Posted on 12/09/2013 2:23:17 PM PST by Kevmo
MIT IAP Cold Fusion 101 to run again [Translate]
The IAP course on cold fusion co-taught by Drs. Peter Hagelstein and Mitchell Swartz is scheduled to run again in 2014 for a third year in a row.
Cold Fusion 101: Introduction to Excess Power in Fleischmann-Pons Experiments will be held on campus at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) January 27-January 31 at 10:30AM-1:30PM in Room 4-145. The class is sponsored by the MIT Electrical Engineering and Computer Science Department where Hagelstein is a faculty member.
In 2012, the course was well-attended and featured a JET Energy, Inc demonstration of the NANOR, a nano-material, two-terminal component that generates excess energy gain using a dry, pre-loaded hydrogen fuel. Open to the public for viewing, the NANOR ran for months in Hagelstein’s office. Massachusetts State Senator Bruce Tarr visited the campus to witness the event, and is now a supporter of the pioneer technology.
Cold Fusion Now’s Jeremy Rys attended the course in 2013 and videod the lectures throughout the week. Problems with the audio feed were lessened with a second Enhanced Audio edit by uploadJ. Watch the 2013 background and theory lectures by Peter Hagelstein here, and see the experimental and technology talks by Mitchell Swartz of JET Energy, Inc. here.
The course syllabus includes:
Excess power production in the Fleischmann-Pons experiment; lack of confirmation in early negative experiments; theoretical problems and Huizenga’s three miracles; physical chemistry of PdD; electrochemistry of PdD; loading requirements on excess power production; the nuclear ash problem and He-4 observations; approaches to theory; screening in PdD; PdD as an energetic particle detector; constraints on the alpha energy from experiment; overview of theoretical approaches; coherent energy exchange between mismatched quantum systems; coherent x-rays in the Karabut experiment and interpretation; excess power in the NiH system; Piantelli experiment; and prospects for a new small scale clean nuclear energy technology.
Independent Activities Program (IAP) is designed for MIT students wishing to learn between semesters, but enrollment is open with permission from the instructor and there is no advance registration required. For more information and to contact the instructor, visit the IAP Cold Fusion 101 course page.
Related Links
Synopsis of Cold Fusion 101 2013 [.pdf] by Gayle Verner Infinite Energy Magazine
Peter Hagelstein Introduction to Excess Power … 2013
Mitchell Swartz Introduction to Excess Power … 2013
Slide Set of NANOR®type output presented at MIT IAP Course [.pdf] 2012
Ummm ... do me a favor ... could you post those other threads that consist of stalking you?
I’m really curious how you come to this “stalking” thing - or whether it’s something that you made up out of thin air.
Will you at least be examining the science behind the issues on these LENR threads?
Not bloody likely.
Oh boy ... I might finally have a chance at running in a pack ... LOL ...
Thanks ... :-) ...
Then talk some sense, numnuts.
If the effect has been replicated more than 14000 times, how is this a lost cause?
Oh, I know, I know. Bandwagon trolls never really address the underlying issues.
It must be the Non-Idiotic-Let’s-Talk-Sense-Just-A-Few-Moments Pack, is it not?
***You’re joining up with Star Traveler, and posting LOL’s everywhere, I see. Then there is diminishingly small chance that you’ll know anything about LENR nor even reading the material, displaying your ignorance as if it were a virtue just like ST does.
Imagine my surprise to see that you had joined ...
in with the concern trolls on this issue.
Let’s see...
Vince Foster conspiracies (ok);
chemtrails (ok);
UFO Quix fantasies (ok);
Iran-contra conspiracy theories (ok) ;
Arkancide conspiracy theories (ok);
but... a science topic about an anomaly which has proven to be replicated thousands of times AND has the potential to solve our energy crises -— NO WAY DUDE, there’s all this clamoring to remove it from FR. And there’s no discussion of the science behind the claims.
Yup. Concern trolls are terribly concerned.
As I see it, you’re still inventing things out of nothing - the same kind of practice you were engaged in before.
***Prove your assertion, troll.
Trolling across thread boundaries is considered stalking.
————————www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg85823.html-———————
Re: [Vo]:Cold Fusion Confusion and Questionable Ethics
-——————www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg87704.html——————
Foks0904 . Mon, 09 Dec 2013 17:20:14 -0800
Obviously major mistakes were made by P&F. The press conference was a
mistake. Calling it fusion was a mistake. The question is: were the results
(excess heat + nuclear products) a delusion? 25 years later and hundreds of
successful replications later and 3 major commercial products in the works
the clear answer is a resounding “NO”.
This presentation is both insightful yet beyond myopic and ignorant at the
same time. Stress on myopic and ignorant.
Regards.
> Cold Fusion Confusion and Questionable Ethics
> http://www.ptei.org/docs/ColdFusionPresentation.pdf
Edmund Storms Mon, 09 Dec 2013 17:28:40 -0800
-—————————www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg87706.html————————
On Dec 9, 2013, at 6:19 PM, Foks0904 . wrote:
Obviously major mistakes were made by P&F. The press conference was a mistake.
That is obvious only after the fact. If F-P had not made a public announcement, Jones would have. In fact, the claim would have gotten attention without the announcement
Calling it fusion was a mistake.
But it is fusion. Do you want F-P to lie?
The question is: were the results (excess heat + nuclear products) a delusion? 25 years later and hundreds of successful replications later and 3 major commercial products in the works the clear answer is a resounding “NO”.
Yes, this is true. The evidence is now overwhelming. Ignorance is the only problem.
This presentation is both insightful yet beyond myopic and ignorant at the same time. Stress on myopic and ignorant.
I see nothing insightful. The claims are a simple-minded repetition of what the skeptics said 23 years ago.
Re: [Vo]:Cold Fusion Confusion and Questionable Ethics
————————www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg87708.html———————
Foks0904 . Mon, 09 Dec 2013 17:37:14 -0800
*That is obvious only after the fact. If F-P had not made a public
announcement, Jones would have. In fact, the claim would have gotten
attention without the announcement*
Yes I agree. After the fact or not however, it is what it is.
*But it is fusion. Do you want F-P to lie?*
At the time of the press conference they were going out on a serious limb
saying that (scientifically speaking) and only basing that claim based
on then A) suspect evidence of weak neutron emissions, and B) the energy
output was in the nuclear range. They didn’t have access to the Helium-4
ash data that we do. That is the only nuclear ash correlated with the
excess heat reaction. All other products, as you have noted in your most
recent ICCF18 paper, may very well be secondary reaction pathway products
(tritium, neutrons, etc. caused by hot fracto-fusion).
*I see nothing insightful. The claims are a simple-minded repetition of
what the skeptics said 23 years ago.*
We agree. I’m only *slightly* more forgiving.
Regards,
John
bfl
Re: [Vo]:Cold Fusion Confusion and Questionable Ethics
-———————www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg87705.html-——————
Edmund Storms Mon, 09 Dec 2013 17:22:14 -0800
....this presentation itself is based on questionable ethics. Many of the statements are lies that are well known to be false. Go to LENR.org and read a students guide to cold fusion by Storms.
Ed Storms
My proof is — ABSOLUTELY NOTHING — that is ... absolutely nothing posted to you prior to this thread.
There you have it ... my proof is NOTHING posted to you before now ... showing that you are making up something out of “nothing” ... doncha know ... LOL
Proof enough that you continue to be a troll on this website.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2165967/posts?page=129#129
My proof is — ABSOLUTELY NOTHING —
***About what FR can expect from you.
I see you’re still at it, doing the same thing you always have - making up stuff out of nothing and misquoting people. I don’t know how you keep from being quite embarrassed considering what you’re misquoting is right on this same thread ... hooboy!
Proof enough that you continue to be a troll on this website.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2165967/posts?page=129#129
Something that you got nowhere on - back in 2009 - is your proof? ... LOL
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
