Before replying, I had a chance to see your other reply to Everett and I
agree, it's nice to have openness. Also, it great to have a place where we
can debate and see it the same day!!!!
Back to the meat and potatoes...
>Joe which part of Hudson's process do you have a problem with? What
>evidence do you have that Hudson's materials are not monoatomic?
With respect, I will place myself in jeopardy for I will give an open reply.
In your continued statements you said:
>
>Hudson's monoatomic theory fits the observations very well. The
>claimed properties of his materials also fit well with the
>properties which would be presumed to be the result of large amounts
>of the monoatomic material which nuclear physicists are observing
>in single atom amounts.
As a qualified researcher and familiar with most occurrences in the area of
newly observed nuclear phenomena I would like to meet or talk to the
"nuclear physicists" who are observing in single atom amounts.
Unless David has entered an elite stream of scientist who are only reporting
to him, I do not know of any mainstream scientific journal, research center
involved in studies of such phenomena, or any current research being
undertaken at this time. To see an atom is impossible. To see the
occurrence of an atom (e.g. helium bubble chamber) --yes.
Who (or whom) or the scientists?
>Hudson and others have publicly claimed that they can convert metallic gold
to a white >powder with properties which do not match any known properties
of any gold compound. >They have claimed that they can then take these
white powders and convert
>them back to metallic gold.
OK Barry (respectfully) I give. Who are the others and have they put there
credentials on the line?
>Hudson has demonstrated these claims
>with sufficient rigor that he has been granted a number of patents
>on these materials and the process for converting them in countries
>around the world.
>
This is a unloaded gun. The countries which granted Hudson patents did not
and do not require demonstration of an apparatus. On the other hand,
neither does the US. However, the laws are such in the US that if proper
"peer review" is accomplished in a subject matter that does not fit main
stream science a patent will issue. Case in point -- the Paterson CETI
Cell. This is a cold fusion cell which main stream science says is
impossible. However, in and during the patent process they were able to
pass sufficient peer review. The bottom line being -- all one has to do is
provide proper documentation, or a physical working model and they will be
granted a patent.
Barry, I hope you do not take me offense, but I would like to answer a
question that you posed to Everett.
> Russian scientists explicitly state in their literature that
> atoms in lattice structures are metallic in nature and that
> these same atoms in the monatomic state are ceramic in nature.
>> Barry asked: Which Russian scientists in which literature?
The Russians David speaks of are from the Institute of Mineralogy,
Geochemistry and Crystal Chemistry of Rare Earth's. This committee was
commissioned by the Russian Academy of Sciences which is located in Moscow.
The study is conducted from a research center in Kiev. The executor of the
study is Dr. Kogan. Their Email address is -- ingre@sovam.com
I am in weekly contact with this center as I am with many throughout the World.
They are quite cognizant of David, but under no condition do they support or
accept his findings of a monoatomic state (a caveat -- a monoatomic state as
presented by David).
I realize that it looks like I am trying to harpoon David. This is not the
intent nor case. If someone has something then put the whole thing on the
table.
The possibility exists that the scientific community has not explored every
possibility in the universe. However, I doubt that geoscientists have
missed 2,400 ounces per ton, or for that matter 3 ounces per to of platinum
metals in mineral deposits within the US.
I have profess a lot during my research. However, I hold no secrets. On my
Web site I give two complete procedures for the production of precious
metals. Procedures which numerous qualified laboratories have replicated.
This is nothing but facts.
The other side of the coin being, on my Web site, I list numerous failures
which have cost unsuspecting investors millions of dollars. It will cost a
little money but call the Office of Mineral Resources for Nevada, Arizona
and Utah and ask them how many people have laid the same claims as David.
David has seen something, but put some meat on the table. Who has been
healed from White Gold? Who was involved from the medical community? If
there is truth to his claims, at least the investors in his plant should
know. If he is lacking data, which is nothing to be ashamed of, they should
be aware of that also.
Enough for now, or I will find myself removed from the Non-moderated list.
Joe Champion
http://www.netzone.com/~discpub