneling, quantum fluctuations and cashmir like effects can give a helping push.

            Electro Magnetic fields might seem important because they cause very rare type of tornado like conditions on a nano scale, allowing for, or increasing the chance, of otherwise uncommon and exotic reactions? So the EMF could possible produce the conditions sometimes, pressure or unnorderly distribution of matter would produce in others?

            Now If Axil would be so kind to give a physicists opinion ?

          • Axil Axil

            There are two reactions producing mechanisms at play in the fundamental LENR mechanism: the black hole model of rotating EMF solitons: entanglement that produces low energy reactions as low as the nanowatt and sub nanowatt power range, and a magnetic beam that produces very high energy reactions such as meson production up to and beyond the 10^^13 Ev range.

            The entanglement mechanism is only found in EMF black holes and is call multiparticle entanglement, quantum tunneling, or worm holes. It is a EPR bridge. Search on EPR=ER for more info.

            The magnetic beam is produced by the alignment of polariton spins pointing toward one pole of the EMF black hole. See the theory here

            Half-solitons in a polariton quantum fluid behave like magnetic monopoles

            http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1204/1204.3564.pdf

            http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/130227173855-black-hole-super-169.jpg

          • I’ll look into it, thanks

          • GordonDocherty

            thanks for the clarification.

  • GordonDocherty

    I like the Anthropocene Institute video – and this one from DrBob:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F3xPbY_gOwU&feature=youtu.be

    I particularly like it when, in the video, it is pointed out that Muon Catalyzed fusion, occurring at low temperatures, is accepted by mainstream science, whereas LENR is rejected as no form of nuclear reaction can occur at low temperatures… a logical impasse, I think

    • Axil Axil

      There is a common mechanism that produces each and every one of these disparate forms of energy. This mechanism is the EMF black hole or under another name, Dark Mode SPP.

      • Why not “Rydberg State Hydrogen Green Cold Plasma Fire” ?

        • Axil Axil

          How does this cause fit in with cavitation?

          • GreenWin

            Simply add “Water Enabled” before what Doc Bob said.

          • Axil Axil

            How does “Water Enabled Rydberg State Hydrogen Green Cold Plasma Fire” theory explain muon catalyzed fusion?

          • GreenWin

            Er… you got me Axil. 🙂

          • I do not know – I just look for similarities.

            Many of these technologies form Deuterium, or Tritium, and then it seems logically to give the following lazy explanation that Quadrum (hydrogen with 3 neutrons) can form, which would implode to become Helium, while helping additional reactions with heat, pressure(implosion), and formation of additional particles.

            On the other hand:

            In miniature, cavitation and the shape of the implosions reminds of a quasar, or a black hole. (For every reaction their is an opposite reaction so an extremely even implosion / singularity could produce an extremely narrow and energetic jet which might channel and feed of the accumulative amount of the energy of its surrounding field)
            (“Oh My God Particles” are freak sub atomic particles, believed to come from Quasars or Hyper novas that carries the amount of energy equal to that of a base ball. Very hard to explain with conventional physics )

            As for a Rydberg Hydrogen Atom, and a Hydrogen Atom with a Muon, they can maybe very easily both loose their negative charge (?), as well easily interact with other atoms / energy fields?

            All these technologies deal with very small and simple atoms, so I suppose that the chance that Quantum Tunneling, quantum fluctuations, time dilation and cashmir commes into play and have to be considered to
            give a helping push. (Including the possibility that energy leaks into the reactions from dimensions we typically do not interact much with)

            Electro Magnetic fields might seem important because they cause very rare type of tornado / vortex like conditions on a nano scale, allowing for, or increasing the chance, of otherwise uncommon and exotic reactions? So the EMF (vortex) could possible produce the conditions sometimes, pressure or unnorderly distribution of matter would produce in others?

          • Axil Axil

            There are two reactions producing mechanisms at play in the fundamental LENR mechanism: the black hole model of rotating EMF solitons: entanglement that produces low energy reactions as low as the nanowatt and sub nanowatt power range, and a magnetic beam that produces very high energy reactions such as meson production up to and beyond the 10^^13 Ev range.

            The entanglement mechanism is only found in EMF black holes and is called multiparticle entanglement, quantum tunneling, or worm holes. It is a EPR bridge. Search on EPR=ER for more info.

            The magnetic beam is produced by the alignment of polariton spins pointing toward one pole of the EMF black hole. See the theory here

            Half-solitons in a polariton quantum fluid behave like magnetic monopoles

            http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1204/1204.3564.pdf

            On page 4, a micrograph of the magnetic beam is shown. Seeing is believing,

            http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/130227173855-black-hole-super-169.jpg

          • I’ll look into it, thanks

          • Michael W Wolf

            Great explanation as usual axil. That is why I think the acronym lenr should be kept simple and general as in Lattice Enabled Nano Reactions. At least until Nuclear can be proven in the reaction

  • Obvious

    The trick, IMO, is to heat the whole room a little bit, then spontaneously trigger an event where the room collectively donates a small portion of heat from everywhere at once to the egg in the pan.
    That doesn’t solve the lepton conservation problem, though.