Cold fusion reactor verified by third-party researchers, seems to have 1 million times the energy de

[VCheng]

it is not on me to inform you of anything, except the fact that the standard you seem to be quoting, ie NASA isn't exactly be all and end all of experiments. If NASA says it isn't feasible, that does not mean they are correct. As proof of this i gave you NIST facility.

So please educate us as to published results of experiments performed by these groups too. Thanks.

 

[Audio]

So please educate us as to published results of experiments performed by these groups too. Thanks.

Educate you how? You are predetermined it is a fail, basing it on results of review a couple of years ago, ignorant of the possibility some sort of breakthrough has been achieved in this time.

if and when second team verifies it, i will post the results here.

 

[Bilal.]

Educate you how? You are predetermined it is a fail, basing it on results of review a couple of years ago, ignorant of the possibility some sort of breakthrough has been achieved in this time.

if and when second team verifies it, i will post the results here.

Wrong move buddy, he'll simply dismiss it just like he dismissed this team's findings and drag you into an endless circular debate. S.A.H reminds me of this every time:

The Philosopher King - Existential Comics

 

[VCheng]

Educate you how? You are predetermined it is a fail, basing it on results of review a couple of years ago, ignorant of the possibility some sort of breakthrough has been achieved in this time.

if and when second team verifies it, i will post the results here.

Okay, if and when there are more results confirming these impossible claims, then we shall discuss them.

 

[Audio]

Okay, if and when there are more results confirming these impossible claims, then we shall discuss them.

You are free to discuss here as well, one independent verification should be enough for discussion. But noooo..allmighty NASA told few years ago it can't be done, so it must be true!!

 

[VCheng]

You are free to discuss here as well, one independent verification should be enough for discussion. But noooo..allmighty NASA told few years ago it can't be done, so it must be true!!

Funny thing is, what NASA says seems to be the basis of your argument.

Let's assume that the verification you claim is actually correct. What should happen next?

 

[Audio]

Let's assume that the verification you claim is actually correct. What should happen next?

lol what is this? 50 cent deflection school?

Stop fantasizing and looking for avenues in which you can write dissmisals. I do not even assume that the verification is correct, i'm simply disputing you when you say NASA says it can't be done, so it's impossible.

 

[VCheng]

lol what is this? 50 cent deflection school?

Stop fantasizing and looking for avenues in which you can write dissmisals. I do not even assume that the verification is correct, i'm simply disputing you when you say NASA says it can't be done, so it's impossible.

The only fantasy here is that LENR/Cold Fusion works as a power source. It does not.

 

[Bilal.]

lol what is this? 50 cent deflection school?

Stop fantasizing and looking for avenues in which you can write dissmisals. I do not even assume that the verification is correct, i'm simply disputing you when you say NASA says it can't be done, so it's impossible.

NASA did not say that. they just said that at present it's taking more energy than it produces and that the procedure is hard to perfect (just like hot fusion reactor research) which our friend twisted to conclude that NASA says it's impossible. Read the link I shared about NASA's research a couple of pages back.

 

[Audio]

The only fantasy here is that LENR/Cold Fusion works as a power source. It does not.

Sure, it might be fantasy, but you can't really prove it. The only thing you can lean that statement on is several years' old research which for all we know can be outdated by now, possibly made obsolete by new advances.

And now we're back to NASA and it's less than stellar record into fusion. See, circular logic.

 

[VCheng]

Sure, it might be fantasy, but you can't really prove it. The only thing you can lean that statement on is several years' old research which for all we know can be outdated by now, possibly made obsolete by new advances.

The burden of proof lies on those claiming that it works.

 

[Audio]

The burden of proof lies on those claiming that it works.

That's just the thing. One research group already confirmed it, but you're still stuck with "burden of proof".

 

[VCheng]

That's just the thing. One research group already confirmed it, but you're still stuck with "burden of proof".

You call this confirmation?

QUOTE:

The researchers are very careful about not actually saying that cold fusion/LENR is the source of the E-Cat’s energy, instead merely saying that an “unknown reaction” is at work. In serious scientific circles, LENR is still a bit of a joke/taboo topic. The paper is actually somewhat comical in this regard: The researchers really try to work out how the E-Cat produces so much darn energy — and they conclude that fusion is the only answer — but then they reel it all back in by adding: “The reaction speculation above should only be considered as an example of reasoning and not a serious conjecture.”

 

[Audio]

You call this confirmation?

QUOTE:

The researchers are very careful about not actually saying that cold fusion/LENR is the source of the E-Cat’s energy, instead merely saying that an “unknown reaction” is at work. In serious scientific circles, LENR is still a bit of a joke/taboo topic. The paper is actually somewhat comical in this regard: The researchers really try to work out how the E-Cat produces so much darn energy — and they conclude that fusion is the only answer — but then they reel it all back in by adding: “The reaction speculation above should only be considered as an example of reasoning and not a serious conjecture.”

Yes, confirmation of net energy, which is all that matters.
Ofcourse the honest person that you are, you somehow failed to paste this, even though it's the first paragraph of the article:

The researchers were also allowed to analyze the fuel before and after the 32-day run, noting that the isotopes in the spent fuel could only have been obtained by “nuclear reactions” — a conclusion that boggles the researchers: “… It is of course very hard to comprehend how these fusion processes can take place in the fuel compound at low energies.”

 

[VCheng]

Yes, confirmation of net energy, which is all that matters.
Ofcourse the honest person that you are, you somehow failed to paste this, even though it's the first paragraph of the article:

So what do you think what the bolded sentence means in the first paragraph?

QUOTE:

"The researchers were also allowed to analyze the fuel before and after the 32-day run, noting that the isotopes in the spent fuel could only have been obtained by “nuclear reactions” — a conclusion that boggles the researchers: “… It is of course very hard to comprehend how these fusion processes can take place in the fuel compound at low energies."