Unconventional Nuclear Reactions (Reginald B. Little)

The following post has been submitted by Reginald B. Little.

In reference to the topic of Axil’s post about chiral particles (particles with two possible rotations, clockwise or counterclockwise), the idea has already been archived by me as reversible (for all transport and transformations chemically) and irreversible ( for unconventional nuclear reactions) fussing and fusing of nuclei of positive and negative nuclear magnetic moments for explaining and accelerating unconventional nuclear reactions.

By such I have explained how all prior cold fusion and LENR observations since Ponns and Fleischmann (I prefer calling them unconventional nuclear reactions as they are not low energy but high potential energy) occur and can be accelerated by these nonprimordial nuclear magnetic moments and the difficulty of inducing unconventional nuclear reactions is thereby explained by me as the site ( Ed Storm’s reaction centers which he did not and was not able to give nature of) has to enrich in these nuclear magnetic moments in particular the negative nuclear magnetic moments.

It was by this that I accelerated unconventional nuclear in silver and copper as by silver having all negative nuclear moments. It is by this that nickel is better than Palladium has it is 61Ni causing nuclear activity in Nano nickel. It is the negative nuclear moment in Ti that causes its unconventional nuclear activity.

By my theory, I also invented a THEORETICAL cure for cancer using negative nuclear moments their consequent chiral rays what I call dark rays. It is by this that i also have discovered the true cause origin and theory of high temperature superconductivity as by these nuclei of negative nuclear magnetic moments. I can explain all superconductivity and I know how to increase superconductivity to room temperatures using isotopes of nonzero nuclear magnetic moments.

The theory and ideas are expressed and archived here: http://rxiv.org/author/reginald_b_little

Reginald B. Little

  • georgehants

    Welcome Reg (if I may call you that) good to have another open thinker on board.
    Any way of testing your cure for Cancer?

    • RLittle

      Hi Sir, the work is new and looking for tests and prospects for helping humanity. I apologize to all but I only hope that like all good works and intentions , such should be rewarded.

      But in general, this theoretical cure lays new foundation for understanding cancer’s origin in totally new way by nuclei of different nuclear magnetic moments as say nonprimordial 13carbon which has positive nuclear magnetic moment (chiral) and about 1% abundance on earth relative to the primordial 12carbon of 98% abundance and zero nuclear magnetic moment (nonchiral). So that in creation and later evolution plants , animals and humans incorporate primordial 12carbon in biomolecules and enzymes and biochemical reaction are sensitive to such 12c for normal cellular functioning. The theory is that normal cells biophysicochemically transform to cancer as the 13C builds up in the local tissue in the protein, sugar , fats and nucleic acids of cells of that tissue for nature of tumor. Also nonprimordial 15N(achiral) 17O(achiral), and 33S(chiral) and possibly 25Mg(chiral) with coupling by electron free radicals and driven by polluting low intensity radiofrequecy and low intense static magnetic fields become apart of nucleic acids and proteins to alter gene replication and accel glycolysis and suppress kreb cycle for Warburg Effect. This cause the origin and birth of cancer cells and it’s habitat.
      With such new origin my theory of cure is to selectively physically and/or chemically stimulate these nonprimordial nuclei as they exist in cancer cells in higher amounts to kill the cancer. This is theory as tuning many radiofrequency (of chiral and achiral rays) and static magnetic field to rotate only the primordial 13c, 15n, 17o and 33s and simultaneous use of soft nonionizing xrays (of chiral and achiral rays) so that the radiofrequency fields and static fields can induce greater selwctive near edge xray absorbance of primordial isotopes to selectively deactivate enzymes of glycolysis in cancer cell with no effect on primordial 12c, 14n, 16o and 32s in normal cells to selectively kill the cancer cell with few to no side effects. Simultaneously i have proposed use of neutron absorbance to increase selectively neutron absorbance cross-section by simultaneoys radio frequency and near edge xray of nonprimordial 13c, 15n, 17o, 33s to transmute these nonprimordial isotopes only in enzymes accelerating glycolysis in cancer cells to thereby deactivate the enzymes of glycolysis only in cancer cells to kill the cancer with no harm to normal cells. The radiofrequency, xrays and neutrons can permeate the body so it can treat all cancer. It is a theory, it may work it may help, and it is possible it may not work. But it should be tested. My only hope is that I be allowed to test as it is my theory or if others test that they acknowledge and reference my theory. Just as the great Stephen Hawkings developed great theories waiting for testing and people thirst to give Hawkings deserving credit if observations prove his theories, I also would like credit if my theories are observed correct. Many people have the wrong opinion of me. But I only seek justice for hard work. My wish is to help humanity. If my work to develop cure for cancer proves correct, I think it uncivilized and dishonest for someone else to steal the credits. In this work I introduce a novel reversible irreversible fissing of these nuclei an unprecedented idea that nuclear fields fiss to alter quantum fields to alter enzymatic. Very beautiful. In this way I proposed that such fussing negative and positive moments of nuclei alter quantum fields to cause superconductivity and superfluidity. Beautiful as proteins have a superfluidity in folsing and denature and naturing. I also reason auch negative nuclear moments induce unconventional nuclear processes as negative moment of 61n, negative moment in pd, negative moments in ti,. Like Hawkings Sir , if I am right it is only just that I get some credit. In all sincerity and honesty. Reginald B. LITTLE

    • RLittle

      Mr. Frank Acland and George, call me Redge. Be encouraged and thanks for friendship. The idea is powerful as I readily identify something new that is common to substances that have shown unusual nuclear processes: Pd, Ag, Ni, and Ti. Such metals have isotopes of negative nuclear magnetic moments and these can under proper pretreatment cause unconventional nuclear reactions. RBL identifies negative nuclear magnetic moments in Titanium (47Ti, and 49Ti); Nickel (61Ni), Palladium (105Pd), and Silver (107Ag, 109Ag) and it is powerful to apply the theory of the fractional fissing (not fussing) of these to produce Dk quantum fields and Dk rays and fields to cause anomalous interactions between electrons and nuclei in metal lattices for causing electron capture, proton capture and fission and fusion. Please be advised that very few elements have negative nuclear magnetic moments and this fits perfectly with the puzzle for fitting prior experimental pieces together. This explains why many efforts to see excess heat and transmutations occur more frequently in PD, Ni, Ti and I introduced Ag in 2003 and ‘hydrino’ researchers later used my work on Ag. Thank you Mr. Acland for sound mind, open mind. Please be encouraged Mr. Acland as my use of dark rays is not goobledegook. There are some prominent scientists noting possible dark energy and fields connected to quantum mechanics. For instance the former President of the American Physical Society. Prof Dr. Laura Greene currently lectures: ” The Dark Energy of Quantum Materials”. See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0QcGIJFfRxY. Thanks and Cheers for friendly interactions! Reginald B. Little

  • RLittle

    Hhiram, You are entitled to your opinions and I will not launch negative insults as you do. But I will tell you that you do not know everything about the universe. For instance, you do not know: “it is thousands of different diseases”. Such is your theory. How do you know what is gobbledegook? Have you experimented to determine dark rays and interactions with cancer cells? Someone could equally call your nanobots gobbledegook? But I am above such!!! You should learn better. Your theory may be right and it may be wrong. Go test it and report back with data. No one knows until the scientific method is applied. It is unprofessional for you to dismiss ideas without proper experimental justification just because it is something you believe, or your personal feelings toward the person proposing the idea. Science progresses by fresh ideas, some are right and some are wrong. But new ideas should be properly tested. There can be common origin of biochemistry that causes cells to undergo ‘undesirable dell respiration’. Who are you to say what will and will not work? Why not test new ideas to see if they work? This is wisdom. Who are you to negatively judge me? You keep your emotional negative outbursts to yourself. Unless you have friendly professional exchange say nothing else to me. But for everyone else, let us continue to think and explore new possibilities with an open mind.

    • psi2u2

      “it is thousands of different diseases”. Such is your theory.

      This is not a theory.

      • georgehants

        psi2u2, you say “it is thousands of different diseases”. but I think all causing the same uncontrolled multiplication of cells as a commonality.
        Please put up your thought out scientific objections to Redge’s theory.

        • RLittle

          Yes Sir, George. You know George it is sad as many people will of their own emotions toward me leave out the possibility of true true science spirit to seek out and observe the unknown. Such petit irrationality, owe I do not like him, well you do not know him, such pettiness. Also the biggest possible loss is the possibility that this is correct and how it can help all of us. Even if I am wrong (which I hope not) I might inspire someone to think in a different way and arrive at the better answer. But it seems irrational to me to dictate and force people not to think freely. I think Einstein called it insane! Think freely and do the experiments. And be mindful that some experiments may by quantum mechanics be ‘uncertain’! Thank you George. It is so refreshing to see light as you shine.

          • georgehants

            Redge, I can only appologise for the few non-scientists on page that unfortunately know no better than to listen to their holy priests denying everything they consider is beyond a steam engine.
            I think Frank must be busy as he certainly would not have allowed the first pathetic comment by Hhiram (I think)

          • RLittle

            You are so right George. You are right as this hurts everyone. Aside from me (but just think on anyone trying to wonder), any one, any young inspiring mind of today’s youth so young and daring, therein of those young minds bud solutions to the future. But before they can help solve the problems facing mankind, mediocrity punches and kicks and harasses them from imagination. Sure imagination can be wrong. But sometimes imagination is right and the profit to humanity can be extraordinary. But if all people are dissuaded from imagining and creativity, it hurts all of us. With all the problems in the world today and the new issues, why choke and kill wondering minds? Cancer may be cured? Global warming may be alleviated? war may be prevented? Disease may be prevented? Man may explore/live in other regions of the universe. But old is good and new is need. Einstein taught us of the power of imagination.

          • georgehants

            Redge, I think I have found A philosophically like mind, but I cannot discuss the technicalities of yours or anybody’s valuable theory’s beyond that.
            My knowledge is scientifically and logically general.
            Best

          • RLittle

            George you are right just ignore this guy. He for what ever reason wants to be contrary. He just wants to be sore. Lets him be sore. Let’s continue in friendly discussion. The soreness leads no where. The fact is that cancers are different. Researchers have been searching for something common in all. It is hard to distinguish cancer cells from normal cells. Scientists have determined general genetic alterations and Warburg effects of cancer cells for many years. My reasoning is using such general common habitat as a basis to affect cancer cell. I never meant to imply all cancers are identical. But if this is resolved before every one then this guy in soreness will dig for something else to be negative. Some people thrive on disruption. So let him be. But thanks for positive outlook. Cancer is a huge effort and I give a theory. Thank you for encouraging. I ignore negative few who Stand around trying to step over 99 positives to poke hole in 1 negative is not going to help solve the mystery of cancer. I avoid such contrary negative destructive people.

          • psi2u2

            Please do not apologize on my account.

        • psi2u2

          I did not say this, George. I objected to RLittle’s sweeping statement that it was a theory that there are many types of cancers. It is not a theory; it is an empirical reality. You write that these are all caused by “uncontrolled multiplication of cells as a commonality.” This is also correct but does not change the reality that there are many types, as they affect different tissues of the body and do so in ways that can be readily classified by scientists. I wonder if you could be so kind as to not lecture me on “how science is done” or impute to me “close-minded denials.” This is rude and unnecessary.

      • RLittle

        Sir , this is not my theory. In cancer science as of this day and into the past, there is no understanding of the cause of cancer so it is meaningless to say ‘it is thousands of different diseases’. How can one make such a statement about something (cancer) which is not truly understood and observed? It is thought hence it is theory that it is ‘it is thousands of different diseases’. But it could by observation be determined otherwise. Please leave aside your personal feelings toward me as such is irrelevant in pure thought, actions of science.

        • psi2u2

          Your reply completely misreads the point of my comment, which is to object to your own cavalier use of the term “theory.” There are many different types of cancer because each attacks a different organ or set of tissues and can be treated with different modalities of therapy. You have a hypothesis that all these types are caused by a single underlying cause at a level of physics below physiology. Even if you are correct, it is still empirically undeniable that there are multiple types of cancers, for the reason just stated. Fighting this reality will not get you very far. Please stop imputing to me “personal feelings” as opposed to “pure thought,” as if you are the one waving the banner of science here. Your qualifications as a scientist have yet to be established.

          • RLittle

            Psi2u2, I do not misread anything. And I do not have a cavalier use of the term theory. My application of theory is based on the Warburg Effect, which is common to all cancer cells and my use of theory is also involving genetic mutations which is common to all cancer cells. So what you mean by cavalier is irrational. These two facts of cancer are all regardless of which organs they attach to or affect. My work is based on these two facts. You are move by something otherwise. These are facts you resist, which leads me to your personal scenario which at this point I no longer will respond. I tell you what keep your way and let’s end this because I have no more time trying to reason with nonfactual.

  • Gerard McEk

    There are indications of investigations in the Ukrain that indicate that bio-processes can influence nuclear decay strongly. This idea/theory may be the basis to get this understood, so do not dismiss ideas so easily, Hhiram.
    Nevertheless, I do not think that most cansers do have a nuclear origin, but that also has to be seen.
    I am glad that an open mind scientist joined us and has given us fruit for thought.
    Welcome mr. Little!

    • Mylan

      No, Hhiram is right. If ideas make no sense at all, it is just not meaningful to bother other people with it. It is nice to stay open, but one has to focus on what makes sense. Everybodies resources are limited.
      Filling this forum with extreme fringe science is counterproductive. Seriously, most people finding this forum by chance will never come back when such stories are the first thing they read.
      I know a lot about cancer, I know how to produce cancer cells, there is nothing nuclear about it. No “ray” could ever distinguish between a cancer cell and a regular cell.

      • georgehants

        You sound just like the 95% of dumb scientists who have always known that Cold Fusion is impossible, well done.

        • RLittle

          Thanks George! Tell him again. You hit the bullseye front and center. Thanks George for your intellect and genius. RBL

        • Mylan

          It is at least unfriendly to call other people dumb. If you believe that 95% of all the other people are dumb and wrong and only you are right, it is most likely a good choice to rethink your own believes.
          You should read James Mahaffey’s “Atomic Adventures”. Really interesting, especially also the cold fusion story. Maybe this could make you realize that most scientists question the existence of cold fusion for a good reason. But that they still tried, out of curiosity.
          Anyway, cold fusion is most likely impossible. If LENR exists, it probably is not cold fusion. So be careful about calling those dumb who deny cold fusion.
          I still hope that something like LENR exists, but as time passes by without significant proof it is getting less and less likely that it does, unfortunately.

          • georgehants

            Mylan, you seem unable to follow the most simple scientific logic, it does not matter if Cold Fusion does or does not exist, the 95% of dumb scientists who disbelieve that it could exist before the full investigation is complete, allowing for that investigation to still have missed something, are incompetent closed-minded fools, certainly untrained in any sensible scientific method.
            This of course apply’s equally to every scientific subject.

          • Mylan

            No. You can of course state that you will never believe that cold fusion can not exist. That would be your personal opinion. However, it does not make sense to demand to wait for the results of a full investigation, because there is no sufficient definition for that. When would it be done? Next year, or in a hundred years? You can always demand more and more experiments, even if the results look bad. But mankind has limited resources that have to be used for what is promising, everything else would be a crime against humanity. Cold fusion is certainly not promising, LENR might be, let’s see.

          • RLittle

            With due respect for Georgehant as he is right, some measurements should be pursued for interesting new ideas as specially from critical thinking and some indirect evidence. Respect George as in last 2 years evidence and observations of at least two different labs in Poland and France in 2016-17 observe cancer cells fractionating 12c and 13c and also 14n and 15n. So such indirect evidence supports the theory here that 13c causes cancer. With each supporting experiment more research should be done. I think some are too personal concerning the source of the idea. But let science prevail. But the France and Poland experiments come after experimental work that I published in 2011 observing nuclear spin slowing combustion in organic and carbon system. As George points out we should all be careful to instantly trash a new idea as no human knows everything. Test the ideas as it may be true.

          • /* If you believe that 95% of all the other people are dumb and wrong and only you are right, it is most likely a good choice to rethink your own believes */

            You should tell this to Galileo or Wegener 😉 The belief in infallible power of consensus is dumbness of its very own. But contemporary scientists ignore cold fusion and similar findings not because they’re dumb, but because they’re pissed-off: they indeed all realize well, that their pet & salary generation projects like NIF or ITER would end soon once the cold fusion would get widespread.

      • Dave Lawton

        The electrical potential of cell membranes is maintained at a lower level than that of healthy cells.Because there is a change in the resonant frequency.
        Georges Lakhovsky demonstrated this with his experiments.

        • RLittle

          Thank Dave I will read Lakhovsky.

          • Toussaint françois

            There was also Antoine PRIORE http://www.priore-cancer.com/index_uk.htm

          • RLittle

            Thank you Toussaint for something positive and factual. Thanks for focusing on facts and ignoring irrelevance. This seems related. I did not know of Priore and Lakhovsky. It seems they used some fields and radiation to observe some success with cancer. This is related. Maybe my new idea can explain their result. Maybe this can be a point to build for greater success. Thank you for not trying to attack me over some irrelevance of whether cancer is many diseases. Thanks for focusing on the fact of identifying something common in all cancer cells as of Warburg Effect and genetic mutations and using these as a basis for distinctness of cancer in its habitat from the habitat of normal cells so as my theory used such to selectively kill the cancer, regardless of its different organs. I thank you.

    • RLittle

      Thank you Sir.

  • georgehants

    Hhiram, without doubt the most pathetic scientific or logical comment I have ever seen on ECW, fully in place and normal on a dumb establishment science website.

  • georgehants

    EurekAlertPublic Release: 16-Apr-2018
    A new Bose-Einstein condensate created at Aalto University
    Researchers at Aalto University,
    Finland are the first to create a Bose-Einstein condensate of light
    coupled with metal electrons, so-called surface plasmon polaritons
    ‘The gold nanoparticle array is easy to create with modern
    nanofabrication methods. Near the nanorods, light can be focused into
    tiny volumes, even below the wavelength of light in vacuum. These
    features offer interesting prospects for fundamental studies and
    applications of the new condensate,’ says Academy Professor Päivi Törmä.
    The main hurdle in acquiring proof of the new kind of condensate is
    that it comes into being extremely quickly.’According to our theoretical
    calculations, the condensate forms in only a picosecond,’ says doctoral
    student Antti Moilanen.
    ‘How could we ever verify the existence of something that only lasts one trillionth of a second?’
    https://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2018-04/au-anb041618.php

    • RLittle

      Yes Sir. Thanks George. As Einstein stated : ” “We are in the position of a little child, entering a huge library whose walls are covered to the ceiling with books in many different tongues. The child knows that someone must have written those books. It does not know who or how. It does not understand the languages in which they are written. The child notes a definite plan in the arrangement of the books, a mysterious order, which it does not comprehend, but only dimly suspects. That, it seems to me, is the attitude of the human mind, even the greatest and most cultured, toward God. We see a universe marvelously arranged, obeying certain laws, but we understand the laws only dimly. Our limited minds cannot grasp the mysterious force that sways the constellations.”

      • georgehants

        Redge, Amen to that, sad that so many are frightened to even look at the books or language and just run and hide under a table or something.

    • Bob Greenyer

      Yes yes yes!

      • georgehants

        Morning Bob, glad you like.
        Regarding “O” day You have found out that Archimedes did not shout “Eureka! Eureka!” in he bath but shouted OOW.

        • Bob Greenyer

          haha – no – worth a try as a guess though.

          Was at the apex of being ill again yesterday, joys of having a kid at school – every single bug is channelled into the school and out again – I think the Japanese have it right – face-masks.

    • Alan DeAngelis

      Pardon me but I got triggered again (went nuts again) by the magic work “exciton”. Thinking about the April 1st 2013 “rossion”. http://e-catworld.com/2013/03/31/senate-directs-e-cat-work/#comment-1532557875
      When the core of Rossi’s E-Cat is heated to 60 degrees C (to create infrared photons), electron holes (+) (positively charged fermions from the valance band of the nickel) react with hydrides H(-) to form neutral bosons, called rossions, H(+ -) (that are similar to excitons http://en.wikipedia.org/wik
      ) . Because these rossions are bosons they can easily aggregate and into a Bose
      gas and emerge as stable nuclei.

      For example:

      62 H(-)(+)
      (a rossion) > 62[H(-)(+)](in a Bose gas) > Ni(62) + 34 e+

      http://www.zercustoms.com/news/images/Miscellaneous/Rossion-Q1-5.jpg

  • RLittle

    Thank you Frederic. Love you too. Let’s make the world a better place. RBL

  • wannabe_lenr_chef

    Maybe this has no place here and has already been talked about, but do people think Scalar Waves may be part of the LENR process?

    CIA doc about Scalar Waves:
    https://www.cia.gov/library/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP96-00792R000500240001-6.pdf

    Technical proof that Scalar Waves exist (maybe) :
    http://vimeo.com/72878317

    • Unfortunately the high-frequency fields always radiate the energy into an outside (check many Tesla coil experiments at YouTube) – so that Konstantin Meyl experiments would serve as a conclusive evidence of scalar waves only if he would enclose his radiators by Faraday cage, which scalar waves should penetrate whereas normal EM waves not.

  • RLittle

    Hi Mr. Acland, Thank you very much for sharing my work. This is all good for mankind. If I can help someone, then this is worth while…

    Sincerely, Reginald B. Little

    • RLittle

      Mr. Acland, I know that you may come criticism. Sir please be assured that I am substance. Mr Acland today (April 17, 2018) a paper {https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-018-24442-8} was released that supports what I presented in this disclosure that you published yesterday (April 16, 2018) as I commented in April 15, 2018. I predict and disclose in my theory that isotopes of more neutrons with greater internal negative angular moment will have superconductivity at higher temperature or higher Tc (critical temperature). This paper has experimentally substantiated my theory as the authors observed increase in critical temperature for superconductivity as they change sulfur isotope from primordial (common) 32 Sulfur (32S) to nonprimodial 33S to 36S. Sir, I spend a lot of time thinking and working. I am substance and I thank you for believing in me! Sir in my disclosure to Ecat World I noted that above room temperature superconductivity is possible by non primordial isotopes. I am real! I thank GOD. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-018-24442-8

      • georgehants

        Morning Redge, good to hear of the confirming nature of the report you mention.
        Keep up the good work.

        • RLittle

          Good morning. I was excited when I saw it yesterday. It would be nice if I had a lab to measure and further test the theory to exceed room temperature superconductivity, but I give the theory. I think in the next few months days someone with resources will do it. But after over 30 years of struggling it is exciting to me to see some confirmations and even talk about it. Thanks Sincerely, RBL

    • Toussaint françois
      • RLittle

        Hi my friend thanks for the reference. Priore was laying a foundation during the 1970s. I wonder why others did not continue to explore why his fields showed many successes or to develop his techie more and understand on atomic scale why it works in many cases and make it 100% successful. I think some ideas in my theory may give deeper understand of Priore’s technique and improve the outcome. I did not know of Priore. But it is good and thank you as your response gives more evidence that I am not some incompetent exaggerator. To step out on a ledge takes courage and I appreciate truly encouragement from a few extraordinary people like you Touissaint. There is so much love peace and goodwill that can better situate the world I thrive on good people like you.

  • Mylan

    The limit is that every dollar can be spent only once. Rlittle does not present any original data. I can’t see this other angle.

  • The N-rays belonged into controversial topic of physics from its very beginning but I believe these rays were real, they’re based on highly polarized X-rays (high-spin or heavy photons in terminology of contemporary physics) and they may even represent substantial portion of dark matter due to their pronounced massive character. It’s nice to see that contemporary science is reinventing this concept again.

    • Mylan

      N rays are a classic result of experimenter byas. Whatever is found today, it is not the N rays described 100 years ago. The N ray story needs to be kept in mind when people do or interpret LENR experiments.

      • Why not, but the same is said about cold fusion of F&P…

        • Mylan

          I don’t agree. The mechanisms discussed are not fusion and could explain, why it might work at all, so renaming it is meaningful in this case.
          And though I know that the general opinion here on the forum is different, there really is no sufficient evidence that Pons and Fleischmann produced some kind of nuclear reaction.
          Sooo many wrong results are published every day, I think many non scientists are not aware of it. And also scientists have to keep this in mind. You just have to dismiss what is disproved or can’t be replicated. That some data sounds cool or would save humanity is not a sufficient reason to believe in it.

          • The mechanism isn’t relevant – once you for example produce tritium from deuterium, then some fusion reaction did actually occur.

  • RLittle

    Thank you Sir. I have thought on that as I have thought on and published that some viruses may be isotopically altered protein that do not function as the primordial containing protein and the altered protein can mutate between viruses. But thanks for friendly correspondence.

  • georgehants

    Science News

    from research organizations

    Scientists make counter-intuitive observations in hybrid quantum systemsResearch Organization of Information and SystemsSummary:Scientist have found that the cooling of quantum
    systems coupled to a common reservoir can lead to counter-intuitive
    behavior, where one of the quantum systems actually heats up.

  • Vinney

    Italy invests Euro 500 million in Hot Fusion research.
    In the latest news, the existing INFN nuclear facility in Frascati (near Rome) will host a Centre for Excellence in Hot Fusion research using an ENEA patented DTT (tokamak) based reactor.
    http://www.enea.it/en/news-enea/news/energy-fusion-dtt-project-soon-to-be-implemented-in-italy

    Many foreign governments are also contributing a small portion of the funds.
    The reactor itself will be 10X smaller than the ITER facility.
    I hope Rossi is on-track to put an end to this absurd waste of funds.
    These sorts of funds spent on LENR research would go 100X further, and employ thousands more researchers, in discrete and relevant research programs.
    Clearly, Rossi (and the E-cat) still has very little traction in Italian research circles, not withstanding the efforts of Preparata, De Giudice, Violante, Piantelli, Focardi and Celani (et al).

    • Bob Greenyer

      Terrible.

  • Bob Greenyer

    Are we on the brink of peace in North Korea due to careful use of undisclosed LENR related technology?

    https://steemit.com/steemstem/@homosymbion/are-we-on-the-brink-of-peace-in-north-korea-due-to-careful-use-of-undisclosed-lenr-related-technology

    • John Oman

      In homosybion’s steemit post (linked above) he states – “Triggering enriched isotopes using the same family of technologies now appears to have been used to bring North Korea to the negotiating table, Dr. Jerome Corsi recently said that some 200 scientist were killed because the U.S. had remote detonated a nuclear test/weapon that was being prepared.” IMHO – That is an absurd speculation supported by nut job conspiracy theories. Elements of truth and reason twisted with BS. Much more likely, as reported in mainstream press, several hundred (mostly laborers) were killed in tunnel collapses resulting from days earlier underground tests. However. I do believe the US, Russia and some others are working on developing directed energy weapons and the underlying physics is related to LENR.

      • Bob Greenyer

        Dr. Jerome Corsi’s comment came after which came after DJT’s ‘Fire and Fury’ which came before the ‘accident’.

        Sequence of events

        1. DJT’s ‘Fire and fury, like the world has never seen before’ regarding military options to use on NK – Aug 8, 20172. Lieutenant Colonel Oliver North’s where he says “We’re going to have to use special weapons we haven’t used elsewhere” Sep 12, 2017
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r_yc_EC4Q9k
        3. The ‘accident’ in NK, reported on Oct 31 2017 and whilst no confirmed data was known, it is claimed to have occurred early September, supposedly after the thermonuclear test.
        4. NK has an abrupt change of heart regarding its position the world – Mar 8, 2018

        Does Dr. Corsi have a point? He is effectively asking ‘why would NK come to the table if it was just an accident?’ One could argue that NK lost many of their best scientists – in that case though, would it make sense to throw in the towel or try and bluff it out?

        • causal observer

          Gets cold in Pyongyang without oil coming in from China.
          Gets restless in China without American consumer dollars powering the factories.
          Gets expensive in America with tariffs on Chinese goods, but so what?

          • Bob Greenyer

            One can survive on very little, I have done it in recent years. If a whole nation has been doing it for generations, they get very hardened and resilient. They also get proud.

            Humans actually need very little to survive – in Vietnam and India, where I have spent considerable time, often you see 60-80 year old’s eking out an existence and I have been with people that have an out pouring of emotion and want to do something to ‘help’ them – whilst in some cases, something was done, other times, individuals would refuse help. I sometimes thought, as poor as they are, they were (at that time) up to a 100% older than I was and going strong, even if they did look thin.

        • John Oman

          I too am curious as to why NK made an abrupt turn. But without some credible evidence that the accident was not the result of cave ins of caverns/tunnels created/weakened by an earlier test, who is driven to dream up some other explanation? I stand behind my earlier opinion – it is nut job conspiracy theorists…

          That is not to say that I do not believe in Directed Energy Weapons (DEW). I do. And it’s EVO and ball lightening and LENR related. And I do not doubt that the US (and others) ‘may’ already have some DEW capability. And that they have been trying to keep it (the technology and LENR along with it) under wraps.

          I’m going to present my own ‘brain fart’ as to why NK’s sudden turn. I’m not going to call it ‘nut job’ because I’m not claiming it has any basis in fact…
          Suppose: CIA Director meets secretly with North Korea’s Kim Jong and presents him with information indicating that we do have DEW capabilities and they are capable of taking out their nuclear stockpile/facilities, all their electronics, electrical generation/distribution, etc… But we really do not want to do that. We feel it is high time we moved on from holding grudges about the war. We would much rather normalize relations and cooperate economically with you. I would be much more inclined to consider that possibility than the ‘accident’ story… Call me a dreamer… I plead guilty… And it is just my opinion…

          RLittle – I have read much of what you have written and admittedly most soars far over my head. I do get the gist, I am hopeful that you are right and thank you for sharing your research here for us to learn from. And I apologize for this NK distraction.

          • Bob Greenyer

            Japan Came to the table because of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Sometimes a screaming, petulant individual needs a slap on the face to come to their senses.

            RLittle – I also appreciate your work and have tried to credit you in videos and writings where relevant in the past.

          • georgehants

            Bob, we must not forget the good work being done by China and Russia to calm the NK situation.

          • Bob Greenyer

            Yes – I guess no one wants an uninhabitable chunk of their country.

    • Korea has many breakthrough energy related technologies – not just these related to LENR… But IMO the main reason of the South-North Korea piece deal was simply pragmatic – the Trump’s politics (not matter whether it has been meant honesty or not) now looks so mercurial for east Asian countries, that they probably decide to manage their security themselves..

  • georgehants

    Scientific AmericanShould Quantum Anomalies Make Us Rethink Reality?
    Inexplicable lab results may be telling us we’re on the cusp of a new scientific paradigm
    By Bernardo Kastrup on April 19, 2018
    Every generation tends to believe
    that its views on the nature of reality are either true or quite close
    to the truth. We are no exception to this: although we know that the
    ideas of earlier generations were each time supplanted by those of a
    later one, we still believe that this time we got it right. Our ancestors were naïve and superstitious, but we are objective—or so we tell ourselves. We know
    that matter/energy, outside and independent of mind, is the fundamental
    stuff of nature, everything else being derived from it—or do we?
    In fact, studies have shown that there is an intimate relationship
    between the world we perceive and the conceptual categories encoded in
    the language we speak. We don’t perceive a purely objective world out
    there, but one subliminally pre-partitioned and pre-interpreted
    according to culture-bound categories. For instance, “color words in a given language shape human perception of color.” A brain imaging study suggests that language processing areas are directly involved even in the simplest discriminations of basic colors. Moreover, this kind of “categorical
    perception is a phenomenon that has been reported not only for color,
    but for other perceptual continua, such as phonemes, musical tones and
    facial expressions.” In an important sense, we see what our
    unexamined cultural categories teach us to see, which may help explain
    why every generation is so confident in their own worldview. Allow me to
    elaborate.
    https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/should-quantum-anomalies-make-us-rethink-reality/

  • georgehants

    Wonderful day

    • Bob Greenyer

      I think you may like this. This is for you.

      A brief overview of technological control of humans and our own potential to interact with all that is

      https://steemit.com/steemstem/@homosymbion/a-brief-overview-of-technological-control-of-humans-and-our-own-potential-to-interact-with-all-that-is

      • georgehants

        Afternoon Bob, it is so quiet on here I thought the World had ended and I had missed all the fun.
        Thank you very much for your link, we are now moving into my idea of genuine science and far beyond the establishment belief that only things made of nuts and bolts are real.
        I cannot comment on your reports that people have exterior control of these things, as I have not seen enough Evidence to bring that into the open, but the Evidence for say Telepathy, remote viewing, physic abilities etc. etc. is scientifically proven beyond any reasonable doubt.
        My link below is I think a great effort to explain the dumb closed-minded comedy of many peoples inability to face or accept Facts.
        We could talk for hours, but I look forward to your further thinking on and before “O” day.
        Interesting that your reference to ” all that is” comes directly from Seth.

        • Bob Greenyer

          Sorry – had not read your link – I just posted to the first comment I saw of yours. I will check it out.

          • georgehants

            Bob, my mistake, I meant my separate post below not the link I added to my reply above.

      • Musical Hemispheres

        Shivers along my spine…
        (Out of recognition I guess.)
        A tremendous achievement to make these amazing connections! And at the same time, not completely surprising.
        If indeed this is the way to really understand these things, about which many people (now and ages ago) have had intuitions, then that is truly remarkable!
        Many words to hide the fact that I’m actually speechless…

        • Bob Greenyer

          MH – this is really only the tip of the tip of the iceberg – even ‘O Day’ will be be a brief (if very lengthy, evidence supported overview) – as I have said a number of times before, it really is difficult to know what is most important to try and get across first.

          • Musical Hemispheres

            Oh my, if this is just the tip of the tip…

            When so many things are connected, and may require some fundamental rethinking, I can indeed imagine that it is very hard to present it in a linear fashion. But a presentation is inevitably linear.
            If I may give a humble suggestion: maybe start with something like a mind map, instead of a table of contents. This may reduce a viewers expectation to grasp it all in one go, especially if it is mentioned that that is an understandable challenge.

          • Bob Greenyer

            I was using Mindamo to map just one aspect – but it became unwieldy… I will release that map in time.

            ‘O Day’ is pretty linear, I have branch stumps towards the end which I will graft onto afterwards.

          • Musical Hemispheres

            Ok 🙂

          • georgehants

            Morning Bob, will your “O” day start with a shortish overview of the realisation in simple terms and then branch off to the more technical side of things from there?
            It seems that it is all very complex and will take sometime to cover all aspects, an overview I think would put it much more in perspective.
            I appologise, as I am sure you have already thought this out.

          • Bob Greenyer

            Hi George,

            It will not be technical. Much of what is needed to understand it has already been made public.

            I have said that the LION track + the ‘two spots’ in context with a little over 5 years of thinking lead me to the realisation.

          • Bob Greenyer

            There are areas I am conflicted on as to the best way to describe it, sometimes it takes a long time to make an argument succinctly. After the core realisation I will address supporting evidence and implications.

  • georgehants

    Science Advances
    Polaritons are quasi-particles that originate from the coupling of light
    with matter and that demonstrate quantum phenomena at the many-particle
    mesoscopic level, such as Bose-Einstein condensation and superfluidity.
    A highly sought and long-time missing feature of polaritons is a
    genuine quantum manifestation of their dynamics at the single-particle
    level. Although they are conceptually perceived as entangled states and
    theoretical proposals abound for an explicit manifestation of their
    single-particle properties, so far their behavior has remained fully
    accounted for by classical and mean-field theories. We report the first
    experimental demonstration of a genuinely quantum state of the
    microcavity polariton field, by swapping a photon for a polariton in a
    two-photon entangled state generated by parametric downconversion. When
    bringing this single-polariton quantum state in contact with a polariton
    condensate, we observe a disentangling with the external photon. This
    manifestation of a polariton quantum state involving a single quantum
    unlocks new possibilities for quantum information processing with
    interacting bosons.
    http://advances.sciencemag.org/content/4/4/eaao6814

  • Stephen

    Great to see Reginald Little post here. It’s always good to see interesting ideas and theories presented for discussion. And Reginald’s insights and previous theory and investigation are always interesting.

    • RLittle

      Thanks Stephen

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies.