Re: [Vo]:Rossi's Best Chance
Periodinc dumping of H seems not true for me. the tank would be empty quickly, and it would be dangerous. DGT clearly said that no Vent is done, except in catastrophic situation, that induce shutdown and maintenance. however maybe is there a reversible storage (I have seen here a pattented device to heat catalystic exhaust cleaner), that allow to absorbe or free H stored inside an hydrid, or alike... another simple solution could be a mechanical piston to tune pressure quickly. I see three solenoid valve controls for hydrogen in/out and the control circuitry which indicates clearly to me that hydrogen is being periodically dumped and refilled by computer control.
Re: [Vo]:Rossi's Best Chance
Here is the link to that device http://www.ergenics.com/page22.htm On 25/01/12 07:59, Alain Sepeda wrote: Periodinc dumping of H seems not true for me. the tank would be empty quickly, and it would be dangerous. DGT clearly said that no "Vent" is done, except in catastrophic situation, that induce shutdown and maintenance. however maybe is there a reversible storage (I have seen here a pattented device to heat catalystic exhaust cleaner), that allow to absorbe or free H stored inside an hydrid, or alike... another simple solution could be a mechanical piston to tune pressure quickly. I see three solenoid valve controls for hydrogen in/out and the control circuitry which indicates clearly to me that hydrogen is being periodically dumped and refilled by computer control.
RE: [Vo]:Rossi's Best Chance
DGT has accused Rossi of using an idea or design which they came up with, and IIRC, they were referring to the flat, rectangular-shaped reactor core that Rossi began using instead of the cylindrical design seen in the first several demos in early 2011. So I think Rossi is now using something akin to what DGT is, and what you described in your posting. -m From: Axil Axil [mailto:janap...@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2012 11:50 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Rossi's Best Chance IMHO, quiescence is caused by deterioration of the micro-powder surface due to inadequate heat control. I speculate that DGT has move the heat producing powder zone to the reactor vessel wall. The powder is mechanically affixed to the reactor vessel wall with excellent heat transfer characteristics. Because of this design change, the temperature of the powder will never exceed the coolant temperature and therefore is idiot proofed But in order to get the powder above the Curie temperature of nickel, the coolant must support very high temperature heat transfer in excess of 400C. On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 4:06 PM, Alain Sepeda alain.sep...@gmail.com wrote: I don't have the answer, but it was my assumption, about control. Quiescence does not seems to be a problem with DGT according to their talk and (more important) to their test protocol (which does talk about continuous heat). 2012/1/24 Mark Iverson-ZeroPoint zeropo...@charter.net Question: Could the quiescence be something as simple as heat not being extracted fast enough from the Ni-core material and it eventually builds up to begin melting the Ni tubercles, slowly quenching the 'active area'? If so, then my initial thoughts don't apply and it is an engineering problem.
Re: [Vo]:University of Bologna Terminates Relationship With Rossi
On 2012-01-24 13:13, Akira Shirakawa wrote: Hello group, Daniele Passerini (22passi) appears to imply that what Krivit said is not true and that before propagating such news to the Internet, people should wait for an official statement by the university of Bologna: http://22passi.blogspot.com/2012/01/piccola-parentesi.html Cheers, S.A.
Re: [Vo]:University of Bologna Terminates Relationship With Rossi
In the same time there is no indication that the Contact is or will be signed. Peter On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 10:36 AM, Akira Shirakawa shirakawa.ak...@gmail.com wrote: On 2012-01-24 13:13, Akira Shirakawa wrote: Hello group, Daniele Passerini (22passi) appears to imply that what Krivit said is not true and that before propagating such news to the Internet, people should wait for an official statement by the university of Bologna: http://22passi.blogspot.com/**2012/01/piccola-parentesi.htmlhttp://22passi.blogspot.com/2012/01/piccola-parentesi.html Cheers, S.A. -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
Re: [Vo]:University of Bologna Terminates Relationship With Rossi
Meanwhile, http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com responds with : The website you were trying to reach is temporarily unavailable. Does this mean that an other rossi contract has been terminated ? From: Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2012 9:58 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:University of Bologna Terminates Relationship With Rossi In the same time there is no indication that the Contact is or will be signed. Peter
Re: [Vo]:University of Bologna Terminates Relationship With Rossi
2012/1/25 zer tte c_foreig...@yahoo.com Meanwhile, http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com responds with : The website you were trying to reach is temporarily unavailable. Does this mean that an other rossi contract has been terminated ? -- *From:* Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com *Sent:* Wednesday, January 25, 2012 9:58 AM *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:University of Bologna Terminates Relationship With Rossi In the same time there is no indication that the Contact is or will be signed. Peter -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com
Re: [Vo]:University of Bologna Terminates Relationship With Rossi
Hi, Can we establish a link between rossi's related annoucements and jonp downtimes ? How long do those downtimes usually last ? (i'm not a regular visitor of jonp but i guess the vortex collective has the answer) Thank you.
Re: [Vo]:University of Bologna Terminates Relationship With Rossi
On 2012-01-24 13:13, Akira Shirakawa wrote: Hello group, It appears that the contract with Rossi has been formally terminated, but the University of Bologna is still open to experimentations: http://radio.rcdc.it/archives/e-cat-unibo-chiude-il-contratto-ma-apre-alla-ricerca-sulla-fusione-fredda-94100/ The above link contains a radio interview in Italian with Dario Braga and a yet unpublished statement by UniBo summarizing what he said, of which the following is a remarkably good Google Translation (very slightly tweaked for clarity): Bologna, January 25, 2012 - The Department of Physics, University of Bologna declares that the contract signed in June 2011 between the Department of Physics and EFA Ltd. (the company owned by Italian Andrea Rossi) was terminated because of failure to meet conditions to the terms. There's no relationship between the Department and the EFA Ltd. in connection with this contract. However, the Department of Physics has made available its experience and its equipment to carry out independent measurements on the production of heat by the equipment's e-cat in order to provide an answer to the entire scientific community and the general public about the phenomenon. The measurement results will be published. Cheers, S.A.
[Vo]:Error getting the message from vortex.
Hi People, It seems that when I reply to vortex list, my reply answer does not go to the group, but directly to the email of the person to who I am replying. Is this an error in my email or is it from the list? -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com
Re: [Vo]:Matts Lewan blog and the ecat.
Hi Mats, No problem! I did like your blog! :-) I have some question concerning the October 28th test, but not about the test itself. Was Levi with Rossi all the time? What about Focardi? Did any of them witness the whole test? What about the reporter of the AP? Did he also spend the whole time with Rossi? 2012/1/25 Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com Hi Mats, No problem! I did like your blog! :-) I have some question concerning the October 28th test, but not about the test itself. Was Levi with Rossi all the time? What about Focardi? Did any of them witness the whole test? What about the reporter of the AP? Did he also spend the whole time with Rossi? 2012/1/25 Lewan Mats mats.le...@nyteknik.se Hi Akira and Daniel, ** ** You might have seen that Bologna University's Deputy President Dario Braga has cleared the situation of the relationship with Rossi. ** ** http://radio.rcdc.it/archives/e-cat-unibo-chiude-il-contratto-ma-apre-alla-ricerca-sulla-fusione-fredda-94100/ ** ** The statement is still not published on the University’s website, but basically it says that the contract was terminated due to failure to meet the conditions of the terms. However, the University also pointed out that the Department of Physics is still available with its experience and its equipment to carry out independent measurements on the production of heat by the E-cat. Dario Braga added that he is also open to new proposals with commissioned research on the technology. ** ** Rossi also told me that the work of the University of Bologna has already started with meetings together with National Instruments to prepare the whole system analysis. ** ** Thanks for mentioning by blog Daniel ;-) ** ** Mats ** ** --- *Mats Lewan mats.le...@nyteknik.se*, reporter (senior editor), Ny Teknik. tel. +46-8-796 64 10, mobil +46-70-590 72 52, Twitter: *matslewhttp://twitter.com/matslew * *www.nyteknik.se* ** ** -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com
Re: [Vo]:Error getting the message from vortex.
On 2012-01-25 12:58, Daniel Rocha wrote: It seems that when I reply to vortex list, my reply answer does not go to the group, but directly to the email of the person to who I am replying. Is this an error in my email or is it from the list? I think that what you received was supposed to be a private email. That's why the reply address was to the sender and not the group. Cheers, S.A.
Re: [Vo]:Error getting the message from vortex.
Oh, right. But it's weird. I got it with a [VO] in the title 2012/1/25 Akira Shirakawa shirakawa.ak...@gmail.com On 2012-01-25 12:58, Daniel Rocha wrote: It seems that when I reply to vortex list, my reply answer does not go to the group, but directly to the email of the person to who I am replying. Is this an error in my email or is it from the list? I think that what you received was supposed to be a private email. That's why the reply address was to the sender and not the group. Cheers, S.A. -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com
Re: [Vo]:University of Bologna Terminates Relationship With Rossi
BTW, you need to put the vortex email address (vortex-l@eskimo.com) in the reply-to field of your email client otherwise replies to your questions don't go the mailing list but only you. On 25/01/12 11:45, zer tte wrote: Hi, Can we establish a link between rossi's related annoucements and "jonp" downtimes ? How long do those downtimes usually last ? (i'm not a regular visitor of jonp but i guess the vortex collective has the answer) Thank you.
Re: [Vo]:University of Bologna Terminates Relationship With Rossi
On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 7:23 AM, Energy Liberator energylibera...@gmail.com wrote: BTW, you need to put the vortex email address (vortex-l@eskimo.com) in the reply-to field of your email client otherwise replies to your questions don't go the mailing list but only you. Or just leave the field blank. T
Re: [Vo]:University of Bologna Terminates Relationship With Rossi
On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 6:58 AM, Akira Shirakawa shirakawa.ak...@gmail.com wrote: On 2012-01-24 13:13, Akira Shirakawa wrote: Hello group, It appears that the contract with Rossi has been formally terminated, but the University of Bologna is still open to experimentations: Indeed! What research institution would not love to offer the first explanation for a revolutionary energy source?!? They should be chomping at the bit to work on this and fund it internally. T
Re: [Vo]:Error getting the message from vortex.
Maybe Rossi settled legal/contract disputes with Defkalion and they are one happy family again. Based upon the potential value of the technology there has to be alot of high priced attorney's swarming over that canceled contract and who owns the intellectual property and was it breach by Rossi or wrongful termination by Defkalion... On Wednesday, January 25, 2012, Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com wrote: Oh, right. But it's weird. I got it with a [VO] in the title 2012/1/25 Akira Shirakawa shirakawa.ak...@gmail.com On 2012-01-25 12:58, Daniel Rocha wrote: It seems that when I reply to vortex list, my reply answer does not go to the group, but directly to the email of the person to who I am replying. Is this an error in my email or is it from the list? I think that what you received was supposed to be a private email. That's why the reply address was to the sender and not the group. Cheers, S.A. -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com
RE: [Vo]:Rossi's Best Chance
Can you provide a citation for that first quote from DGT ? At any rate, venting 3-4 times per day WOULD BE maintenance, if it is done to prevent quiescence. And a tank that size would last 200 days before losing too much pressure - with regular venting. There are many ways to look at what is going on, but in one perspective - it is likely that the hydrogen cannot be reused in this type reactor - as it would be the cause of the problem. Expelled hydrogen could always be reused in a separate fuel cell for its chemical energy, or simply burned, so technically that is not venting either since it adds heat. Winter heating always benefits from added moisture. From: alain.coetm...@gmail.com DGT clearly said that no Vent is done, except in catastrophic situation, that induce shutdown and maintenance. however maybe is there a reversible storage (I have seen here a patented device to heat catalytic exhaust cleaner), that allow to absorb or free H stored inside an hydride, or alike... another simple solution could be a mechanical piston to tune pressure quickly. I see three solenoid valve controls for hydrogen in/out and the control circuitry which indicates clearly to me that hydrogen is being periodically dumped and refilled by computer control.
Re: [Vo]:Matts Lewan blog and the ecat.
On 2012-01-25 12:59, Daniel Rocha wrote: Rossi also told me that the work of the University of Bologna has already started with meetings together with National Instruments to prepare the whole system analysis. So let's recap: - On January 12 in an ecat.com interview Rossi said that a joint work with two unnamed universities would have started soon. - On January 25 Dario Braga informed the public the contract between EFA and UniBo has been terminated, but the university is still looking forward to test the E-Cat, as long as test results will be made public. - On the same day, Mats Lewan informs us (as far as I understand it is ok to discuss publicly about this) that the work of the University of Bologna has already started with meetings with Rossi and National Instruments to prepare the whole system analysis. It looks like the formal contract termination didn't actually affect the work with the University of Bologna. Cheers, S.A.
Re: [Vo]:Rossi's Best Chance
On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 9:13 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: Can you provide a citation for that first quote from DGT ? http://defkalion-energy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=19t=773 Re: dumping 350 degree hydrogen Defkalion GT Posted: Mon Dec 19, 2011 9:33 pm Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2011 6:56 am Posts: 418 Depressurizing Hydrogen for safety/emergency reasons was a problem that we had to deal with during design of our products, following also the official recommendations and regulations on hydrogen handling (please see specs Environmental and Safety, p19). According to them, degas to the environment is not permitted. Following our design, it is not needed. As you can notice in the released spec sheet, there is plenty of space in the filled with Argon tamper resistant compartment A of Hyperions. This is the area where degas procedure sends the Hydrogen in case of emergency through the exhaust valves. Casing specs, which we have not released in details, can hold the maximum internal pressure from such degassing. As it is proved during our internal safety/stress tests, the limited amount of very hot hydrogen in such Argon atmosphere creates no safety problems to the product nor its environment. We consider such emergency hydrogen evacuation as a result of the malfunction of several other safety systems related with the hydrogen circuit. As such, in the case of degas (Hydrogen in the Argon atmosphere), Hyperion will shut down, will turn to stand by mode and automatically will send an alarm message to Hyperion Support Center triggering a replacement and repair procedure for the product. Thank you for this good question end
Re: [Vo]:Rossi's Best Chance
On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 9:31 AM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 9:13 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: Can you provide a citation for that first quote from DGT ? http://defkalion-energy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=19t=773 This is why I think they agitate their powder using hydrogen puffing. Or Pydrogen huffing? :-) T
Re: [Vo]:Rossi's Best Chance
I did not pay close attention to that defkalion post earlier. Reading it now cheers me up: to me these are thorough and sane (?) answers that go that extra mile in explaining practical details while at the same time matching up with the earlier released specs, proving that they are not patchwork scammer's answers to keep us quiet, but something they really bumped into earlier. Was it Mark Twain who said something about who never lies does not need a good memory? (Do I make sense?) Andre On 01/25/2012 10:31 AM, Terry Blanton wrote: On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 9:13 AM, Jones Beenejone...@pacbell.net wrote: Can you provide a citation for that first quote from DGT ? http://defkalion-energy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=19t=773 Re: dumping 350 degree hydrogen Defkalion GT Posted: Mon Dec 19, 2011 9:33 pm Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2011 6:56 am Posts: 418 Depressurizing Hydrogen for safety/emergency reasons was a problem that we had to deal with during design of our products, following also the official recommendations and regulations on hydrogen handling (please see specs Environmental and Safety, p19). According to them, degas to the environment is not permitted. Following our design, it is not needed. As you can notice in the released spec sheet, there is plenty of space in the filled with Argon tamper resistant compartment A of Hyperions. This is the area where degas procedure sends the Hydrogen in case of emergency through the exhaust valves. Casing specs, which we have not released in details, can hold the maximum internal pressure from such degassing. As it is proved during our internal safety/stress tests, the limited amount of very hot hydrogen in such Argon atmosphere creates no safety problems to the product nor its environment. We consider such emergency hydrogen evacuation as a result of the malfunction of several other safety systems related with the hydrogen circuit. As such, in the case of degas (Hydrogen in the Argon atmosphere), Hyperion will shut down, will turn to stand by mode and automatically will send an alarm message to Hyperion Support Center triggering a replacement and repair procedure for the product. Thank you for this good question end
Re: [Vo]:Matts Lewan blog and the ecat.
And of course since the initial news was leaked by Krivit, it is not surprising it was inaccurate. Krivit is the master of the half truth, including a part of the truth to purposely mislead. That is what he does, that is at the heart of what he is, ie, the master of the half truth. - Original Message - From: Akira Shirakawa shirakawa.ak...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2012 8:27 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Matts Lewan blog and the ecat. On 2012-01-25 12:59, Daniel Rocha wrote: Rossi also told me that the work of the University of Bologna has already started with meetings together with National Instruments to prepare the whole system analysis. So let's recap: - On January 12 in an ecat.com interview Rossi said that a joint work with two unnamed universities would have started soon. - On January 25 Dario Braga informed the public the contract between EFA and UniBo has been terminated, but the university is still looking forward to test the E-Cat, as long as test results will be made public. - On the same day, Mats Lewan informs us (as far as I understand it is ok to discuss publicly about this) that the work of the University of Bologna has already started with meetings with Rossi and National Instruments to prepare the whole system analysis. It looks like the formal contract termination didn't actually affect the work with the University of Bologna. Cheers, S.A.
Re: [Vo]:Matts Lewan blog and the ecat.
Dear Akira et al, I think that most realistic is to say that we have not the slightest idea what's true, fractionally true or untrue re this Contract, collaboration. Many things re Rossi are in a similar cognitive chaos. Peter On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 5:00 PM, Randy Wuller rwul...@freeark.com wrote: And of course since the initial news was leaked by Krivit, it is not surprising it was inaccurate. Krivit is the master of the half truth, including a part of the truth to purposely mislead. That is what he does, that is at the heart of what he is, ie, the master of the half truth. - Original Message - From: Akira Shirakawa shirakawa.ak...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2012 8:27 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Matts Lewan blog and the ecat. On 2012-01-25 12:59, Daniel Rocha wrote: Rossi also told me that the work of the University of Bologna has already started with meetings together with National Instruments to prepare the whole system analysis. So let's recap: - On January 12 in an ecat.com interview Rossi said that a joint work with two unnamed universities would have started soon. - On January 25 Dario Braga informed the public the contract between EFA and UniBo has been terminated, but the university is still looking forward to test the E-Cat, as long as test results will be made public. - On the same day, Mats Lewan informs us (as far as I understand it is ok to discuss publicly about this) that the work of the University of Bologna has already started with meetings with Rossi and National Instruments to prepare the whole system analysis. It looks like the formal contract termination didn't actually affect the work with the University of Bologna. Cheers, S.A. -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
RE: [Vo]:MgH2 as hydrogen source
Jones, I just wanted to remind all of the 3rd alternative which is a QM based exploitation of Zero Point posited in Jan Naudts paper , Moller's MAHG , Haisch Moddel prototype, and Cavity QED by Zofia Bialynicka-Birula. The QM represents the accumulation and segregation of dispersion forces without any need for gravitational gradients like we are accustomed to at the macro scale and the migrating gases represent our linkage to HUP resulting in chaotic motion and where atomic or molecular configuration represents our opportunity to organize and exploit an asymmetry. The sudden breach in isotropy that Zofia mentions in cavity QED is not an isolated incident but rather an entire tapestry of sudden jumps in suppression level being constantly experienced by gas atoms loaded into the Ni lattice, defects or powders associated with this anomaly. The disassociation threshold represents an opportunity to rectify the chaotic motion of gas into heat energy. In this theory the quiescence you mention is a runaway condition where the enabling tapestry - geometry melts or grows cat whiskers that short circuit the suppression. I am not challenging that tunneling occurs and in fact would better explain the small amounts of transmuted elements discovered as a small side effect of the Zero Point energy in runaway. Regards Fran From: Jay Caplan [mailto:uniqueprodu...@comcast.net] Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2012 5:49 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:MgH2 as hydrogen source I'd like to solicit comments from the list re the Chan/Phen/Ortiz postings using MgH2 as H source http://www.ecatplanet.net/showthread.php?100-Chan-Method-of-Ni-H-fusion as it would pertain to QM theory, to thermonuclear processes, and to the noted 'quiescence.' - Original Message - From: Jones Beenemailto:jone...@pacbell.net To: vortex-l@eskimo.commailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2012 3:26 PM Subject: RE: [Vo]:Rossi's Best Chance Mark, The first question that must be answered is: it the Ni-H phenomena Quantum Mechanical in nature, or is it Thermonuclear, on a reduced scale? There are some that still believe Ni-H is thermonuclear and in fact, Pd-D could be. In fact W-L theory tries hard not to be forced into making that decision, and has QM features - but if the defining detail of that theory involves neutrons, neutron capture - and subsequent weak-force reactions, just as are seen in traditional physics - then it is a thermonuclear theory. Theories that involve tunneling of protons in one form or another are QM based - if no neutron is involved. QM is normally too low in probability to account for much heat. But one aftermath of the development of the modern CPU by Intel and others is that QM tunneling (of electrons) can be engineer and optimized to occur at very high rates. A CPU operating a 2 GHz will have electrons tunneling in predictable fashion the high terahertz range. The CPU is a QM electron tunneling device operating at high probability. The CPU is a good model to use for proton tunneling - where instead of a small chip needing to shed 30 watts of heat (and not gainful) you have much more heat, and importantly it is anomalous due to the tunneling. If there is gain, then it must be defined. Without going into great detail on defining the gain for now, except to say that it comes from the mass of the proton, and it comes without much radiation or transmutation (some of each, but way too little to account for the gain), then it is easier to account for the quiescence phenomenon. Stated simply, quiescence involves too much depletion in the mass of the hydrogen so that the high level of probability of tunneling is reduced. This is where anything that relates to QM probability come in, and you have already found papers suggestive of a few of these factors. Rossi has designed a reactor where hydrogen is not circulated and it is likely that he could eliminate the problem with periodic dumping of H2 and reloading (every few hours) on a set schedule. There is evidence that DGT may be doing this already. Jones From: Mark Iverson-ZeroPoint If quiescence is a reality, and *if* it will require a scientific/QM understanding, the I don't think any amount of 'control engineering' is going to be much help... one will need to find out the cause of the quiescence, which is a physics problem... If the quiescence is of a reasonable periodic nature (i.e., repeatable), or if it gives you adequate 'warning' that it has started, then one could have 2 or 3 reactor cores inside, only one of which is 'running'. When it begins to go into quiescence, one then starts up one of the 'idle' cores... while shutting down the quiescent one. This is a brainless kind of solution, and wouldn't work if the quiescent core needs to be unassembled in order to make it 'ignite' again. If reactive capability can be reinstated by shocking it with a hi-V pulse
RE: [Vo]:Rossi's Best Chance
Most Interesting ! and it shows the thought given detail, for a product that is obviously going into production. However, it is also a stretch to think that they did it solely for environmental or private use concerns. They are years away from proper permits to sell in the USA or EEC, so that stated rationale could be a poisson rouge. They do not want to give away too much. Once again, hat's off to DGT - and it tends to highlight Rossi's comparative lack of engineering skills. However, this feature also tends to reinforce the conclusion of regular turnover of hydrogen being necessary, since the likelihood is as a safety issue for a commercial product, it came later in time. But when the need arose, it went hand in hand with the already addressed need to avoid quiescence, going back to the time of the split with Rossi. IOW they likely developed an elaborate purge system for one fundamental purpose but publicized it for another use, even though it accomplishes both elegantly. Time will tell - but that is my story for today (dual-use H2 purging system) and I'm sticking to it :) -Original Message- From: Terry Blanton http://defkalion-energy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=19t=773 Depressurizing Hydrogen for safety/emergency reasons was a problem that we had to deal with during design of our products, following also the official recommendations and regulations on hydrogen handling (please see specs Environmental and Safety, p19). According to them, degas to the environment is not permitted. Following our design, it is not needed. As you can notice in the released spec sheet, there is plenty of space in the filled with Argon tamper resistant compartment A of Hyperions. This is the area where degas procedure sends the Hydrogen in case of emergency through the exhaust valves. Casing specs, which we have not released in details, can hold the maximum internal pressure from such degassing. As it is proved during our internal safety/stress tests, the limited amount of very hot hydrogen in such Argon atmosphere creates no safety problems to the product nor its environment. We consider such emergency hydrogen evacuation as a result of the malfunction of several other safety systems related with the hydrogen circuit. As such, in the case of degas (Hydrogen in the Argon atmosphere), Hyperion will shut down, will turn to stand by mode and automatically will send an alarm message to Hyperion Support Center triggering a replacement and repair procedure for the product. Thank you for this good question end
RE: [Vo]:MgH2 as hydrogen source
Fran, I fully agree that any QM explanation supports the Casimir cavity interpretation, and even fractional hydrogen and IRH, if you throw out most of Mills' fluff (he claims not to believe in QM and then goes on to reword it). That QM explanation supports the Casimir cavity interpretation pretty much goes without saying. The only two things which are mutually exclusive are . well . let's say that nothing is ruled out, at this stage. It is pretty hard to cover all the bases with a short posting. To be honest, I was 'fishing' for an expert opinion - and hoping that Jay or anyone else on Vo has additional input to share on how and why QM/QED and especially QCD can be relevant to Ni-H (as an alternative to a purely thermonuclear explanation, or W-L bogosity). This is all newer stuff. Some of it is not even being taught yet at the University level. I have talked to experienced physicists whose eyes glaze-over when you mention QCD. Jones From: Roarty, Francis X Jones, I just wanted to remind all of the 3rd alternative which is a QM based exploitation of Zero Point posited in Jan Naudts paper , Moller's MAHG , Haisch Moddel prototype, and Cavity QED by Zofia Bialynicka-Birula. The QM represents the accumulation and segregation of dispersion forces without any need for gravitational gradients like we are accustomed to at the macro scale and the migrating gases represent our linkage to HUP resulting in chaotic motion and where a tomic or molecular configuration represents our opportunity to organize and exploit an asymmetry. The sudden breach in isotropy that Zofia mentions in cavity QED is not an isolated incident but rather an entire tapestry of sudden jumps in suppression level being constantly experienced by gas atoms loaded into the Ni lattice, defects or powders associated with this anomaly. The disassociation threshold represents an opportunity to rectify the chaotic motion of gas into heat energy. In this theory the quiescence you mention is a runaway condition where the enabling tapestry - geometry melts or grows cat whiskers that short circuit the suppression. I am not challenging that tunneling occurs and in fact would better explain the small amounts of transmuted elements discovered as a small side effect of the Zero Point energy in runaway. Regards Fran
Re: [Vo]:Rossi's Best Chance
Can one regen the hydrogen by circulating it through some type of catalyst, palladium etc to get it re-energized ? On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 9:13 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: Can you provide a citation for that first quote from DGT ? ** ** At any rate, venting 3-4 times per day WOULD BE maintenance, if it is done to prevent quiescence. And a tank that size would last 200 days before losing too much pressure - with regular venting. ** ** There are many ways to look at what is going on, but in one perspective - it is likely that the hydrogen cannot be reused in this type reactor – as it would be the cause of the problem. ** ** Expelled hydrogen could always be reused in a separate fuel cell for its chemical energy, or simply burned, so technically that is not venting either since it adds heat. Winter heating always benefits from added moisture. ** ** * * * * *From:* alain.coetm...@gmail.com DGT clearly said that no Vent is done, except in catastrophic situation, that induce shutdown and maintenance. however maybe is there a reversible storage (I have seen here a patented device to heat catalytic exhaust cleaner), that allow to absorb or free H stored inside an hydride, or alike... another simple solution could be a mechanical piston to tune pressure quickly. ** ** I see three solenoid valve controls for hydrogen in/out and the control circuitry which indicates clearly to me that hydrogen is being periodically dumped and refilled by computer control. ** **
Re: [Vo]:Rossi's Best Chance
If you tell the truth, you don't have to remember anything. T
Re: [Vo]:Rossi's Best Chance
What about the reactor wall as a sheet of nickel or nickel alloy with the surface of the sheet treated to form the type of micro characteristics necessary for this reaction? Is there a way to make the sheet surface look like the powder surfaces? If so, a pair of sheets could be formed into a long flat tube, welded or crimped along the edges, with H2 pressure applied within. These flat tubes in a auto type radiator like arrangement with the H2 circulating like radiator fluid in them, and the glycol coolant passing over the tubes like air does in an auto radiator. - Original Message - From: Axil Axil To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2012 1:50 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Rossi's Best Chance IMHO, quiescence is caused by deterioration of the micro-powder surface due to inadequate heat control. I speculate that DGT has move the heat producing powder zone to the reactor vessel wall. The powder is mechanically affixed to the reactor vessel wall with excellent heat transfer characteristics. Because of this design change, the temperature of the powder will never exceed the coolant temperature and therefore is idiot proofed But in order to get the powder above the Curie temperature of nickel, the coolant must support very high temperature heat transfer in excess of 400C. On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 4:06 PM, Alain Sepeda alain.sep...@gmail.com wrote: I don't have the answer, but it was my assumption, about control. Quiescence does not seems to be a problem with DGT according to their talk and (more important) to their test protocol (which does talk about continuous heat). 2012/1/24 Mark Iverson-ZeroPoint zeropo...@charter.net Question: Could the quiescence be something as simple as heat not being extracted fast enough from the Ni-core material and it eventually builds up to begin melting the Ni tubercles, slowly quenching the ‘active area’? If so, then my initial thoughts don’t apply and it is an engineering problem.
Re: [Vo]:Rossi's Best Chance
What about the reactor wall as a sheet of nickel or nickel alloy with the surface of the sheet treated to form the type of micro characteristics necessary for this reaction? Is there a way to make the sheet surface look like the powder surfaces? If so, a pair of sheets could be formed into a long flat tube, welded or crimped along the edges, with H2 pressure applied within. These flat tubes in a auto type radiator like arrangement with the H2 circulating like radiator fluid in them, and the glycol coolant passing over the tubes like air does in an auto radiator. - Original Message - From: Axil Axil To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2012 1:50 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Rossi's Best Chance IMHO, quiescence is caused by deterioration of the micro-powder surface due to inadequate heat control. I speculate that DGT has move the heat producing powder zone to the reactor vessel wall. The powder is mechanically affixed to the reactor vessel wall with excellent heat transfer characteristics. Because of this design change, the temperature of the powder will never exceed the coolant temperature and therefore is idiot proofed But in order to get the powder above the Curie temperature of nickel, the coolant must support very high temperature heat transfer in excess of 400C. On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 4:06 PM, Alain Sepeda alain.sep...@gmail.com wrote: I don't have the answer, but it was my assumption, about control. Quiescence does not seems to be a problem with DGT according to their talk and (more important) to their test protocol (which does talk about continuous heat). 2012/1/24 Mark Iverson-ZeroPoint zeropo...@charter.net Question: Could the quiescence be something as simple as heat not being extracted fast enough from the Ni-core material and it eventually builds up to begin melting the Ni tubercles, slowly quenching the ‘active area’? If so, then my initial thoughts don’t apply and it is an engineering problem.
RE: [Vo]:Rossi's Best Chance
From: Chemical Engineer * Can one regen the hydrogen by circulating it through some type of catalyst, palladium etc to get it re-energized ? Very interesting question/speculation. In fact you may have hit on an important detail. This probably gets back to QCD and gauge bosons - and how (or if) nuclear mass can be transferred between nuclear entities, without benefit of a known thermonuclear reaction. I have no strong clue, and do not pretend to be an expert on the full range of QM, but have read as much on the subject as can be digested, up to now. If I had to guess with limited knowledge, it would seem that the heavier (in a.m.u.) that the donor is (it must be a proton conductor), then the more likely extra mass in the form of nuclear bosons would transfer - i.e. transfer from a heavier element to the depleted proton. Pd is a likely candidate, but there are better ones. Again, let's keep in mind the net proton mass is far from quantized. The leap of faith is that net proton mass is an average with a range of values, since it is not quantized like quark mass (and that it can vary a fractional percent or more as overage or deficit). Of course, some of the mass variation would then be convertible to energy when the strong force is pitted against Coulomb repulsion. That is where QCD comes into play. Let's say the known mass of the proton in the standard model is 938.272013 MeV. However, this is really an average mass based on whatever the most advanced current measurement technique is being employed - and that it can vary in individual protons. The quark component of protons is the only component which is fixed with a quantum value and at least a hundred MeV is in play. There is a range of expendable mass-energy of the non-quark remainder (pion, gluon, etc) - which is extractable as the 'gain' seen in the Ni-H thermal effect - yet the proton maintains its identity. Can this mass loss, if depleted (leading to quiescence) then can be replenished by exposure to a heavy nucleus (bringing the average mass of the proton back up)? That is the gist of our speculation. Perhaps the proton net mass can go down to say - 937 MeV, for instance, on a temporary basis, and with a decent amount of energy release - and thereafter this deficit is recouped. We do not need to specify how it is recouped (regauged) yet, but the route is surely encompassed in one of the definitions of ZPE (i.e. Dirac's negative energy 'sea'). Jones attachment: winmail.dat
Re: [Vo]:LEAD shielding - a dual purpose?
On 25/01/12 15:41, OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson wrote: Somewhere in a recent collection of Vort posts was a thread or two touching on speculation (evidence?) that the source of the massive amount of exothermic heat generated from Rossi's eCats is actually due to gamma radiation being emitted from the reactor core. It is the generated gamma radiation (which itself is not necessary hot in the thermal sense) that subsequently bombards the surrounding lead shielding, thus HEATING up the lead. That came from Rossi's recent radio interview apparently. I only listened to the interview once and didn't pick up on that but Aussie Guy mentioned it in his summarized list of key points from that interview which he posted here. I questioned it at the time as it struck me by surprise as I expected all the heat to come solely from the actual reaction.
Re: [Vo]:LEAD shielding - a dual purpose?
for defkalion réactors, knowing their testing measures, it is clear that no noticeable gamma is produced, and that (hopefuly) classic gamma are not the main production of energy. it is not far from the same with rossi's reactor, when you see the relatively thin lead protection... from what I've read here, the gamma seems to appear when the reactor is not in normal mode... starting or stopping... maybe is it that the reaction change in unstable situation, and stops quickly, or evolve to heating only mode... 2012/1/25 OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson svj.orionwo...@gmail.com Somewhere in a recent collection of Vort posts was a thread or two touching on speculation (evidence?) that the source of the massive amount of exothermic heat generated from Rossi's eCats is actually due to gamma radiation being emitted from the reactor core. It is the generated gamma radiation (which itself is not necessary hot in the thermal sense) that subsequently bombards the surrounding lead shielding, thus HEATING up the lead.
Re: [Vo]:LEAD shielding - a dual purpose?
In the context of the new high temperature NiH reactor designs, lead will melt at a lower temperature (327C) as compared to the temperature of the high temperature coolant (349C), therefore the theory of heat production in lead is untenable. On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 10:41 AM, OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson svj.orionwo...@gmail.com wrote: Somewhere in a recent collection of Vort posts was a thread or two touching on speculation (evidence?) that the source of the massive amount of exothermic heat generated from Rossi's eCats is actually due to gamma radiation being emitted from the reactor core. It is the generated gamma radiation (which itself is not necessary hot in the thermal sense) that subsequently bombards the surrounding lead shielding, thus HEATING up the lead. It suggests the fact that the eCats themselves do not necessarily need to be anywhere near as hot (in the thermal sense) as the surrounding lead shielding eventually gets. This suggests it is the accumulated heat being generated within the LEAD shielding is what Rossi ends up exploiting in order to generate massive amounts of hot water and steam. This implies that the external heating elements Rossi applies as Input to the ecat, in effect, is used primarily to CONTROL the internal temperature of his reactor cores. It suggests Rossi's eCats need to be maintained within a narrow temperature range, which the external heating elements more-or-less supply. I would also speculate that the optimal internal temperature range of the eCat may not need to be anywhere near as hot (thermally speaking) as the thermal temperature being generated within the surrounding lead shielding. If Rossi were to turn off the external heating element, leaving only some of the generated thermal heat from the surrounding lead shielding to return back to the reactor cores, it is conceivable that attempting to maintain a precise reactor core temperature range may be much more difficult to control. To be honest, however, I'm not entirely sure I buy such speculation. For example, what's stopping thermal heat being generated from the lead shielding from entering the reactor cores WHILE the external heaters are turned on. What's the difference? OTOH, is it possible that accompanying temperature sensors are constantly monitoring the internal temperature of the reactor core. If so, perhaps Rossi's heating elements ARE smart enough to gauge the internal temperature. Maybe they are smart enough to adjust their power settings based on the amount of heat being returned back from surrounding lead shielding. If that is the case, if the external heating elements are deliberately turned off, Rossi would lose a critical control factor. Speculation, both pro and con, is invited. Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com http://www.orionworks.com/ www.zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]:LEAD shielding - a dual purpose?
The 'fact' that the gamma only appears as a burst during startup is one peice of 'evidence' that I think suggests that the mechanism relies on a coherent state within the nickel, probably an optical vibrational mode within the lattice. Once it is at a sufficient amplitide, it's existence might stimulate the excited nuclei to emit their excess energy after an LENR event has occurred into the mode using the principle of a PHASER, rather than emit it as gamma radiation (Like a LASER, but with phonons not photons. Both are bosons). While the modes are establishing themselves the excess energy still has a significant probability of being emitted as gamma radiation. Once established, the excess energy has a route to thermal energy within the nickel, not the lead, which does not involve gamma. On 25/01/2012 16:23, Alain Sepeda wrote: for defkalion réactors, knowing their testing measures, it is clear that no noticeable gamma is produced, and that (hopefuly) classic gamma are not the main production of energy. it is not far from the same with rossi's reactor, when you see the relatively thin lead protection... from what I've read here, the gamma seems to appear when the reactor is not in normal mode... starting or stopping... maybe is it that the reaction change in unstable situation, and stops quickly, or evolve to heating only mode...
Re: [Vo]:LEAD shielding - a dual purpose?
Good comments from everyone. From Axel: In the context of the new high temperature NiH reactor designs, lead will melt at a lower temperature (327C) as compared to the temperature of the high temperature coolant (349C), therefore the theory of heat production in lead is untenable. I agree. I already knew that lead has a much lower melting temperature. That factor alone bothered me. Needless to say, my theory needs to be tweaked. ;-) From Alain: from what I've read here, the gamma seems to appear when the reactor is not in normal mode... starting or stopping... maybe is it that the reaction change in unstable situation, and stops quickly, or evolve to heating only mode... What kind of radiation is emitted from Rossi's eCats remains a frustrating trade-secret. It's obvious that Rossi has been deliberately deceptive on the matter. At present we don't really know for sure whether Rossi's eCats emit harmful radiation, particularly in the gamma range, or not. Rossi sez something to the effect that his eCat's don't produce (much) harmful radiation, but then he uses lead shielding, implying that some kind of harmful radiation must be produced. However, insofar as the public record on the matter goes, all attempts to record just the slightest hint of radiation appears to have failed. So, do the eCats really produce radiation, or is the pretense of generated radiation just another cover story Rossi is using to muddy the waters? Maybe the burst of gamma recorded back last January was just a glitch in the recording device. We just don't know. My theory is based on a premise that some kind of radiation (perhaps even harmful radiation) is produced from the eCats, and that some kind of protective external shielding (metal, and/or lead) of a thickness is capable of capturing the radiation and transforming (stepping it down) it into thermal heat. At this juncture I'm long on a premise but extremely short on a plausible theory that would explain such a mechanism. ;-) From Nigel: The 'fact' that the gamma only appears as a burst during startup is one peice of 'evidence' that I think suggests that the mechanism relies on a coherent state within the nickel, probably an optical vibrational mode within the lattice. Interesting insight. The he premise is worth exploring. Once it is at a sufficient amplitide, it's existence might stimulate the excited nuclei to emit their excess energy after an LENR event has occurred into the mode using the principle of a PHASER, rather than emit it as gamma radiation (Like a LASER, but with phonons not photons. Both are bosons). While the modes are establishing themselves the excess energy still has a significant probability of being emitted as gamma radiation. Once established, the excess energy has a route to thermal energy within the nickel, not the lead, which does not involve gamma. Can you elaborate a little more as to what kind of gamma radiation could be produced? Perhaps more to the point, how much potential gamma radiation would we have to worry about (and subsequently have shield ourselves from) before the excess energy has a direct route to thermal energy? Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
[Vo]:Full text: Independent Testing on Hyperion Reactors
Independent Testing on Hyperion Reactors Praxen Defkalion Green Technologies Global Ltd. (PDGT) is ready to further allow third parties to evaluate its core technology: a multi stage LENR reaction between Nickel and Hydrogen. PDGT has successfully completed its scientific, technological and engineering steps necessary to sustain such a reaction with results exceeding a COP of 20 and with temperatures capable to exceed 650 degrees Celsius. As it was announced in our November 30th Press Release, a series of third party tests on Hyperion products have been scheduled to be performed within the first months of 2012, immediately after our product’s certification. This announcement does not refer to such product tests. Independent tests have already been scheduled. With this announcement, PDGT welcomes further requests from internationally recognized and reputable scientific and business organizations interested to conduct their independent tests on “bare” Hyperion Reactors. Tests will be conducted following mutually agreed protocols based on the general principles herein. Test Objectives Measurement of excess heat produced by reactions within Hyperion reactors Measurement of “bare” Hyperion Reactor COP (i.e. total energy consumed versus energy produced) Measurement of radioactivity during testing Measurement of reactor’s stability using its control mechanisms Type of Testing Parallel run of two identical Hyperion Reactors connected in parallel to the same electric energy sources for pre-heating and the same Hydrogen input source. The active Reactor #1 will be equipped and prepared ready to trigger and sustain a steady reaction. The Reactor #2 will be empty of any powders and with all triggering and control mechanisms deactivated. Following a parallel test run of both Reactors for at least 48 hours, the two Reactors will be switched for a second run (Reactor #1 empty and Reactor #2 active) in order to authenticate the same results. Configuration Measurements Both Reactors are of the same configuration, placed in the same room with a 50-60cm distance from each other. Both reactors will be identically isolated. Calibrated thermocouples of the same type will be connected inside each Reactor chamber and attached in the outer surface of each reactor. All four thermocouples will report their measurements to the same data logger and PC logging software. The pressure of the Hydrogen circuit will be monitored and logged with the same sample rate as the thermocouples logging (i.e. 1/sec). All electric consuming devises attached to the Reactors will be measured and logged (Volt and Amps). All electric supplies to the reactors will be through a UPS unit to avoid grid problems and any possible fluctuations. Monitoring of any type of radioactivity from the tested Reactors will be performed following a 24hours measurement of the testing environment, to be used as base measurement. Cooling Method Cold air may be blown to both Reactors through their isolation if the maximum safety temperature level as defined in the test protocol is reached in the active Reactor. Measurement Methodologies 1. On Heat Energy and COP Differential Thermal Analysis: Following the test run, the Temperature/Time logged plots of inner and outer thermocouples will be used to calculate: The difference of integrals between the Temperature/Time logged plots of inner thermocouple measurements of the two Reactors. This results to the calculation of the absolute excess heat energy produced by the active Reactor. The difference of integrals between the logged plots of each pair of inner and outer attached thermocouples attached to each Reactor. The difference of the respective energy of the absolute excess heat energy produced by the active Reactor versus the total electric energy consumed by the active Reactor (heater and controls). This results in the COP of the active Reactor. Reactors will be weighed before and after testing. 2. On Radiation A Muller-Geiger tube, calibrated to the environment base radiation level, will be used to measure alpha and gamma emissions from the active Reactor. 3. On Stability The active Reactor’s thermocouples measured temperatures, both inner and on outer surface, will be maintained stable with a fluctuation of no more than +/- 10% during the whole testing period, as observed after the triggering of the reaction in the active Reactor. 4. Other Measurements No other measurements (e.g. calorimetry), will be performed during such “bare” Reactor testing. The existing already released specifications of Hyperion products relating to system performance, stability, safety and functionality will not be tested during this series if tests. Reactor’s Performance It is expected that tests will conclude a COP in excess of 20 Publication of Protocols and Results The detailed test protocols will be published by PGDT before any third party test is performed. Test results may be published by the
Re: [Vo]:LEAD shielding - a dual purpose?
Unfortunately this model is nowhere near adequate to be able to calculate the levels of gamma we might see. At this stage it is at best a qualitative model that might explain the general characteristics. If the match looked sufficiently good to be worth looking at further then no doubt the model could be developed to be more quantitative. I am of course standing on the shoulders of giants at this stage. The idea can be found on page 173 of Preperata's QED Coherence in Matter where it is used to exlain Miracle No 2 of LENR systems: namely that there is not as much gamma radiation as you might expect given classical Hot fusion theory. On 25/01/2012 17:55, OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson wrote: Once it is at a sufficient amplitide, it's existence might stimulate the excited nuclei to emit their excess energy after an LENR event has occurred into the mode using the principle of a PHASER, rather than emit it as gamma radiation (Like a LASER, but with phonons not photons. Both are bosons). While the modes are establishing themselves the excess energy still has a significant probability of being emitted as gamma radiation. Once established, the excess energy has a route to thermal energy within the nickel, not the lead, which does not involve gamma. Can you elaborate a little more as to what kind of gamma radiation could be produced? Perhaps more to the point, how much potential gamma radiation would we have to worry about (and subsequently have shield ourselves from) before the excess energy has a direct route to thermal energy? Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]:LEAD shielding - a dual purpose?
note that for defkalion, gamma measures is not a secret http://www.defkalion-energy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=5615#p5615 2012/1/25 OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson svj.orionwo...@gmail.com What kind of radiation is emitted from Rossi's eCats remains a frustrating trade-secret.
Re: [Vo]:Rossi's Best Chance
On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 11:17 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: We do not need to specify how it is recouped (regauged) yet, but the route is surely encompassed in one of the definitions of ZPE (i.e. Dirac's negative energy 'sea'). Are you growing a Beard(en)? 'Regauged' was/is his favorite word. Hmmm, I should check his web site: http://www.cheniere.org/ since he's probably already explained it all. Regarding the rest of your post, suppose it's those slightly different pass protons which are giving up mass that is not replenished by PAMD's sea. It would mean that new H2 would need to be added to the mix to get more ragged proton mass. If Rossi restarts his eCatnapping reactor, do we know how he does it? T
Re: [Vo]:LEAD shielding - a dual purpose?
From Alian: note that for defkalion, gamma measures is not a secret http://www.defkalion-energy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=5615#p5615 I read the thread. The only commentary from DGT is: No, there is not any such limitation Thank you ??? Ooooh-Kay... What does that mean? Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
RE: [Vo]:LEAD shielding - a dual purpose?
Hi Steven... Think the most likely explanation is that Rossi was trying to throw people off his trail; slow them down. If the competition thinks that gammas are produced in copious numbers, they will be looking at the wrong theoretical explanations... he's leading the snakes down the wrong hole. -mark -Original Message- From: OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson [mailto:svj.orionwo...@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2012 9:56 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:LEAD shielding - a dual purpose? Good comments from everyone. snip
Re: [Vo]:LEAD shielding - a dual purpose?
I've understood they mean: you can measure gamma as you wan't, no limitation (unlike rossi's) 2012/1/25 OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson svj.orionwo...@gmail.com From Alian: note that for defkalion, gamma measures is not a secret http://www.defkalion-energy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=5615#p5615 I read the thread. The only commentary from DGT is: No, there is not any such limitation Thank you ??? Ooooh-Kay... What does that mean? Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
RE: [Vo]:Rossi's Best Chance
Jones: A few questions... I have specific reasons for each one. 1) When you refer to the variable mass of a proton, are you thinking about H, or protons in all elements? 2) If the mass of a proton = m_sub_p +- m_sub_v , would the variability (m_sub_v) be less than or equal to the total mass of the electrons in the element? -Mark _ From: Jones Beene [mailto:jone...@pacbell.net] Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2012 8:18 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: [Vo]:Rossi's Best Chance From: Chemical Engineer * Can one regen the hydrogen by circulating it through some type of catalyst, palladium etc to get it re-energized ? Very interesting question/speculation. In fact you may have hit on an important detail. This probably gets back to QCD and gauge bosons - and how (or if) nuclear mass can be transferred between nuclear entities, without benefit of a known thermonuclear reaction. I have no strong clue, and do not pretend to be an expert on the full range of QM, but have read as much on the subject as can be digested, up to now. If I had to guess with limited knowledge, it would seem that the heavier (in a.m.u.) that the donor is (it must be a proton conductor), then the more likely extra mass in the form of nuclear bosons would transfer - i.e. transfer from a heavier element to the depleted proton. Pd is a likely candidate, but there are better ones. Again, let's keep in mind the net proton mass is far from quantized. The leap of faith is that net proton mass is an average with a range of values, since it is not quantized like quark mass (and that it can vary a fractional percent or more as overage or deficit). Of course, some of the mass variation would then be convertible to energy when the strong force is pitted against Coulomb repulsion. That is where QCD comes into play. Let's say the known mass of the proton in the standard model is 938.272013 MeV. However, this is really an average mass based on whatever the most advanced current measurement technique is being employed - and that it can vary in individual protons. The quark component of protons is the only component which is fixed with a quantum value and at least a hundred MeV is in play. There is a range of expendable mass-energy of the non-quark remainder (pion, gluon, etc) - which is extractable as the 'gain' seen in the Ni-H thermal effect - yet the proton maintains its identity. Can this mass loss, if depleted (leading to quiescence) then can be replenished by exposure to a heavy nucleus (bringing the average mass of the proton back up)? That is the gist of our speculation. Perhaps the proton net mass can go down to say - 937 MeV, for instance, on a temporary basis, and with a decent amount of energy release - and thereafter this deficit is recouped. We do not need to specify how it is recouped (regauged) yet, but the route is surely encompassed in one of the definitions of ZPE (i.e. Dirac's negative energy 'sea'). Jones attachment: winmail.dat
RE: [Vo]:Rossi's Best Chance
-Original Message- From: Terry Blanton ... suppose it's those slightly different mass protons which are giving up mass that is not replenished by PAMD's sea. It would mean that new H2 would need to be added to the mix to get more ragged [sic - rugged?] proton mass. If Rossi restarts his eCatnapping reactor, do we know how he does it? Well, Rossi could purge and add more H2, for one thing. I do NOT know that is what he does, of course, or else I would be more assertive about the explanation. If he does purge and refill, and then it restarts as easily as it did the first time, then it is almost case-closed for this explanation having some validity. ... or QED, which in his case is a pun on itself :) J.
Re: [Vo]:Opponents should please go away and form your own group
In reply to David Roberson's message of Sun, 22 Jan 2012 18:01:02 -0500 (EST): Hi, [snip] I believe that the danger in operating the device in maximum feedback is that the nickel will melt and that will end the power generation permanently. It most likely will require an operation temperature that is controlled and set to the proper level for the desired heat output power. Dave [snip] Yes, the cooling needs to be adequate to carry away the energy produced, and the fuel supply rate determines the power output. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
[Vo]:Forum ?
Hello Im following this group with great interest, im a e-cat experimental device builder. I have a question to the group, would you guys like a Forum instead of discussing mail wise ? I could get a new forum up and running in an hour or so, we can set someone as moderator, or have a group of moderators - admin . I will do this for free, and i will never ask anyone for funding or alike. The group can decide tpo raise funding for visits to defkalion, etc, but thats for the group to decide. I do this because im very interested in this subject, and i feel that we have a real braintrust cooking. We just need a better tool for discussions, in my opinion. Just let me know, a name for the domain i set up would also be nice, like www.lenrbb.org , or something .. Regards Marten Sundling
Re: [Vo]:Forum ?
Hello Im following this group with great interest, im a e-cat experimental device builder. I have a question to the group, would you guys like a Forum instead of discussing mail wise ? I could get a new forum up and running in an hour or so, we can set someone as moderator, or have a group of moderators - admin . Will you let Mary Yugo join?
[Vo]:Nickel honeycomb ?
Hello guys I have a q, i have been reading all the posts about the problems with energy transfer, core melts and so on . Why not embed the nickel / catalyst mix in a honeycomb, or other structure that gets easy acess for both H2 and heat trasnfer to the walls of the tube ? Is there any practical method of doing this? I have thought about covering steel or other material with nickel as so many other people, but in my mind that decrease the surface too much, a fungi or honeycomb like structure would maybe work, but how to make one ? Any ideas ? Marten
RE: [Vo]:Rossi's Best Chance
From: Mark Iverson-ZeroPoint 1) When you refer to the variable mass of a proton, are you thinking about H, or protons in all elements? To be honest, this hypothesis really has not gotten beyond hydrogen protons, so far. 2) If the mass of a proton = m_sub_p +- m_sub_v , would the variability (m_sub_v) be less than or equal to the total mass of the electrons in the element? It could be more than 512 keV, if I understand the question. The accepted value is for a proton is 938.272013 MeV, but that value (in my hypothesis) is an average of many protons. If there is a range, even a narrow range, and a distribution within the range - something like a bell curve or even a Maxwellian distribution of mass-energy, then the tail could be up to 940 or more and several MeV extra mass in the form of bosons are present... and that would mean significant energy is there to spare. Since over half of the mass-energy is quark mass, presumably quantized, there is plenty of leeway. Jones From: Chemical Engineer * Can one regen the hydrogen by circulating it through some type of catalyst, palladium etc to get it re-energized ? Very interesting question/speculation. In fact you may have hit on an important detail. This probably gets back to QCD and gauge bosons - and how (or if) nuclear mass can be transferred between nuclear entities, without benefit of a known thermonuclear reaction. I have no strong clue, and do not pretend to be an expert on the full range of QM, but have read as much on the subject as can be digested, up to now. If I had to guess with limited knowledge, it would seem that the heavier (in a.m.u.) that the donor is (it must be a proton conductor), then the more likely extra mass in the form of nuclear bosons would transfer - i.e. transfer from a heavier element to the depleted proton. Pd is a likely candidate, but there are better ones. Again, let's keep in mind the net proton mass is far from quantized. The leap of faith is that net proton mass is an average with a range of values, since it is not quantized like quark mass (and that it can vary a fractional percent or more as overage or deficit). Of course, some of the mass variation would then be convertible to energy when the strong force is pitted against Coulomb repulsion. That is where QCD comes into play. Let's say the known mass of the proton in the standard model is 938.272013 MeV. However, this is really an average mass based on whatever the most advanced current measurement technique is being employed - and that it can vary in individual protons. The quark component of protons is the only component which is fixed with a quantum value and at least a hundred MeV is in play. There is a range of expendable mass-energy of the non-quark remainder (pion, gluon, etc) - which is extractable as the 'gain' seen in the Ni-H thermal effect - yet the proton maintains its identity. Can this mass loss, if depleted (leading to quiescence) then can be replenished by exposure to a heavy nucleus (bringing the average mass of the proton back up)? That is the gist of our speculation. Perhaps the proton net mass can go down to say - 937 MeV, for instance, on a temporary basis, and with a decent amount of energy release - and thereafter this deficit is recouped. We do not need to specify how it is recouped (regauged) yet, but the route is surely encompassed in one of the definitions of ZPE (i.e. Dirac's negative energy 'sea'). Jones attachment: winmail.dat
Re: [Vo]:Forum ?
On 25.01.2012 12:26, Vorl Bek wrote: Hello Im following this group with great interest, im a e-cat experimental device builder. I have a question to the group, would you guys like a Forum instead of discussing mail wise ? I could get a new forum up and running in an hour or so, we can set someone as moderator, or have a group of moderators - admin . Will you let Mary Yugo join? Well, thats not for me do decide, but personally, No. Im very tired of these full blown sceptics that make a negative mess of everything. But in my mind, he forum is to be run by us, we must form a base of rules together. I have removed all of those idiots, their language are somewhat similar, there may be more names on few people if you get my drift .. Marten
RE: [Vo]:Nickel honeycomb ?
There are a number of options. Google porous nickel or nickel foam but beware of Alibaba. INCOFOAM is an available nickel foam, produced in a wide porosity range which has been available for several years. A large scale commercial production facility is operating at the Vale/Inco refinery near Swansea, Wales UK. -Original Message- From: mar...@krteknik.com Why not embed the nickel / catalyst mix in a honeycomb, or other structure that gets easy access for both H2 and heat transfer to the walls of the tube ? Is there any practical method of doing this? attachment: winmail.dat
Re: [Vo]:Nickel honeycomb ?
Marten, You might want to google or bing nickel nanowire grow or nickel whisker grow. Some of these techiques are hazardous, so better use extreme caution. My guess is that (poly-)crystalline nanostructures are most promising. Hello guys I have a q, i have been reading all the posts about the problems with energy transfer, core melts and so on . Why not embed the nickel / catalyst mix in a honeycomb, or other structure that gets easy acess for both H2 and heat trasnfer to the walls of the tube ? Is there any practical method of doing this? I have thought about covering steel or other material with nickel as so many other people, but in my mind that decrease the surface too much, a fungi or honeycomb like structure would maybe work, but how to make one ? Any ideas ? Marten
[Vo]:Ang.: [Vo]:Nickel honeycomb ?
great help, thanks! Skickat från min HTC - Reply message - Från: Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net Till: vortex-l@eskimo.com Rubrik: [Vo]:Nickel honeycomb ? Datum: ons, jan 25, 2012 20:44 There are a number of options. Google porous nickel or nickel foam but beware of Alibaba. INCOFOAM is an available nickel foam, produced in a wide porosity range which has been available for several years. A large scale commercial production facility is operating at the Vale/Inco refinery near Swansea, Wales UK. -Original Message- From: mar...@krteknik.com Why not embed the nickel / catalyst mix in a honeycomb, or other structure that gets easy access for both H2 and heat transfer to the walls of the tube ? Is there any practical method of doing this?
[Vo]:Replacing powder is bad
*http://renewable.50webs.com/fusion.html* *NEWS! * *Defkalion Green Technologies*http://www.defkalion-energy.com/homehas *announced (1/23/2012)*http://www.defkalion-energy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4t=926that they are now welcoming third party testing of their LENR reactors. They expect to market nickel-hydrogen* *Low Energy Nuclear Reaction (LENR*) *reactors in 2012 after government safety certifications are issued. Defkalion claims their reactors produce up to 32 times input power and are capable of outputting steam at temperatures up to 414 degrees Celsius. Their *Hyperion Modules* can be linked together to produce up to 5 megawatts of heat, and larger models may only need nickel powder refueling every 34 months. Defkalion claims Hyperions are refueled in place without the need to uninstall modules while refueling. Nickel powder fuel is renewed in vacuum using Hyperion Recharge Units, a suitcase sized device developed by Defkalion. Defkalion says they have received interest in license agreements from 850 companies based in 60 different countries around the world. With special attention focused on the following info: Defkalion claims Hyperions are refueled in place without the need to uninstall modules while refueling. Nickel powder fuel is renewed in vacuum using Hyperion Recharge Units, a suitcase sized device developed by Defkalion. This tells me that the micro powder cannot be removed from the reaction vessel and an alternative rejuvenation method has been discovered to reactivate the spent powder to revive reactor performance. This is another indicator that DGT permanently affixes powder to the reactor heat transfer structure. The take away… I like this...Reviving the powder is good…DGT I don't like this...Replacing powder is bad,,,Rossi.
Re: [Vo]:Forum ?
There is a forum for that already, http://www.ecatplanet.net/forum.php We just need more members... 2012/1/25 mar...@krteknik.com On 25.01.2012 12:26, Vorl Bek wrote: Hello Im following this group with great interest, im a e-cat experimental device builder. I have a question to the group, would you guys like a Forum instead of discussing mail wise ? I could get a new forum up and running in an hour or so, we can set someone as moderator, or have a group of moderators - admin . Will you let Mary Yugo join? Well, thats not for me do decide, but personally, No. Im very tired of these full blown sceptics that make a negative mess of everything. But in my mind, he forum is to be run by us, we must form a base of rules together. I have removed all of those idiots, their language are somewhat similar, there may be more names on few people if you get my drift .. Marten -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com
Re: [Vo]:Nickel honeycomb ?
I think are a many potential downsides to using bulk material substrates (foams, foils, wires) with nickel coatings. - you might get large and non-homogenous transient temperature changes throughout the reactor and this could lead to deformation and even breakup of large continuous scaffolds. - it prevents transport of powder throughout the reactor (which may be important for continuous operation in terms of subjecting the nickel to varying temperatures or physical impacts to create hydrogen flux through the nickel surface) - a foil type substrate may constrain or otherwise limit convective flow of hydrogen (particularly if there is thermal deformation of the substrate), allowing hot-spots to form and creating worse temperature inhomogeneities throughout the reactor. - thermal expansion and material crystalline structure phase changes caused by temperature change or hydrogen loading can lead to large dimensional mismatches and stresses between substrate and nickel - leading to the nickel coating flaking off etc, at which point why not just use powder anyway? - the processes by which you apply the nickel coating to the substrate may have limitations and so not be optimal for creating the exact chemical alloy makeup and surface topologies required for best LENR performance. - making nano-powder will almost certainly be cheaper than any plating procedure. - harder to recycle substrate with nickel coating - very easy to replace nickel powder in a reactor. - one or more of the above problems will probably impose a lower temperature limit on the process than the nickel powder would have by itself. Hydrogen convection driven by buoyancy will likely slowly agitate and transport nickel nano-particles throughout the reactor, with radiation at high temperatures and physical contact of the blowing nickel particles with the walls also enhancing heat transfer. That does not mean nickel on a substrate won't work, but it appears to come with more potential problems, temperature limitations and higher fabrication and running costs than nickel powder, with few if any benefits that I can see. So unless you have other compelling reasons for a substrate I think you may as well just stick with the nano powder. On 25 January 2012 19:28, mar...@krteknik.com wrote: Hello guys I have a q, i have been reading all the posts about the problems with energy transfer, core melts and so on . Why not embed the nickel / catalyst mix in a honeycomb, or other structure that gets easy acess for both H2 and heat trasnfer to the walls of the tube ? Is there any practical method of doing this? I have thought about covering steel or other material with nickel as so many other people, but in my mind that decrease the surface too much, a fungi or honeycomb like structure would maybe work, but how to make one ? Any ideas ? Marten
[Vo]:Ang.: [Vo]:Nickel honeycomb ?
Hello Thanks for a great number of input. My concern have been that the powder might just sit there as a pile Be badly avaliable to the h2 and get so hot by the bad cooling that it melts, I'm BTW using micrometer powders at the moment by rossis specs, but it sounds like I will use nano powder I thought that I might overcome those hurdles by using a conductive porous substrate, but that might not be the case then. What's your opinion about using acetylene and nickel instead of nickel,carbon,h2 a idea that is floating around.. Marten Skickat från min HTC - Reply message - Från: Robert Lynn robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com Till: vortex-l@eskimo.com Rubrik: [Vo]:Nickel honeycomb ? Datum: ons, jan 25, 2012 22:00 I think are a many potential downsides to using bulk material substrates (foams, foils, wires) with nickel coatings.- you might get large and non-homogenous transient temperature changes throughout the reactor and this could lead to deformation and even breakup of large continuous scaffolds. - it prevents transport of powder throughout the reactor (which may be important for continuous operation in terms of subjecting the nickel to varying temperatures or physical impacts to create hydrogen flux through the nickel surface) - a foil type substrate may constrain or otherwise limit convective flow of hydrogen (particularly if there is thermal deformation of the substrate), allowing hot-spots to form and creating worse temperature inhomogeneities throughout the reactor. - thermal expansion and material crystalline structure phase changes caused by temperature change or hydrogen loading can lead to large dimensional mismatches and stresses between substrate and nickel - leading to the nickel coating flaking off etc, at which point why not just use powder anyway? - the processes by which you apply the nickel coating to the substrate may have limitations and so not be optimal for creating the exact chemical alloy makeup and surface topologies required for best LENR performance. - making nano-powder will almost certainly be cheaper than any plating procedure.- harder to recycle substrate with nickel coating- very easy to replace nickel powder in a reactor.- one or more of the above problems will probably impose a lower temperature limit on the process than the nickel powder would have by itself. Hydrogen convection driven by buoyancy will likely slowly agitate and transport nickel nano-particles throughout the reactor, with radiation at high temperatures and physical contact of the blowing nickel particles with the walls also enhancing heat transfer. That does not mean nickel on a substrate won't work, but it appears to come with more potential problems, temperature limitations and higher fabrication and running costs than nickel powder, with few if any benefits that I can see. So unless you have other compelling reasons for a substrate I think you may as well just stick with the nano powder. On 25 January 2012 19:28, mar...@krteknik.com wrote: Hello guys I have a q, i have been reading all the posts about the problems with energy transfer, core melts and so on . Why not embed the nickel / catalyst mix in a honeycomb, or other structure that gets easy acess for both H2 and heat trasnfer to the walls of the tube ? Is there any practical method of doing this? I have thought about covering steel or other material with nickel as so many other people, but in my mind that decrease the surface too much, a fungi or honeycomb like structure would maybe work, but how to make one ? Any ideas ? Marten
[Vo]:Resonances: Coupling between electronic states and vibrational modes (phonons)...
FYI: The presence of excess heat, and [near] lack of high-E particles/photons from LENR reactions would require coupling the large amount of E into the lattice vibrations (phonon modes) instead of into gammas (photons) or particles (neutrons and subsequently, dead grad-students). The article below looked into the energy-transfer (coupling) process in photosynthesis. They discovered that the coupling between electronic states and vibrational modes is greatly enhanced when they hit the light-harvesting complexes of algae with a 2-color (wavelength) photon spectroscopy. How does this apply to LENR? According to DGT, the form of LENR used in their technology (and likely all Ni-H gas-phase experiments) is a 'multi-stage' process. One of those stages is the coupling of the excess [nuclear] energy into the lattice instead of the usual gammas or energetic particles. I would posit that there is something unique about the geometry of the H-loaded metal lattice and the AMOUNT of heat energy that is present which determines the frequency of the lattice vibrations (phonons), which establishes a coherence similar to the below article which couples energy from electronic states to vibrational modes. The difference is that LENR would be coupling nuclear energies to the lattice... or could there be coupling from nuclear to electronic, and then from electronic to phononic? PhysOrg article: http://www.physorg.com/news/2012-01-role-quantum-effects-photosynthesis.html Key phrases: By using the newer, less common technique, called two-color photon echo spectroscopy, the researchers could excite only the pathway in which [quantum] coherence occurs. Singling out this pathway revealed clear signatures for strong coupling between the electronic states and the vibrational modes of the protein matrix (phonons) Our observation of strong coupling between the electronic states and the phonon modes of the protein matrix provides strong experimental evidence that classical treatment of these interactions is not sufficient, From the paper's abstract: ... allowing coherent coupling between otherwise nonresonant transitions. which is here: http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/jz201600f Longer excerpt from PhysOrg article: ... the quantum coherence in the algae's light-harvesting complexes was originally observed using 2D electronic spectroscopy, which uses short, broadband pulses to probe energy dynamics. The use of broadband pulses (i.e., pulses with a wide range of frequencies) excites many different pathways simultaneously. Although this technique can be useful, it also makes it difficult to isolate different processes since multiple excitations can interact and alter each other's dynamics. By using the newer, less common technique, called two-color photon echo spectroscopy, the researchers could excite only the pathway in which [quantum] coherence occurs. Singling out this pathway revealed clear signatures for strong coupling between the electronic states and the vibrational modes of the protein matrix (phonons) in the algae's light-harvesting complexes. As Davis explained, this type of interaction is not what is expected from the classical models that have traditionally been used to describe light harvesting and energy transfer in photosynthesis. Our observation of strong coupling between the electronic states and the phonon modes of the protein matrix provides strong experimental evidence that classical treatment of these interactions is not sufficient, and that models including the microscopic details of the coupling interactions are indeed required, Davis said. The quantum nature of these interactions increases the scope for quantum effects to have an impact and enhances the possibility of coherent energy transfer in photosynthesis. In the future, the researchers plan to further extend the technique to investigate these quantum mechanical interactions and the role they play in light harvesting and energy transfer. We are currently exploring the dependence of these coherent interactions on a number of experimental parameters, including temperature, wavelength and polarization, Davis said. These results will enable us to explore the nature of the excited states, their interactions with the phonon modes of the protein matrix and the role they play in energy transfer. We also plan to investigate whether such long-lived coherences also exist between other states in these systems and ultimately whether coherence transfer between states occurs and is relevant for photosynthesis. attachment: winmail.dat
Re: [Vo]:Replacing powder is bad
I don't undesrtand that... what I undesrtand is that they have a portable unit (pump?) to remove the used powder, and put a new one but it depend on the meaning of renew it can simply mean : change, but as you propose, rejuvenante... I feel change more probable 2012/1/25 Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com Defkalion claims Hyperions are refueled in place without the need to uninstall modules while refueling. Nickel powder fuel is renewed in vacuum using Hyperion Recharge Units, a suitcase sized device developed by Defkalion. This tells me that the micro powder cannot be removed from the reaction vessel and an alternative rejuvenation method has been discovered to reactivate the spent powder to revive reactor performance. This is another indicator that DGT permanently affixes powder to the reactor heat transfer structure. The take away… I like this...Reviving the powder is good…DGT I don't like this...Replacing powder is bad,,,Rossi.
Re: [Vo]:Nickel honeycomb ?
If I was attempting to build a system from scratch, I would be tempted to stick as close as possible to what we know of the standard receipes used by others. The problem is that at the moment we don't understand the system to know what is important and what is not. My brother helped build a prototype stone crusher/sorter for a quarry and it worked a treat. They then built a proper one and it did not work at all. It turned out that the ricketyness of the prototype was essential for it to work properly. There may be critical ricketyness in the nickel nano-powder system. Nigel On 25/01/2012 19:28, mar...@krteknik.com wrote: Hello guys I have a q, i have been reading all the posts about the problems with energy transfer, core melts and so on . Why not embed the nickel / catalyst mix in a honeycomb, or other structure that gets easy acess for both H2 and heat trasnfer to the walls of the tube ? Is there any practical method of doing this? I have thought about covering steel or other material with nickel as so many other people, but in my mind that decrease the surface too much, a fungi or honeycomb like structure would maybe work, but how to make one ? Any ideas ? Marten
Re: [Vo]:Replacing powder is bad
Axil, I would agree that the best way to transfer heat is to electroplate/co-deposit the Nickel/catalyst on the walls of the kernal/core. Does the Hydrogen need to be purified to monatomic across a membrane? From their Spec: Atomic Hydrogen generation Method : Proprietary, embedded within reactor’s structure Maybe for a regen you need to add fresh Hydrogen and get rid of the stale stuff and just dust off the Nickel... On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 2:49 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: *http://renewable.50webs.com/fusion.html* *NEWS! * *Defkalion Green Technologies*http://www.defkalion-energy.com/homehas *announced (1/23/2012)*http://www.defkalion-energy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4t=926that they are now welcoming third party testing of their LENR reactors. They expect to market nickel-hydrogen* *Low Energy Nuclear Reaction (LENR*) *reactors in 2012 after government safety certifications are issued. Defkalion claims their reactors produce up to 32 times input power and are capable of outputting steam at temperatures up to 414 degrees Celsius. Their *Hyperion Modules* can be linked together to produce up to 5 megawatts of heat, and larger models may only need nickel powder refueling every 34 months. Defkalion claims Hyperions are refueled in place without the need to uninstall modules while refueling. Nickel powder fuel is renewed in vacuum using Hyperion Recharge Units, a suitcase sized device developed by Defkalion. Defkalion says they have received interest in license agreements from 850 companies based in 60 different countries around the world. With special attention focused on the following info: Defkalion claims Hyperions are refueled in place without the need to uninstall modules while refueling. Nickel powder fuel is renewed in vacuum using Hyperion Recharge Units, a suitcase sized device developed by Defkalion. This tells me that the micro powder cannot be removed from the reaction vessel and an alternative rejuvenation method has been discovered to reactivate the spent powder to revive reactor performance. This is another indicator that DGT permanently affixes powder to the reactor heat transfer structure. The take away… I like this...Reviving the powder is good…DGT I don't like this...Replacing powder is bad,,,Rossi.
Re: [Vo]:Ang.: [Vo]:Nickel honeycomb ?
Hydrogen is amazingly good for heat transfer. Rossi and Defkalion are both using H2 of 2.5-5MPa, and at 600°C that will have density of about 0.7kg/m³ or greater. At that density 4µm nickel powder particles (As defkalion are specifying) will need a hydrogen flow velocity of about 0.5m/s to pick it up against the force of gravity (from bernoulli's equation). Please Note that the following calculations are very basic, and not that accurate, but give some indication about the size of flow speeds in the reactor. If the centre of the reactor is 600°C and the walls are 350°C then there is about 0.2kg/m³ hydrogen density difference between them, (about 2N/m³ in earths gravitational field). A reactor height of 50mm with that density difference would give about 2x0.05= 0.1Pa of driving force, and that pressure (from bernoullis equation again with 0.7kg/m³ density) would be equal to the dynamic pressure of hydrogen flowing at about 0.5m/s. So the powder is probably almost being picked up and circulated by the hydrogen. If the reactor was (taller) then the circulation of hydrogen would get faster and the powder would almost certainly start to get slowly blown around making a fountain in the hot middle of the reactor that would fall down the colder walls, gradually circulating the powder around the reactor. Also if the powder was smaller diameter then it would take less H2 flow speed to lift it up. But even without the particles moving you can see that the hydrogen will circulate (convect) in the reactor, fountaining up in the hot middle and dropping down the cool sides. Any hot spots will also increase the flow speed of the hydrogen locally in that spot due to reduced hydrogen density. The overall circulation of hydrogen will work to even out the temperatures throughout the powder very quickly, and if you want to increase the flow speeds and heat transfer then it is useful to have a taller reactor to increase the driving pressure (like a thermosiphon). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermosiphon If you are very worried then you could also use a mechanical shaker to move the powder around and limit formation of hot spots. On 25 January 2012 21:20, mårten Sundling mar...@krteknik.com wrote: Hello Thanks for a great number of input. My concern have been that the powder might just sit there as a pile Be badly avaliable to the h2 and get so hot by the bad cooling that it melts, I'm BTW using micrometer powders at the moment by rossis specs, but it sounds like I will use nano powder I thought that I might overcome those hurdles by using a conductive porous substrate, but that might not be the case then. What's your opinion about using acetylene and nickel instead of nickel,carbon,h2 a idea that is floating around.. Marten Skickat från min HTC - Reply message - Från: Robert Lynn robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com Till: vortex-l@eskimo.com Rubrik: [Vo]:Nickel honeycomb ? Datum: ons, jan 25, 2012 22:00 I think are a many potential downsides to using bulk material substrates (foams, foils, wires) with nickel coatings. - you might get large and non-homogenous transient temperature changes throughout the reactor and this could lead to deformation and even breakup of large continuous scaffolds. - it prevents transport of powder throughout the reactor (which may be important for continuous operation in terms of subjecting the nickel to varying temperatures or physical impacts to create hydrogen flux through the nickel surface) - a foil type substrate may constrain or otherwise limit convective flow of hydrogen (particularly if there is thermal deformation of the substrate), allowing hot-spots to form and creating worse temperature inhomogeneities throughout the reactor. - thermal expansion and material crystalline structure phase changes caused by temperature change or hydrogen loading can lead to large dimensional mismatches and stresses between substrate and nickel - leading to the nickel coating flaking off etc, at which point why not just use powder anyway? - the processes by which you apply the nickel coating to the substrate may have limitations and so not be optimal for creating the exact chemical alloy makeup and surface topologies required for best LENR performance. - making nano-powder will almost certainly be cheaper than any plating procedure. - harder to recycle substrate with nickel coating - very easy to replace nickel powder in a reactor. - one or more of the above problems will probably impose a lower temperature limit on the process than the nickel powder would have by itself. Hydrogen convection driven by buoyancy will likely slowly agitate and transport nickel nano-particles throughout the reactor, with radiation at high temperatures and physical contact of the blowing nickel particles with the walls also enhancing heat transfer. That does not mean nickel on a substrate won't work, but it appears to come with more potential problems,
Re: [Vo]:Replacing powder is bad
But if depositing on the walls how would you get the massive surface area required? 4µm powder has about 0.4m²/gram of surface area, and using approximate (Rossi) figures of 100kW/kg then a 10kW unit needs about 100g or 40m² of surface area. It also creates more problems with recycling/replacing the nickel if it is necessary. I think simple buoyant convection and radiative heat transfer can do the job quite well with cheap and simple nano-powder. Much of the powder preparation work we hear about involves ball-milling oxides and then reducing them using hydrogen and vacuum heating cycles. Maybe refreshing the powder is as simple as oxidising it and then reducing it at elevated temperatures in hydrogen to remove some of the unwanted accumulated impurities and reset the crystalline structure of the Ni. Or maybe it does require the replacement of the powder to eliminate impurities, in which case large nickel plated substrates make the job a lot more expensive. On 25 January 2012 21:53, Chemical Engineer cheme...@gmail.com wrote: Axil, I would agree that the best way to transfer heat is to electroplate/co-deposit the Nickel/catalyst on the walls of the kernal/core. Does the Hydrogen need to be purified to monatomic across a membrane? From their Spec: Atomic Hydrogen generation Method : Proprietary, embedded within reactor’s structure Maybe for a regen you need to add fresh Hydrogen and get rid of the stale stuff and just dust off the Nickel... On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 2:49 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: *http://renewable.50webs.com/fusion.html* *NEWS! * *Defkalion Green Technologies*http://www.defkalion-energy.com/homehas *announced (1/23/2012)*http://www.defkalion-energy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4t=926that they are now welcoming third party testing of their LENR reactors. They expect to market nickel-hydrogen* *Low Energy Nuclear Reaction (LENR *) *reactors in 2012 after government safety certifications are issued. Defkalion claims their reactors produce up to 32 times input power and are capable of outputting steam at temperatures up to 414 degrees Celsius. Their *Hyperion Modules* can be linked together to produce up to 5 megawatts of heat, and larger models may only need nickel powder refueling every 34 months. Defkalion claims Hyperions are refueled in place without the need to uninstall modules while refueling. Nickel powder fuel is renewed in vacuum using Hyperion Recharge Units, a suitcase sized device developed by Defkalion. Defkalion says they have received interest in license agreements from 850 companies based in 60 different countries around the world. With special attention focused on the following info: Defkalion claims Hyperions are refueled in place without the need to uninstall modules while refueling. Nickel powder fuel is renewed in vacuum using Hyperion Recharge Units, a suitcase sized device developed by Defkalion. This tells me that the micro powder cannot be removed from the reaction vessel and an alternative rejuvenation method has been discovered to reactivate the spent powder to revive reactor performance. This is another indicator that DGT permanently affixes powder to the reactor heat transfer structure. The take away… I like this...Reviving the powder is good…DGT I don't like this...Replacing powder is bad,,,Rossi.
RE: [Vo]:Rossi's Best Chance
Earlier in the thread, hydrogen was mentioned as a control mechanism, or a possible factor to be purged at the onset of quiescence: I'm having trouble imagining that the existing reactor core has a pile of nickel, a hydrogen gas fitting, and a hydrogen release for anything short of emergency evacuation. If the hydrogen can be purged regularly, some very precise filtering would be necessary to prevent aerosolising nano-nickel particles and fouling any such relief valve From: jone...@pacbell.net To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: [Vo]:Rossi's Best Chance Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2012 11:14:53 -0800 -Original Message- From: Terry Blanton ... suppose it's those slightly different mass protons which are giving up mass that is not replenished by PAMD's sea. It would mean that new H2 would need to be added to the mix to get more ragged [sic - rugged?] proton mass. If Rossi restarts his eCatnapping reactor, do we know how he does it? Well, Rossi could purge and add more H2, for one thing. I do NOT know that is what he does, of course, or else I would be more assertive about the explanation. If he does purge and refill, and then it restarts as easily as it did the first time, then it is almost case-closed for this explanation having some validity. ... or QED, which in his case is a pun on itself :) J.
Re: [Vo]:Ang.: [Vo]:Nickel honeycomb ?
How do you cycle hydrogen into/out of the reactor kernal without blowing micro/nanopowder out of the reactor into the hydrogen system? I agree that a type of fluidized bed of micro/nano powder might work well if uniformly distributed On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 4:56 PM, Robert Lynn robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com wrote: Hydrogen is amazingly good for heat transfer. Rossi and Defkalion are both using H2 of 2.5-5MPa, and at 600°C that will have density of about 0.7kg/m³ or greater. At that density 4µm nickel powder particles (As defkalion are specifying) will need a hydrogen flow velocity of about 0.5m/s to pick it up against the force of gravity (from bernoulli's equation). Please Note that the following calculations are very basic, and not that accurate, but give some indication about the size of flow speeds in the reactor. If the centre of the reactor is 600°C and the walls are 350°C then there is about 0.2kg/m³ hydrogen density difference between them, (about 2N/m³ in earths gravitational field). A reactor height of 50mm with that density difference would give about 2x0.05= 0.1Pa of driving force, and that pressure (from bernoullis equation again with 0.7kg/m³ density) would be equal to the dynamic pressure of hydrogen flowing at about 0.5m/s. So the powder is probably almost being picked up and circulated by the hydrogen. If the reactor was (taller) then the circulation of hydrogen would get faster and the powder would almost certainly start to get slowly blown around making a fountain in the hot middle of the reactor that would fall down the colder walls, gradually circulating the powder around the reactor. Also if the powder was smaller diameter then it would take less H2 flow speed to lift it up. But even without the particles moving you can see that the hydrogen will circulate (convect) in the reactor, fountaining up in the hot middle and dropping down the cool sides. Any hot spots will also increase the flow speed of the hydrogen locally in that spot due to reduced hydrogen density. The overall circulation of hydrogen will work to even out the temperatures throughout the powder very quickly, and if you want to increase the flow speeds and heat transfer then it is useful to have a taller reactor to increase the driving pressure (like a thermosiphon). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermosiphon If you are very worried then you could also use a mechanical shaker to move the powder around and limit formation of hot spots. On 25 January 2012 21:20, mårten Sundling mar...@krteknik.com wrote: Hello Thanks for a great number of input. My concern have been that the powder might just sit there as a pile Be badly avaliable to the h2 and get so hot by the bad cooling that it melts, I'm BTW using micrometer powders at the moment by rossis specs, but it sounds like I will use nano powder I thought that I might overcome those hurdles by using a conductive porous substrate, but that might not be the case then. What's your opinion about using acetylene and nickel instead of nickel,carbon,h2 a idea that is floating around.. Marten Skickat från min HTC - Reply message - Från: Robert Lynn robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com Till: vortex-l@eskimo.com Rubrik: [Vo]:Nickel honeycomb ? Datum: ons, jan 25, 2012 22:00 I think are a many potential downsides to using bulk material substrates (foams, foils, wires) with nickel coatings. - you might get large and non-homogenous transient temperature changes throughout the reactor and this could lead to deformation and even breakup of large continuous scaffolds. - it prevents transport of powder throughout the reactor (which may be important for continuous operation in terms of subjecting the nickel to varying temperatures or physical impacts to create hydrogen flux through the nickel surface) - a foil type substrate may constrain or otherwise limit convective flow of hydrogen (particularly if there is thermal deformation of the substrate), allowing hot-spots to form and creating worse temperature inhomogeneities throughout the reactor. - thermal expansion and material crystalline structure phase changes caused by temperature change or hydrogen loading can lead to large dimensional mismatches and stresses between substrate and nickel - leading to the nickel coating flaking off etc, at which point why not just use powder anyway? - the processes by which you apply the nickel coating to the substrate may have limitations and so not be optimal for creating the exact chemical alloy makeup and surface topologies required for best LENR performance. - making nano-powder will almost certainly be cheaper than any plating procedure. - harder to recycle substrate with nickel coating - very easy to replace nickel powder in a reactor. - one or more of the above problems will probably impose a lower temperature limit on the process than the nickel powder would have by itself. Hydrogen
Re: [Vo]:Rossi's Best Chance
Agreed. I just posted something similar On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 5:29 PM, Robert Leguillon robert.leguil...@hotmail.com wrote: Earlier in the thread, hydrogen was mentioned as a control mechanism, or a possible factor to be purged at the onset of quiescence: I'm having trouble imagining that the existing reactor core has a pile of nickel, a hydrogen gas fitting, and a hydrogen release for anything short of emergency evacuation. If the hydrogen can be purged regularly, some very precise filtering would be necessary to prevent aerosolising nano-nickel particles and fouling any such relief valve From: jone...@pacbell.net To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: [Vo]:Rossi's Best Chance Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2012 11:14:53 -0800 -Original Message- From: Terry Blanton ... suppose it's those slightly different mass protons which are giving up mass that is not replenished by PAMD's sea. It would mean that new H2 would need to be added to the mix to get more ragged [sic - rugged?] proton mass. If Rossi restarts his eCatnapping reactor, do we know how he does it? Well, Rossi could purge and add more H2, for one thing. I do NOT know that is what he does, of course, or else I would be more assertive about the explanation. If he does purge and refill, and then it restarts as easily as it did the first time, then it is almost case-closed for this explanation having some validity. ... or QED, which in his case is a pun on itself :) J.
RE: [Vo]:Replacing powder is bad
From: Robert Lynn * 4µm powder has about 0.4m²/gram of surface area, Not necessarily the right comparison number to use here. Raney nickel, for instance, can arrive in 40 µm particles, before it is activated. After activation by leaching with lye, it is completely porous with a minimum of 10,000 times more internal surface area than the external area. Note: Raney nickel is a trademark of WR Grace Co. When someone claims not to use it, this does not mean that they do not use a functional equivalent. There are at least two dozen companies in China alone exporting the equivalent kind of nickel aluminum-alloy (not activated) as Raney, and although they may call it Raney they are not supposed to use that trademarked name. Jones
RE: [Vo]:Rossi's Best Chance
Not true at all ! Think about it, a incredibly simple solution to stop dispersal of powder is a solid proton conductor blocking the exit of the reactor. All the nickel stays in - only hydrogen goes through a proton conductor, and it exits fast, depending on the type. Many fail to realize how easily hydrogen can go through what appears to be solid. Even stainless shim stock works for this purpose. You do not have to use palladium as the proton conductor. From: Robert Leguillon Subject: RE: [Vo]:Rossi's Best Chance Earlier in the thread, hydrogen was mentioned as a control mechanism, or a possible factor to be purged at the onset of quiescence: I'm having trouble imagining that the existing reactor core has a pile of nickel, a hydrogen gas fitting, and a hydrogen release for anything short of emergency evacuation. If the hydrogen can be purged regularly, some very precise filtering would be necessary to prevent aerosolising nano-nickel particles and fouling any such relief valve ... suppose it's those slightly different mass protons which are giving up mass that is not replenished by PAMD's sea. It would mean that new H2 would need to be added to the mix to get more ragged [sic - rugged?] proton mass. If Rossi restarts his eCatnapping reactor, do we know how he does it? Well, Rossi could purge and add more H2, for one thing. I do NOT know that is what he does, of course, or else I would be more assertive about the explanation. If he does purge and refill, and then it restarts as easily as it did the first time, then it is almost case-closed for this explanation having some validity. ... or QED, which in his case is a pun on itself :) J.
Re: [Vo]:Ang.: [Vo]:Nickel honeycomb ?
Good question, I assume a filter of some sort, maybe include a vortex separator too. Cool the gas before the filter to make life easier. Filter is blown clean when you next refill. On 25 January 2012 22:35, Chemical Engineer cheme...@gmail.com wrote: How do you cycle hydrogen into/out of the reactor kernal without blowing micro/nanopowder out of the reactor into the hydrogen system? I agree that a type of fluidized bed of micro/nano powder might work well if uniformly distributed On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 4:56 PM, Robert Lynn robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com wrote: Hydrogen is amazingly good for heat transfer. Rossi and Defkalion are both using H2 of 2.5-5MPa, and at 600°C that will have density of about 0.7kg/m³ or greater. At that density 4µm nickel powder particles (As defkalion are specifying) will need a hydrogen flow velocity of about 0.5m/s to pick it up against the force of gravity (from bernoulli's equation). Please Note that the following calculations are very basic, and not that accurate, but give some indication about the size of flow speeds in the reactor. If the centre of the reactor is 600°C and the walls are 350°C then there is about 0.2kg/m³ hydrogen density difference between them, (about 2N/m³ in earths gravitational field). A reactor height of 50mm with that density difference would give about 2x0.05= 0.1Pa of driving force, and that pressure (from bernoullis equation again with 0.7kg/m³ density) would be equal to the dynamic pressure of hydrogen flowing at about 0.5m/s. So the powder is probably almost being picked up and circulated by the hydrogen. If the reactor was (taller) then the circulation of hydrogen would get faster and the powder would almost certainly start to get slowly blown around making a fountain in the hot middle of the reactor that would fall down the colder walls, gradually circulating the powder around the reactor. Also if the powder was smaller diameter then it would take less H2 flow speed to lift it up. But even without the particles moving you can see that the hydrogen will circulate (convect) in the reactor, fountaining up in the hot middle and dropping down the cool sides. Any hot spots will also increase the flow speed of the hydrogen locally in that spot due to reduced hydrogen density. The overall circulation of hydrogen will work to even out the temperatures throughout the powder very quickly, and if you want to increase the flow speeds and heat transfer then it is useful to have a taller reactor to increase the driving pressure (like a thermosiphon). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermosiphon If you are very worried then you could also use a mechanical shaker to move the powder around and limit formation of hot spots. On 25 January 2012 21:20, mårten Sundling mar...@krteknik.com wrote: Hello Thanks for a great number of input. My concern have been that the powder might just sit there as a pile Be badly avaliable to the h2 and get so hot by the bad cooling that it melts, I'm BTW using micrometer powders at the moment by rossis specs, but it sounds like I will use nano powder I thought that I might overcome those hurdles by using a conductive porous substrate, but that might not be the case then. What's your opinion about using acetylene and nickel instead of nickel,carbon,h2 a idea that is floating around.. Marten Skickat från min HTC - Reply message - Från: Robert Lynn robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com Till: vortex-l@eskimo.com Rubrik: [Vo]:Nickel honeycomb ? Datum: ons, jan 25, 2012 22:00 I think are a many potential downsides to using bulk material substrates (foams, foils, wires) with nickel coatings. - you might get large and non-homogenous transient temperature changes throughout the reactor and this could lead to deformation and even breakup of large continuous scaffolds. - it prevents transport of powder throughout the reactor (which may be important for continuous operation in terms of subjecting the nickel to varying temperatures or physical impacts to create hydrogen flux through the nickel surface) - a foil type substrate may constrain or otherwise limit convective flow of hydrogen (particularly if there is thermal deformation of the substrate), allowing hot-spots to form and creating worse temperature inhomogeneities throughout the reactor. - thermal expansion and material crystalline structure phase changes caused by temperature change or hydrogen loading can lead to large dimensional mismatches and stresses between substrate and nickel - leading to the nickel coating flaking off etc, at which point why not just use powder anyway? - the processes by which you apply the nickel coating to the substrate may have limitations and so not be optimal for creating the exact chemical alloy makeup and surface topologies required for best LENR performance. - making nano-powder will almost certainly be cheaper than any plating procedure. -
Re: [Vo]:Problem with flow calorimetry in Defkalion system
Am I right in thinking that if the Hyperion is roughly cylindrical, then the heat flow between the inner and outer surfaces is calculated as in A hollow cylinder http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Heat_Transfer/Conduction#A_hollow_cylinder For a cylinder of length L : inner R1 at T1, outer R2 at T2 Q = 2 pi k (T1 - T2) / ln ( R2/ R1 ) Since this cylinder is surrounded by another insulating cylinder we don't have to worry how it gets rid of the heat (radiation,convection,conduction) to the surrounding air. (I think I'll have another go with the Elmer FEM program).
Re: [Vo]:Problem with flow calorimetry in Defkalion system : PROPOSAL
At 04:13 PM 1/25/2012, Alan J Fletcher wrote: Am I right in thinking that if the Hyperion is roughly cylindrical, then the heat flow between the inner and outer surfaces is calculated as in A hollow cylinder http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Heat_Transfer/Conduction#A_hollow_cylinder For a cylinder of length L : inner R1 at T1, outer R2 at T2 Q = 2 pi k (T1 - T2) / ln ( R2/ R1 ) Since this cylinder is surrounded by another insulating cylinder we don't have to worry how it gets rid of the heat (radiation,convection,conduction) to the surrounding air. Here's a method: http://www.chooyuchem.com/product_tputty.html 1. Suppose the hyperion is roughly cyclindrical, with inner radius R1 and outer R2 2. Wrap the roughly cylindrical hyperion in a HIGH conductivity putty (5 W/mK), forming a cylinder of R3 at T3 High conductivity is chosen to even out any hot spots. 3. Wrap that cylinder with another cylinder of LOW conductivity (2 W/mK), forming a cylinder of R4 at T4 4. Wrap that with another HIGH conductivity cylinder with radius R5 at T5 5. Use VERY good insulation on the ends of the cylinder (eg aerogel) The two high-conductivity zones will even out any irregularities on the surface of the hyperion (shape and thermal profile) AND any irregularities on the outside surface (different convection, conduction) I think that calculating Q from T3 to T4 would be very accurate.
RE: [Vo]:Problem with flow calorimetry in Defkalion system
I was under the impression that the physical shape of Rossi's core was similar to what was used in DGT's Hyperion? More of a low-height, rectangular shape... -m -Original Message- From: Alan J Fletcher [mailto:a...@well.com] Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2012 4:14 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Problem with flow calorimetry in Defkalion system Am I right in thinking that if the Hyperion is roughly cylindrical, then the heat flow between the inner and outer surfaces is calculated as in A hollow cylinder http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Heat_Transfer/Conduction#A_hollow_cylinder For a cylinder of length L : inner R1 at T1, outer R2 at T2 Q = 2 pi k (T1 - T2) / ln ( R2/ R1 ) Since this cylinder is surrounded by another insulating cylinder we don't have to worry how it gets rid of the heat (radiation,convection,conduction) to the surrounding air. (I think I'll have another go with the Elmer FEM program).
Re: [Vo]:Resonances: Coupling between electronic states and vibrational modes (phonons)...
Along those lines, you might want to read - PROGRESS ON DUAL LASER EXPERIMENTS http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/Hagelsteinprogresson.pdf EXCERPT: We have continued our experiments using duel laser stimulation of electrochemically loaded PdDx. In earlier work, we used two properly oriented and polarized tunable diode lasers which provided stimulation at optical frequencies; interestingly, we found that the excess heat issensitive to the beat difference frequency. Low-level thermal signals are observed to be triggered at apparent resonances when the difference frequency is 8.3, 15.3 and 20.4 THz Perhaps, also related is the ultrasonic Superwave LENR stimulation used by Energetics Technologies - http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/DardikIultrasonic.pdf My impression is that their source has a wideband discrete spectrum of phase-locked frequencies - so that the same stimulus signal is repeatedly swept.
[Vo]:Interview with jean paul biberian about cold fusion
http://www.knowledge-tv.com/Lafusionfroide.html Recently noticed this video interview from Jean Paul Biberian apparently made in early oct 2011. The interview is in french, so for non french readers here is a really quick summary : First, Biberian talks at length about the history of cold fusion and it's suppression. Then about rossi's progress and his hopes for the future of Ni H cells. At the end you will notice Biberian running an experiment on an Ni-H reactor.
