Sensei

How do you know that Nickel and Hydrogen are the most powerful? Searching for all possibilities by hand would take a lot of time. There is 118 elements to check. Some have dozen of isotopes. That's plenty of work. Have you done so? Anyway I have already did theoretical calculations with Nickel and Hydrogen and posted in #24 http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/83658-low-energy-nuclear-reactions-cold-fusion-thread-split/page-2#entry810423 Where I showed that reaction that Rossi is using, can have also more mainstream physics explanation. If Ni-62 is hit by neutron, it's changing to Ni-63 (and releasing energy). Ni-63 is unstable and is decaying to Cu-63 (and releasing energy). And we don't have Coulomb's Barrier in this reaction to worry about. And that's why perhaps Rossi device requires a lot of input energy. Output is higher because of decay energy is higher than energy needed to create neutron. Also what is important is that Ni-62 has just 3.63% abundance in nature! If you will buy 1 kg Nickel in the shop for $13, just 36.3 grams of it will be good for this reaction. Does Rossi clean up raw Nickel to clean isotope or not? That's important question that I asked already and was ignored by all of you.. Sockpuppets?

From what Swansont said it was clear that he meant that no 100% gamma photons can be absorbed, and some will have to escape device, and being detected around it. No shield, no filter has perfect accuracy. Anyway, during performing official Rossi device tests, according to article on his website, there was no used device capable to detect any radiation.. They mention just IR camera, and power analyzer. Lack of neutrons and detected existence of tritium (that was not there in water before) are quite contradictions.. p+ + n0 -> D+ + 2.22 MeV D+ + n0 -> T+ + 6.26 MeV T+ -> He-3 + e- + Ve + 18.6 keV That sounds like normal pair production, that is known since early years of XX century. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pair_production

Cu-65 that absorbed neutron would decay through electron emission to Zn-66. Cu-63 + n0 -> Cu-64 + 7.916 MeV (quite plausible) Cu-64 -> Ni-64 + e+ + Ve (unstable isotope) 61% Cu-64 -> Zn-64 + e- + Ve (unstable isotope) 39% Cu-63 abundance is 69% Cu-65 abundance is 31% We don't need Rossi device to verify this. Just Nickel and Copper and beam of neutrons.

Swansont, exactly reverse... According to Rossi: Ni-62 + p+ -> Cu-63 + 6.12 MeV I have checked it, from energy point of view, correct. So the only problem is repelling of proton with Nickel. Here are mine calculations: But Ni-62 has just 3.63% abundance. See last line: Ni-62 + n0 -> Ni-63 + 6.84 MeV (possible from energy point of view, and has no problem with repelling charges) But Ni-63 is unstable isotope. And will decay to.. Cu-63 Ni-63 -> Cu-63 + e- + Ve So basically what Rossi takes as fusion with proton, might be multiple stages reaction, and possible in mainstream physics.

Can nuclear reaction occur at room temperature? Yes, it can. It's well known. And it's used all the time by neutron detectors and neutrino detectors. Deuterium bombarded by free neutrons (from neutron decaying radioactive isotope) is changing to Tritium, and Tritium is decaying after a while to Helium-3 emitting electron and anti neutrino. Chlorine-37 that absorbed neutrino with energy higher than 0.814 MeV is changing to Argon-37 and emitting electron. Argon-37 is unstable isotope, and will capture electron, and will be back Chlorine-37. Annihilation of electron and positron will be detected by device. You're keeping saying LENR this, LENR that. IMHO you should always specify which reaction you have in mind. But this would require to have some real knowledge..

Metal piece can be heated from long distance many ways. I would not fully trust tests performed inside of company building. Especially if they would refuse moving it outside of building. In this test they're using two, just two, measuring devices, IR camera and Power analyzer.. http://ecat.com/news/ecat-ht-validated-by-top-physicists C'mon! Where is Geiger counter? Where are shields protecting measured item from all sides against external radiation..? etc. etc. What isotope is used in ecat? ps. How much does ecat company pays you.. ? ps2. Natural abundance of isotope used by ecat device is 3.63%. Does ecat company will take care of providing 100% clean isotope by them self.. ? Provide fuel to their device?

Investigation would require free access to ecat or other such device.. Reading somebody articles about them, is not enough.

But free neutron is not proton+electron. Proton energy 938,272,046 eV Electron energy 510,999 eV Neutron energy 939,565,378 eV Subtract sum of energies of proton+electron from neutron energy and you will have missing 782,333 eV

Newtonian mechanics is limitless. It doesn't have limit of speed of objects. In it velocity of object can go up to infinity. Modern physics has limit - speed of light.

You should concentrate on classical physics. When it will have no mysteries to you, learn Standard Model. Then you can go to unconfirmed theories. Without extensive knowledge you can't even judge if something is correct or incorrect. Plausible or not. Otherwise you're in kinda like position of somebody who is reading about calculus without knowing what is multiplication..

I remember other thread on SFN where person interested in string theory asked what are all these 11 dimensions. And nobody, literally nobody, could answer... I don't think so he asked for precise math. Just simple explanation.

But first you need to verify that water has 1 g/cm^3 Take f.e. glassware with volume scale, put it on Weighing scale, reset settings, fill with water, read volume and mass. Calculate density of substance in g/cm^3. Some scientists did it with the all chemical elements, the all chemical substances ever produced. It was repeated over and over again during the last couple hundred years with better scales to receive more precise results. You can take a bit of substance, let's say 100 grams, measure it's volume, and then extrapolate to higher mass, higher volume. That's how you can calculate mass of Earth. Average density of Earth multiplied by volume = mass. Volume of Earth = 4/3*PI*radius of Earth^3

That was quote on top of some Renaissance school if I recall correctly. Don't trust anybody words. Verify them all by yourself.

If some scientists is publishing his/her discovery, other people (not just scientists) can check it and verify and confirm or contradict (perhaps showing where has been made mistakes). Trust is necessary only if somebody doesn't want to learn. If I say you 1 m^3 volume of water has mass 1 ton. You Nicholas, can believe me on word, or check it by yourself. Tell me how you would do such experiment.. ?

I have no idea what search function you're talking about. Wget is simply downloading what you will tell to download.. You can generate your own HTML page with just links f.e. http://www.server.com/2014/01/01/ http://www.server.com/2014/01/31/ http://www.server.com/2014/12/01/ http://www.server.com/2014/12/31/ Then use wget on your own web page. And wget will find links, and download stuff they're pointing to. Or prepare script with many rows with "wget args [some url]" And execute dynamically created script. Personally I am using .NET Framework Net::WebClient::DownloadFile() or DownloadString(). We can have list (f.e. 1000+) of proxy HTTP servers, and use them instead of our own IP address, so web server owner won't know that we're downloading large quantity of data. Each request will be from different proxy.

You need application that is recursively analyzing HTTP pages, searching for links and downloading,. Such as wget.

If you will make f.e. 1 undividable length unit 1 femtometre (10^-15 m) everything what we know (especially macro scale & cosmic scale) will appear really big. Atom of gold has diameter ~288 pm = 288*10^-12 m. So 288*10^-12 / 10^-15 = 288000 base units. Visible violet photon has wavelength 400 nm. From perspective of 1 femtometre, it's 400,000,000..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bit

No, you cannot have mili bits. You can't even have half of bit. However you can have integer multiply of bits. You can have Mega bit for instance (typically used in network transmission speed Mbps = Mega bits per second). If you have 1 GB of memory stick, it's 8 * 1024 * 1024 * 1024 = 8589934592 bits. It's similar case, from other discipline, as in physics quantity of electrons, protons or neutrons that must be integer number. You can't have half of electron, half of proton, half of neutron. That's assertion. Quarks could be theoretically made of something smaller, but not necessarily strings. String theory is just one of many theories. Difference is that it has many (theoretician) scientists on its side. That does necessarily make it more plausible/probable. Simply it's well known by public (from just name mostly). Ask people for string theory math.. It always looks impossible, until somebody invent a way to do it. And then get Nobel prize.. BTW, look at neutral pion particle decay mode. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pion

What is composition of bit? (in computer sense) We know that it can have value 0 or 1 (kinda like property of bit), and we know its address (kinda like position of bit). We can read bit, write bit, compare two bits, store it on disk, restore, group them to byte (8 bits), short (16 bits), long (32 bits) etc.etc. I am not saying that Universe is some kind of database or so. Universe is "alive". Particles interact constantly. But as you can see in above example, not everything has to be made of infinitely smaller things. Bit is unbreakable. It's fundamental.

A. Erwin Schrödinger B. Marie Skłodowska-Curie

The best is to see it on your own eyes. If you will place magnet/electromagnet in Cloud Chamber and send beam of particles, or from radioactive decay, you will see how they behave in magnetic field based on their charge, mass, and momentum. Building your own Cloud Chamber costs $20. Just find steady source of dry ice in your area.

No,no,no... In Coulombs Law you don't have flowing charged particles (so you can't say "charges per second"). They are stationary. Motionless. At least during verification of law we're not using moving charges. When Coulomb created his theory, batteries didn't exist yet. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles-Augustin_de_Coulomb http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alessandro_Volta Distance between leafs in electroscope device is changing the more it's "charged". Leafs are further each other the more electrons gathered on them. Distance between leafs = r in equation. Q symbol is used to denote charge not C. C is unit. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_charge Are you reading the all articles that are posted here? "charges per second" has sense in electrical circuits, when electrons from one side (negative - electrode) of battery flows to other side (positive + electrode).

?? If you have number f.e. 1000 you can write it also using scientific notation 1e+3 or 1e3 (+ is default) Other example: 1.23e-2 = 0.0123 = 1.23*10^-2 After exponent symbol you don't/shouldn't have power ^ symbol. Read this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_notation In many physical equations f.e. radioactive decay with mean-life instead of half-life there is used e mathematical constant http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E_%28mathematical_constant%29 Don't confuse these two things! When I have to quickly enter very small number to calculator often I am dividing by large positive number, f.e. I want to enter 1.602e-19. I am entering 1.602, hitting divide, and entering 1e19, and calculator is showing 1.602e-19. You can also enter 1.602, press EXP, then +/-, then 19, and calculator will show 1.602e-19. But much easier is doing calculations in f.e. OpenOffice SpreadSheet or Excel.

You're mixing everything.. Electron has charge -1.602*10^-19 C (Coulombs) It's elementary charge http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elementary_charge If we have 6.24*10^18 electrons, we have: Q=-1.602*10^-19 C * 6.24*10^18 = -1 C (1 Coulomb charge) I=Q/t Current in Amperes is Charge divided by time. For t=1 second I=1 C/1s=1 A If ampere meter is connected to circuit and is showing 1 A, you know that it's 6.24*10^18 electrons flowing through wire per 1 second. Battery that has 1400 mAh (typical NiMH AA for digital camera) has 1.4 * 3600 = 5040 C. So it's 5040 * 6.24*10^18 = 3.14496*10^22 electrons total. Knowing how many electrons has battery, and knowing how many electrons is used per second, you can calculate time battery will be working in seconds. With I=1 A, such battery will be working for 5040 seconds. With I=0.5 A, such battery will be working for 10080 seconds. etc. etc. How charge -+1.602*10^-19 C has been calculated? In oil drop experiment. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_drop_experiment Coulomb's Law is for stationary charges that gathered on body like previously mentioned by me electroscope leafs. It costs 20-30 usd. On ebay there is a few. Anybody can build it in a few minutes using jar and aluminum foil. Buy it or build it, and you will see how it works in practice and about what we're talking.