[ExI] Efficiency of wind power

[Damien Broderick]

On 4/7/2011 3:44 PM, spike wrote:

> It's bogus Damien.  A huge hint is the comment that the used powder contains
> 10% copper.  It suggested proton capture to transform nickel to copper, but
> to do that would require the presence of a lot of the rare-ish (~3%) isotope
> nickel62 doing the proton capture (never mind how such a wacky event could
> be happening.)

Yer probably right. But one physicist replies:

<People in CF have already figured such issues out.  3% may be enough if 
nuclear processes are involved.  It is much more likely that there have 
been problems measuring the composition (this part is not in the 
experimenters' report) than with the measurements of the very large 
quantities of heat.  Let's also not forget that Levi has been studying 
the reactor over a large period of time, and has noted that it would 
hardly do his career much good if he were involved in fraud or 
deception.  I think we have to wait until the composition issue gets 
clarified.  Incidentally, one of the observers was ex-chairman of the 
Swedish Sceptics Society (and also a physicist), who would be strongly 
motivated to spot flaws in the measurement>

while another agrees strenuously with you:

<As I've said before any nuclear reaction with by products such as 
neutrons or gammas and operating at these power levels would fry 
everyone in the room.  The same comment applies here. Imagine 10% of the 
mass being copper 62 which I see has a radioactivity of 1.2 x 10^7 
Terabecquerels per gram, you can see the problem.

Whatever is going on, if anything, is not this.  I suspect /dev/null is 
the right repository. >

Damien Broderick