If you are talking to me, a singularity is where I was a year ago as I have listened to your range of theories.
You also appear to be embracing string theory now and dismissed it a year ago. I suggest you stop what you are doing and go back and read up on M theory while we are throwing out suggestions But I will read up on nanoplasmonics. Thanks, Stewart On Tuesday, August 13, 2013, Axil Axil wrote: > As Jed has suggested up-thread, you should suspend all current theory > making until you understand better what EMF brings to the LENR table. I > also suggest that you study Nanoplasmonics as a modern day extension of the > pioneering work of Pons and Fleischman. This field is currently the > enthusiastically embraced darling of traditional science which can start > your preparation for a new paradigm of LENR theory making. > > > On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 8:01 PM, Edmund Storms <[email protected]>wrote: > > > On Aug 13, 2013, at 5:41 PM, Axil Axil wrote: > > Dfkalion also reports high RF interference with the phone systems and > their SCADA function. > > > Yes, which indicates that their claim for a 1.6 T magnetic field resulted > from a misreading of the Gauss meter, perhaps because the meter was > influenced by an RF field, not a magnetic field. Perhaps the effect gives > off RF radiation, but it clearly does not create a strong magnetic field. > Before you provide an explanation, you need to know EXACTLY what happened. > We do not yet have this information. The information is second hand and > hearsay provided by people who have shown very little understanding of what > they have observed in the past. We NEED better data to believe an > observation that conflicts with the basic ways magnetic fields are > generated. > > Ed > > > The real data reported in the ICCF-18 paper is not hard to interpret.. 1.6 > tesla at 20 Cms. What could be clearer than that, unless you just don't > want to believe it, that is. > > > On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 7:27 PM, Edmund Storms <[email protected]>wrote: > > But exactly what is the anomaly? DGT reports a magnetic field with 1.6 T. > Rossi reports RF radiation. Neither source gives any actual data. I would > not be surprised to see RF radiation. I would be surprised to see a 1.6 T > magnetic field. The devil is in the details. Using a collection of > ambiguous data to support a novel theory is not progress. Conventional > scientists complain that we in the field will believe anything, no matter > how impossible or poorly demonstrated. You are proving them right. > > Ed > > On Aug 13, 2013, at 4:39 PM, Axil Axil wrote: > > Rossi mentioned extreme EMF behavior coming out of his reactor. Two like > systems reporting the same type of EMF anomaly looks like the real thing to > me. > > If you are really interest in zeroing in on the causation of LENR, the > also research Rossi's EMF claims. > > > On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 6:29 PM, Edmund Storms <[email protected]>wrote: > > > On Aug 13, 2013, at 4:10 PM, Axil Axil wrote: > > The strength of the magnetic field is a “smoking gun” for soliton > production. > > > It is a smoking gun if the claim is real. But what if the claim is not > real? What if we discover it is actually based on an error. What will you > say then? How much evidence, Axil, do you require to believe an amazing > claim? You are explaining an amazing claim using an amazing explanation > with neither having any evidence for being real. Can you see why your claim > is not believed? > > Ed > > What remains to be determined is what exact nature of the EMF produced by > the soliton. And is this EMF responsible for the disintegration of the > nucleus. > > > Kim thinks it is the electrostatic field. I think it is the anapole > magnetic radiation that comes out of the solit > >
