Room-temperature superconductivity?

Point out news stories, on the net or in mainstream media, related to polywell fusion.

Moderators: tonybarry, MSimon

TallDave
Posts: 3140
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2007 7:12 pm
Contact:

Post by TallDave »

Good morning Johan, are any labs currently evaluating your work, or have any gotten back to you with positive or negative feedback? I know you said you had sent some things off. Reproducibility is everything, of course.
n*kBolt*Te = B**2/(2*mu0) and B^.25 loss scaling? Or not so much? Hopefully we'll know soon...

johanfprins
Posts: 708
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2010 6:40 pm
Location: Johannesbutg
Contact:

Post by johanfprins »

TallDave wrote:Good morning Johan, are any labs currently evaluating your work, or have any gotten back to you with positive or negative feedback? I know you said you had sent some things off. Reproducibility is everything, of course.
My experiments are reproducible. In fact, my experiment on electrons extracted from a diamond, is the FIRST experiment EVER which proves that a phase can be created through which charge is transferred without an electric-field being present. There is NO other experiment in the history of physics which has proved this.

This has NOT been proved for ANY other material which is claimed to be a superconductor. In this regard I am probably the FIRST PERSON EVER which proved directly that a current can flow around a circuit while it contains an element within which there is NO electric-field.

But OH, this also proves that the BCS model is wrong AND that the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics is wrong. Therefore my impeccable elementary physics must be wrong!

I am willing to cooperate with ANY laboratory who has physicists who can still understand elementary electrostatics and dipoles. I am afraid that such people do not exist anymore. Theoretical physicists are too busy to force their esoteric mathematics through "renormalization" to fudge what they want to model.

johanfprins
Posts: 708
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2010 6:40 pm
Location: Johannesbutg
Contact:

Post by johanfprins »

For some resaon I have been struggling today to stay connected with Polywell. I have now moved to another computer and if I can now easily connect it will indicate that Google-Chrome is the cause of the problem.

So Tall-Dave, if you can get a laboratory which will be willing to try and repeat my simple measurements which any high-school student will be able to do AND report back honestly, then you will have found a very rare physics laboratory. I have been trying for 10 years and the only guy who did repeat my results went into catatonic-psychosis. He refuses to even write a report. There are no physicists alive who are willing to blaspheme against the physics of the past 80 years.

It seems that I can now stay connected!

TallDave
Posts: 3140
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2007 7:12 pm
Contact:

Post by TallDave »

How much equipment does it require, exactly? There are some amateurs here who might be willing to give it a shot, and others who might be willing to donate towards the effort.

Are you able to share any details about the scientist who did replicate your results? I'd be interested to speak or write to him, if possible.
n*kBolt*Te = B**2/(2*mu0) and B^.25 loss scaling? Or not so much? Hopefully we'll know soon...

hanelyp
Posts: 2261
Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2007 8:50 pm

Post by hanelyp »

johanfprins wrote:My experiments are reproducible. ...
If you haven't done so already, write up a description of your method and results as you would for peer review, and publish it online where we can look at it.

icarus
Posts: 819
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2008 12:48 am

Post by icarus »

write up a description of your method and results as you would for peer review, and publish it online where we can look at it.
There are some amateurs here who might be willing to give it a shot, and others who might be willing to donate towards the effort.
Interesting.

[edit]
Last edited by icarus on Fri Oct 15, 2010 9:07 am, edited 1 time in total.

johanfprins
Posts: 708
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2010 6:40 pm
Location: Johannesbutg
Contact:

Post by johanfprins »

TallDave wrote:How much equipment does it require, exactly? There are some amateurs here who might be willing to give it a shot, and others who might be willing to donate towards the effort.
Most laboratories which work on electron extraction of electrons from solid surfaces have the equipment. AS I have posted before, diamonds prepared by myself has been sent to susch a laboratory in England and another one in Japan in 2007. I have sent e-mail enquiries, but s far no report back not even to say that I am wrong.
Are you able to share any details about the scientist who did replicate your results? I'd be interested to speak or write to him, if possible.
Prof Terry Doyle. He is retired and have repeated all my results and more; but insists that the phase that forms is a "dusty plasma". How a "dusty plasma" can form and then stays stable when one breaks the vacuum; only he understands. Experts on dusty plasmas I have contacted is of the opinion that if he can form such a plasma this discovery will be more interesting than superconduction at room temperature. Biut it seems that Prof. Doyle will argue anything except to consider the possibility that BCS, Ginzberg-Landau and the London brothers have all along been wrong. It probably will mean that all his publication over a period of 50 years might be seriously flawed. Las I heard he was at the i-Themba labs in the Cape Province. I avoid talking to him until he is able to understand that Ohm's law was only discovered when a current flows with a HIGH resistance so that the cxharge carriers accelerate and scatter so frequently that one can approximate their movement with an average drift speed. In a superconductor there are no accelerartion-scatterring events to cause an average drift speed.

johanfprins
Posts: 708
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2010 6:40 pm
Location: Johannesbutg
Contact:

Post by johanfprins »

johanfprins wrote:
TallDave wrote:How much equipment does it require, exactly? There are some amateurs here who might be willing to give it a shot, and others who might be willing to donate towards the effort.
Most laboratories which work on electron extraction of electrons from solid surfaces have the equipment. As I have posted before, diamonds prepared by myself has been sent to susch a laboratory in England and another one in Japan in 2007. I have sent e-mail enquiries, but s far no report back not even to say that I am wrong.
Are you able to share any details about the scientist who did replicate your results? I'd be interested to speak or write to him, if possible.
Prof Terry Doyle. He is retired and has repeated all my results and more; but insists that the phase that forms is a "dusty plasma". How a "dusty plasma" can form and then stays stable when one breaks the vacuum; only he understands. Experts on dusty plasmas I have contacted is of the opinion that if he can form such a plasma this discovery will be more interesting than superconduction at room temperature.

But it seems that Prof. Doyle will argue anything except to consider the possibility that BCS, Ginzberg-Landau and the London brothers have all along been wrong. It probably will mean that all his publication over a period of 50 years might be seriously flawed. Last I heard he was at the i-Themba labs in the Cape Province. I avoid talking to him until he is able to understand that Ohm's law was only discovered when a current flows with a HIGH resistance so that the charge carriers accelerate and scatter so frequently that one can approximate their movement with an average drift speed. In a superconductor there are no accelerartion-scatterring events to cause an average drift speed.

I have again problems to log in and to stay logged in

johanfprins
Posts: 708
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2010 6:40 pm
Location: Johannesbutg
Contact:

Post by johanfprins »

hanelyp wrote:
johanfprins wrote:My experiments are reproducible. ...
If you haven't done so already, write up a description of your method and results as you would for peer review, and publish it online where we can look at it.
It has been done and it is well described in both my books: Especially the one which is now on sale. If you can understand how a Schottky barrier works then you should be abe to follow the logic. As I have pointed out numerous times there is NOT a single "superconductor" for which it has been experimentally proven that there is noelectric field driving the current except in my case. So who has really proved superconduction for the first time? Onnes or me?

GIThruster
Posts: 4686
Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 8:17 pm

Post by GIThruster »

Dr. Prins, you do recognize that it is only the way you couch the question that gives a good result. What we have observed is current flowing with no resistance or heating and there are many superconductors that are obviously superconducting on a daily basis.

You're still asking the wrong questions, IMHO. What you need to be asking is, "how do I demonstrate what I have works?"

Here's one way:

http://www.nasa.gov/offices/oct/early_s ... chart.html

This is new money that is already budgeted by the President for FY11. If congress approves the President's budget, these research funds will start to flow in the US for the first time since VSE (the Vision for Space Exploration=Constellation) closed them down half a decade ago. The funds are open for invention outside the US. Please see the note I sent you privately on this yesterday.

What you need is very modest finance in order to construct much larger samples and then do 4 point tests on them. That's enough to get past all the nonsense, IMHO.

Ordering the book, and congratulations!
"Courage is not just a virtue, but the form of every virtue at the testing point." C. S. Lewis

rcain
Posts: 992
Joined: Mon Apr 14, 2008 2:43 pm
Contact:

Post by rcain »

Hi johan

I dont think we've spoken before, but i've been following your thread here.
Would you consider making a pdf/text version of your latest MS available to us for 'private' reading, here and abouts?

It would seem to be the surest way of securing a wider critical/qualified readership - if indeed that is what you seek at this stage; the $ price of your books is a little high for me i'm afaid, and probably a dissinducement to many otherwise interested folk.

i happen to know some people working in similar SC area with graphene and Fullerenes at present, spintronics and functional materials also, so there could be some cross overs.

johanfprins
Posts: 708
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2010 6:40 pm
Location: Johannesbutg
Contact:

Post by johanfprins »

GIThruster wrote:Dr. Prins, you do recognize that it is only the way you couch the question that gives a good result. etc,
Thank you for your well-meant advice, as well as the information you sent by PM. My problem is that a person who was a top executive (when I say TOP I mean TOP) at Jet Propulsion Laboratories before his retirement tried (already 5 years ago) to induce them to spend a modest amount of money to reproduce my results. He was stopped in his tracks by two so-called "experts" on superconduction. NASA men in "black"? Is this why the USA will soon depend on Russia to get their astronauts into space? Why should I waste my time on NASA. I think thsy have demonstrated to the whole world that they will eventually fail.

What else do you want me to demonstrate? There is not single superconducting phase in the world (except the one I demonstrated in 2000) for which it has been proved that there is no electric-field when a current is flowing. Show me a single experiment EVER where this was demonstrated; and I will repeat it. I have been the first person EVER to demonstrate that this is actually possible. So what do you want me to do more? Show my any experiment including Onnes for which this was proved and then ask me to reproduce this experiment!!
Ordering the book, and congratulations!
Thanks, this is the only way that I will be able to get more money for further experiments: Definitely not through NASA which will soon be more extinct than they are even now. NASA has, just like the Large Hdron Collider, become a black hole slurping up taxpayers' money.

johanfprins
Posts: 708
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2010 6:40 pm
Location: Johannesbutg
Contact:

Post by johanfprins »

rcain wrote:Hi johan
Would you consider making a pdf/text version of your latest MS available to us for 'private' reading, here and abouts?
I have tried for seven yeras to publish manuscripts which were all rejected because of foolish reasons. My "latest manuscript" is now three years old. I have now summarised everything in my latest book. If you buy it at only $34-95 you will have the whole story, and you will help me to proceed further with my research.
i happen to know some people working in similar SC area with graphene and Fullerenes at present, spintronics and functional materials also, so there could be some cross overs.
Yes they make me cry! They are working with the correct related materials but are still barking up the wrong tree. The cat is alive but not sitting within the tree where they want it to be: How naughty that there is not even a dead cat in this tree!!

rcain
Posts: 992
Joined: Mon Apr 14, 2008 2:43 pm
Contact:

Post by rcain »

johanfprins wrote:I have tried for seven yeras to publish manuscripts which were all rejected because of foolish reasons. My "latest manuscript" is now three years old. I have now summarised everything in my latest book. If you buy it at only $34-95 you will have the whole story, and you will help me to proceed further with my research....
with respect, i suggest therein lies a large part of your problem: you are told your books will not sell/papers will not stand, by people in that business, and you consider their reasons 'foolish'. for 7 years.

i begin to suspect you consider making a profit on your 'books' more important than contributing to science. who knows, you might be a genius - but i too am inviting investors to fund my own research into the giant green teapot that surely inhabits the 11th dimension - i too have proof and i will supply to you at 99$ per installment - monthly.

you see, it doesn't come across too well.

what is more important - your {sic} online book business, or your science?


...
johanfprins wrote: Yes they make me cry! They are working with the correct related materials but are still barking up the wrong tree. The cat is alive but not sitting within the tree where they want it to be: How naughty that there is not even a dead cat in this tree!!
surely it is your duty then, to steer them in the right direction, if as you claim yours is the right direction, it shouldnt be so hard to gain some support along the way, no?

but no one is going to support you if they know nothing of your work, and they certainly wont be inclined to buy anything from you if you cant even sell your basic concepts on the back of your nodoubt reputable professional credentials.

'get it out there' is my advice - at least then you wont be kicking yourself quite so hard when someone else eventualy beats you to a proof.

TallDave
Posts: 3140
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2007 7:12 pm
Contact:

Post by TallDave »

It's interesting you haven't heard back from the English and Japanese labs if they solicited samples. You'd think you'd at least get a terse "This doesn't do what you said it does." Maybe some of us could write and ask why in a citizen-journalistic sense, if that wouldn't bother you. Maybe if we drum up some interest a lab will do the experiment publicly, and force theorists to explain the results.

Sorry if you answered this before, but what exactly are the short-term practical applications?
Most laboratories which work on electron extraction of electrons from solid surfaces have the equipment.
How many such labs exist? Are we talking dozens, hundreds? If someone wanted to build their own such lab, what kind of investment would they be looking at, roughly? Thousands, hundreds of thousands, millions, tens of millions?
n*kBolt*Te = B**2/(2*mu0) and B^.25 loss scaling? Or not so much? Hopefully we'll know soon...

Post Reply