Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Environment & Energy

FogerRox

(13,211 posts)

26. Whoa.

Reply to OKIsItJustMe (Reply #11)

Tue May 28, 2013, 08:20 PM

May 2013

break out the check books

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

38 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Indication of anomalous heat energy production in a reactor device containing hydrogen loaded nicke… [View all] OKIsItJustMe May 2013 OP

cold fusion again Progressive dog May 2013 #1

Actually, there may be something to “Cold Fusion” as well… OKIsItJustMe May 2013 #2

beta decay huh to gamma and then heat Progressive dog May 2013 #3

Transmutation is what fusion does phantom power May 2013 #4

Yes it does and it's what fission does too Progressive dog May 2013 #5

Strange… my reaction is different than yours OKIsItJustMe May 2013 #6

Maybe Rossi could cooperate with this guy? FogerRox May 2013 #8

Not just one person at NASA OKIsItJustMe May 2013 #11

Whoa. FogerRox May 2013 #26

50,000,000 degrees to add energy necessary for 2 protons to fuse Progressive dog May 2013 #9

Did you actually read what you replied to? OKIsItJustMe May 2013 #12

Neutron stars are about the only place this happens Progressive dog May 2013 #14

Then, some other explanation (other than LENR) must be found for the results OKIsItJustMe May 2013 #15

One experiment does not a theory make Progressive dog May 2013 #17

Right, however, it’s not just one experiment OKIsItJustMe May 2013 #18

LENR the new explanation for bad science Progressive dog May 2013 #23

Yup. Things like iron are the end of the cycle FogerRox May 2013 #27

This may help you OKIsItJustMe May 2013 #13

IT is not a theory Progressive dog May 2013 #16

And, of course, experiments never overturn existing science OKIsItJustMe May 2013 #19

Real scientists publish methods, unlike these Progressive dog May 2013 #21

Look, I'm not going to try to convince you of anything OKIsItJustMe May 2013 #29

I hate it when "scientists" make up stuff so Progressive dog May 2013 #32

Thousands say no but a handful are "successful" Progressive dog May 2013 #24

I guess we will need to define “theory” in order to decide whether it is one or not OKIsItJustMe May 2013 #20

There is a scientific definition and a lay definition of theory Progressive dog May 2013 #22

I just read, rather than skimmed the supposed NASA crap Progressive dog May 2013 #34

"So we are left with exactly what we started with, but miraculously have gained energy." OKIsItJustMe May 2013 #36

Nah, I think it's pretty simple and I mean simple nt Progressive dog May 2013 #37

Rossi has been pushing this for a few years now FogerRox May 2013 #7

But, at this point, it is not just Rossi OKIsItJustMe May 2013 #10

Someone else is making E-cats? FogerRox May 2013 #25

Did you read the paper? OKIsItJustMe May 2013 #28

Patent it? Done. OKIsItJustMe May 2013 #30

The E-Cat Testing Team, Real or Ringers? OKIsItJustMe May 2013 #31

Great endorsements of Rossi's team Progressive dog May 2013 #33

I'm on board too - a skeptic would have too much to lose wtmusic May 2013 #35

We should be finding out some results soon. bluedeathray Jun 2013 #38