* Posts by Brad Arnold

14 posts • joined 10 Nov 2007

TRANSMUTATION claims US LENR company

Brad Arnold

http://www.space.com/26713-impossible-space-engine-nasa-test.html

I agree the Em drive (which creates thrust without using fuel, and will inevitably be a major development in space travel) is phenomenal. But, like LENR from this company, the Em drive had TWO valid third-party validations, and people still doubted it, until (and many still do doubt it) NASA validated it too.

Brad Arnold

Re: no transmutation at all

http://pesn.com/2014/07/22/9602521_SHT-publishes_3rd-third-party-test-results_1345x-overunity/

Here's your "extraordinary proof" buddy. OTH, I suppose you can just keep howling for more because you can't wrap your head around it.

Brad Arnold

http://pesn.com/2014/07/22/9602521_SHT-publishes_3rd-third-party-test-results_1345x-overunity/

I don't know why people have such a hard time understanding that a reputable third-party verification means the technology is valid. Frankly, most people posting here are thick as a brick - they don't deserve almost free, clean energy.

NASA tests crazytech flying saucer thruster, could reach Mars in days

Brad Arnold

It is typical of the current ossified scientific community that you not only need to demonstrate results for them not to call you a fraud, you also need to provide an acceptable theory to explain it. For instance, the following is a clean, virtually free, and super abundant energy technology (LENR) which has been verified (more than once by the way) by an impeccable third party:

http://pesn.com/2014/07/22/9602521_SHT-publishes_3rd-third-party-test-results_1345x-overunity/

The following explains more fully, along with some NASA quotes verifying LENR:

http://coldfusionnow.org/the-evidence-for-lenr/

Boffins discuss AI space program at hush-hush IARPA confab

Brad Arnold

Those that talk don't know, and those that know don't talk.

You simply don't understand how close Google (for instance) is to ASI (artificial super intelligence) emerging. Since most people are clueless (including a vast number of the people who attended that US government conference), here is a link that will give you a clue (if you have the ability to grasp the implications, which are staggering): http://www.viralglobalnews.com/technology/google-says-fully-reasoning-ai-inevitable/11545/

Simply put, the Singularity is coming quicker than you think, and it is going to change everything.

Google research chief: 'Emergent artificial intelligence? Hogwash!'

Brad Arnold

You're forgetting "leakage"

I agree that artificial intelligence is unlikely to emerge "accidentally" rather than "deliberately." What I think is misleading is that SkyNet also didn't emerg accidentally, instead it spread through "leakage." Let me point out this: http://online.wsj.com/article/PR-CO-20130516-905231.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

It is entirely possible that this project by the US government (ready for use in the Fall of this year) will product the greatest, most powerful mind in (at least) our solar system. Thank God it will be working for us, but it is not only plausible, but extremely likely, that this mind could "leak" into the public area, and thereby "change."

The Singularity is coming...and there isn't a [email protected] thing we can do about it. Just using the rather uncontroversial Moore's Law, the first computer chips more power than a human brain will be produced in about a decade. The software isn't far behind (especially because computers are now being used to accelerate hardware and software design).

Cutting CO2 too difficult? Try these 4 simple tricks instead

Brad Arnold

How about just adopting LENR?

"A volume about the size of a #2 pencil eraser of water provides as much energy as two 48-gallon drums of gasoline. That is 355,000 times the amount of energy per volume – five orders of magnitude." ( http://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/New-LENR-Machine-is-the-Best-Yet.html ).

This phenomenon (LENR) has been confirmed in hundreds of published scientific papers: http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/RothwellJtallyofcol.pdf

"Over 2 decades with over 100 experiments worldwide indicate LENR is real, much greater than chemical..." --Dennis M. Bushnell, Chief Scientist, NASA Langley Research Center

"Total replacement of fossil fuels for everything but synthetic organic chemistry." --Dr. Joseph M. Zawodny, NASA

By the way, here is a survey of some of the companies that are bringing LENR to commercialization: http://www.cleantechblog.com/2011/08/the-new-breed-of-energy-catalyzers-ready-for-commercialization.html

For those who still aren't convinced, here is a paper I wrote that contains some pretty convincing evidence: http://coldfusionnow.org/the-evidence-for-lenr/

NASA-backed fusion engine could cut Mars trip down to 30 days

Brad Arnold

LENR emerging soon

What isn't widely known is that a new clean, very very cheap, and super abundant energy technology is emerging (Leonardo is selling a 1 megawatt LENR generator to a long wait list of customers starting this April - with a COP of about 6, the estimated cost to be about 1/10th that of fossil fuel, and a third-party verification is due to be published soon).

In other words, the electricity to fuel the fusion engine can be LENR, which has the fuel density of 5 orders of magnitude over fossil fuel. Hydrogen and nickle are common elements throughout the solar system. Here is a primer:

"A volume about the size of a #2 pencil eraser of water provides as much energy as two 48-gallon drums of gasoline. That is 355,000 times the amount of energy per volume – five orders of magnitude." ( http://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/New-LENR-Machine-is-the-Best-Yet.html ).

This phenomenon (LENR) has been confirmed in hundreds of published scientific papers: http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/RothwellJtallyofcol.pdf

"Over 2 decades with over 100 experiments worldwide indicate LENR is real, much greater than chemical..." --Dennis M. Bushnell, Chief Scientist, NASA Langley Research Center

"Total replacement of fossil fuels for everything but synthetic organic chemistry." --Dr. Joseph M. Zawodny, NASA

By the way, here is a survey of some of the companies that are bringing LENR to commercialization: http://www.cleantechblog.com/2011/08/the-new-breed-of-energy-catalyzers-ready-for-commercialization.html

For those who still aren't convinced, here is a paper I wrote that contains some pretty convincing evidence: http://coldfusionnow.org/the-evidence-for-lenr/

Russia and NASA plan to COLONISE the Moon

This post has been deleted by a moderator

Mullumbimby’s plan to save the world peters out

Brad Arnold
Thumb Up

LENR Primer

There is a new clean energy technology that is 1/10th the cost of coal. Don’t believe me? Watch this video by a Nobel prize winner in physics: http://pesn.com/2011/06/23/9501856_Nobel_laureate_touts_E-Cat_cold_fusion/

Still don’t believe me? It convinced the Swedish Skeptics Society: http://www.nyteknik.se/nyheter/energi_miljo/energi/article3144827.ece

http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/blog/post/2011/05/swedish-skeptics-confirm-nuclear-process-in-tiny-4-7-kw-reactor

LENR using nickel. Incredibly: Ni+H+K2CO3(heated under pressure)=Cu+lots of heat. Here is a detailed description of the device and formula from a US government contract: www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/GernertNnascenthyd.pdf

Here is a PowerPoint presentation by George Miley of the University of Illinois who has successfully replicated the LENR "cold fusion" reaction: https://netfiles.uiuc.edu/mragheb/www/NPRE%20498ES%20Energy%20Storage%20Systems/Nuclear%20Battery%20using%20Clusters%20in%20Nanomaterials.pptx

According to Forbes, electricity will be "too cheap to meter" if Rossi's Oct 28 demonstration succeeds: http://www.forbes.com/sites/markgibbs/2011/10/17/hello-cheap-energy-hello-brave-new-world/

Here's the latest, according to MSNBC it passed the test: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/45153076/ns/technology_and_science-science/#.TrNo9rJqwe4

Oz skeptic offers prize if Rossi’s E-cat works

Brad Arnold
Thumb Up

LENR Primer

There is a new clean energy technology that is one tenth the cost of coal. LENR using nickel. Incredibly: Ni+H(heated under pressure)=Cu+lots of heat.

This phenomenon (LENR) has been confirmed in hundreds of published scientific papers: http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/RothwellJtallyofcol.pdf

"Over 2 decades with over 100 experiments worldwide indicate LENR is real, much greater than chemical..." --Dennis M. Bushnell, Chief Scientist, NASA Langley Research Center

"Energy density many orders of magnitude over chemical." Michael A. Nelson, NASA

"Total replacement of fossil fuels for everything but synthetic organic chemistry." --Dr. Joseph M. Zawodny, NASA

According to Forbes, electricity will be "too cheap to meter" if Rossi's Oct 28 demonstration succeeds: http://www.forbes.com/sites/markgibbs/2011/10/17/hello-cheap-energy-hello-brave-new-world/

Here's the latest, according to MSNBC it passed the test: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/45153076/ns/technology_and_science-science/#.TrNo9rJqwe4

By the way, here is a current survey of all the companies that are bringing LENR to commercialization: http://www.cleantechblog.com/2011/08/the-new-breed-of-energy-catalyzers-ready-for-commercialization.html

Peat bogs will not cause runaway global warming

Brad Arnold

Cold fusion a reality (save big money cutting emissions)

There is a new clean energy technology that is 1/5th the cost of coal. Don’t believe me? Watch this video by a Nobel prize winner in physics: http://pesn.com/2011/06/23/9501856_Nobel_laureate_touts_E-Cat_cold_fusion/

Still don’t believe me? It convinced the Swedish Skeptics Society: http://www.nyteknik.se/nyheter/energi_miljo/energi/article3144827.ece

LENR using nickel. Incredibly: Ni+H+K2CO3(heated under pressure)=Cu+lots of heat. Here is a detailed description of the device and formula from a US government contract: www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/GernertNnascenthyd.pdf

According to Forbes, electricity will be "too cheap to meter" if the Oct 28 demonstration succeeds: http://www.forbes.com/sites/markgibbs/2011/10/17/hello-cheap-energy-hello-brave-new-world/

Here's the latest, according to MSNBC it passed the test: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/45153076/ns/technology_and_science-science/#.TrNo9rJqwe4

Veteran climate scientist says 'lock up the oil men'

Brad Arnold
Pirate

Ecosystem collapse

"Few seem to realise that the present IPCC models predict almost unanimously that by 2040 the average summer in Europe will be as hot as the summer of 2003 when over 30,000 died from heat. By then we may cool ourselves with air conditioning and learn to live in a climate no worse than that of Baghdad now. But without extensive irrigation the plants will die and both farming and natural ecosystems will be replaced by scrub and desert. What will there be to eat? The same dire changes will affect the rest of the world and I can envisage Americans migrating into Canada and the Chinese into Siberia but there may be little food for any of them." --Dr James Lovelock's lecture to the Royal Society, 29 Oct. '07

"Leemans and Eickhout (2004) found that adaptive capacity decreases rapidly with an increasing rate of climate change. Their study finds that five percent of all ecosystems cannot adapt more quickly than 0.1 C per decade over time. Forests will be among the ecosystems to experience problems first because their ability to migrate to stay within the climate zone they are adapted to is limited. If the rate is 0.3 C per decade, 15 percent of ecosystems will not be able to adapt.

If the rate should exceed 0.4 C per decade, all ecosystems will be quickly destroyed, opportunistic species will dominate, and the breakdown of biological material will lead to even greater emissions of CO2. This will in turn increase the rate of warming" --Leemans and Eickhout (2004), "Another reason for concern: regional and global impacts on ecosystems for different levels of climate change," Global Environmental Change 14, 219–228

Bacteria to blame for global warming?

Brad Arnold

Debunk this: drastic emissions cuts will warm us up resulting in catastrophe

It is unintuitive, but people who advocate only drastic cuts in emissions are as bad as global warming deniers-both would result in catastrophe.

It is very unlikely that a growing population with rapidly expanding economies will cut their emissions so fast and drastically that abrupt climate change or runaway global warming will be avoided.

Furthermore, the argument over who will pay to rebuild our energy infrastructure is creating political gridlock.

Yet, the most ironic is that any drastic emission cuts will result in short term warming, and only result in cooling in the long term.

Our emissions do emit tremendous amounts of greenhouse gases that warm us up, but they also pollute sun dimming pollution that cools us down. The sun dimming pollution only stays in the air a short time, whereas the greenhouse gases stay in the air a long time.

We are now heating up at 0.2 C/decade (per IPCC), and if the rate of warming exceeds 0.4 C/decade all ecosystems will be quickly destroyed (per Leemans & Eickhout 2004). If emissions were to be drastically cut, the short term warming could easily exceed 0.4 C/decade, causing abrupt climate change and catastrophe.

On the other hand, I suggest we remove the CO2 from the air using the low cost method of "biosequestration."

Read my blog at http://www.myspace.com/dobermanmacleod for more information.

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR WEEKLY TECH NEWSLETTER

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2020