Re: [Vo]:Mizuno slides coming
Okay, I started from scratch with a new version of the PowerPoint slides. The PDF file shrank from 40,060 KB down to 4,591 KB. Acrobat is unpredictable. It is the format where documents go to die. I will upload this version this morning and then go back to yesterday's version and replace the Japanese text in some of the graphs later on. - Jed
RE: [Vo]:Magnetic permeability and LENR
Jones said [snip] IOW - an oscillation between bound and unbound modes of two atoms in a nanocavity creates a strong near-field magnetic flux at terahertz frequency which diminishes rapidly with distance. Thus the magnetic permeability of the walls of the cavity are important to capture a percentage of that flux. Mu metal is at least 10 times more capable (higher permeability) than nickel to capture near field flux.[/snip] Jones, Nicely said, this idea is a real good candidate for linkage of energy to the walls and plays into issue of atomic vs molecular populations and runaway or starvation of the effect. It would fit into the puzzle nicely! Fran _ From: Jones Beene [mailto:jone...@pacbell.net] Sent: Wednesday, March 26, 2014 12:44 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: EXTERNAL: RE: [Vo]:Magnetic permeability and LENR To clarify: If the LENR reaction, at any stage, involves hydrogen flipping rapidly from ortho to para alignment (THz) then that spin-energy could be converted to heat by Mu Metal foil as both the electrode and flux sink the tritium reaction which occurs with deuterium (Claytor) could be the result of heat having been extracted instead of the cause of that heat. This is not as crazy as it sounds, at least not in QM. Imagine a large number of nanocavities which have been formed into nickel, using Mizuno's glow discharge technique. The SEM images indicate that these cavities are like surface blisters, raised on the formerly flat surface. D2 is contained therein and at a threshold temperature, can go into a spin-flipping mode where the molecules flip from ortho-to-para alignment rapidly and/or from atomic to molecular form (or both) like a see-saw. The effective magnetic field of any atom of deuterium is 12.5 T but the molecule is diamagnetic. That creates a strong changing flux pattern (which may not be conserved) but that near-field flux would not be noticed unless the cavity walls can convert it into heat. IOW - an oscillation between bound and unbound modes of two atoms in a nanocavity creates a strong near-field magnetic flux at terahertz frequency which diminishes rapidly with distance. Thus the magnetic permeability of the walls of the cavity are important to capture a percentage of that flux. Mu metal is at least 10 times more capable (higher permeability) than nickel to capture near field flux. Once the two deuterium atoms have given up significant levels of spin energy to their surroundings, then the Oppenheimer-Philips effect happens at a reduced threshold to give tritium. OP is a quantum effect - not a thermonuclear effect. It is the result of excess heat having been already extracted - and not the cause of that heat. In the case of hydrogen, no secondary fusion reaction (or side-effect reaction) is possible as is the case with bosonic deuterium (due to Pauli exclusion). The result with H2 is two energy depleted protons which can no longer shed energy and effectively go cold, or else they capture fractional electrons at close radius and go dark. Mills defines dark energy as highly redundant ground state hydrogen - but he may have missed that the primary way protons can do this is via magnetic spin coupling - and not his way - which involves impossibly high levels of ionization. Both ways are possible, even in the same reaction - but the Rossi effect does not require extreme ionization, and Mills does require it.
[Vo]:Yoshino slides from 2014 MIT Colloquium
Finally! The slides are here: http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/YoshinoHreplicable.pdf I will replace a few of the graphs that still have Japanese text in them later. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Magnetic permeability and LENR
Fran, Jones, Frank, Axil, Dave, etal-- I think that Jones summary is right on. Too many things fit together. It deserves a paper. If nowhere else with Jed. Bob - Original Message - From: Roarty, Francis X To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thursday, March 27, 2014 7:29 AM Subject: RE: [Vo]:Magnetic permeability and LENR Jones said [snip] IOW - an oscillation between bound and unbound modes of two atoms in a nanocavity creates a strong near-field magnetic flux at terahertz frequency which diminishes rapidly with distance. Thus the magnetic permeability of the walls of the cavity are important to capture a percentage of that flux. Mu metal is at least 10 times more capable (higher permeability) than nickel to capture near field flux.[/snip] Jones, Nicely said, this idea is a real good candidate for linkage of energy to the walls and plays into issue of atomic vs molecular populations and runaway or starvation of the effect. It would fit into the puzzle nicely! Fran _ From: Jones Beene [mailto:jone...@pacbell.net] Sent: Wednesday, March 26, 2014 12:44 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: EXTERNAL: RE: [Vo]:Magnetic permeability and LENR To clarify: If the LENR reaction, at any stage, involves hydrogen flipping rapidly from ortho to para alignment (THz) then that spin-energy could be converted to heat by Mu Metal foil as both the electrode and flux sink.. the tritium reaction which occurs with deuterium (Claytor) could be the result of heat having been extracted instead of the cause of that heat. This is not as crazy as it sounds, at least not in QM. Imagine a large number of nanocavities which have been formed into nickel, using Mizuno's glow discharge technique. The SEM images indicate that these cavities are like surface blisters, raised on the formerly flat surface. D2 is contained therein and at a threshold temperature, can go into a spin-flipping mode where the molecules flip from ortho-to-para alignment rapidly and/or from atomic to molecular form (or both) like a see-saw. The effective magnetic field of any atom of deuterium is 12.5 T but the molecule is diamagnetic. That creates a strong changing flux pattern (which may not be conserved) but that near-field flux would not be noticed unless the cavity walls can convert it into heat. IOW - an oscillation between bound and unbound modes of two atoms in a nanocavity creates a strong near-field magnetic flux at terahertz frequency which diminishes rapidly with distance. Thus the magnetic permeability of the walls of the cavity are important to capture a percentage of that flux. Mu metal is at least 10 times more capable (higher permeability) than nickel to capture near field flux. Once the two deuterium atoms have given up significant levels of spin energy to their surroundings, then the Oppenheimer-Philips effect happens at a reduced threshold to give tritium. OP is a quantum effect - not a thermonuclear effect. It is the result of excess heat having been already extracted - and not the cause of that heat. In the case of hydrogen, no secondary fusion reaction (or side-effect reaction) is possible as is the case with bosonic deuterium (due to Pauli exclusion). The result with H2 is two energy depleted protons which can no longer shed energy and effectively go cold, or else they capture fractional electrons at close radius and go dark. Mills defines dark energy as highly redundant ground state hydrogen - but he may have missed that the primary way protons can do this is via magnetic spin coupling - and not his way - which involves impossibly high levels of ionization. Both ways are possible, even in the same reaction - but the Rossi effect does not require extreme ionization, and Mills does require it.
Re: [Vo]:Magnetic permeability and LENR
I agree, that is good stuff, even I can understand parts of it. On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 11:11 AM, Bob Cook frobertc...@hotmail.com wrote: Fran, Jones, Frank, Axil, Dave, etal-- I think that Jones summary is right on. Too many things fit together. It deserves a paper. If nowhere else with Jed. Bob - Original Message - *From:* Roarty, Francis X francis.x.roa...@lmco.com *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com *Sent:* Thursday, March 27, 2014 7:29 AM *Subject:* RE: [Vo]:Magnetic permeability and LENR Jones said [snip] IOW - an oscillation between bound and unbound modes of two atoms in a nanocavity creates a strong near-field magnetic flux at terahertz frequency which diminishes rapidly with distance. Thus the magnetic permeability of the walls of the cavity are important to capture a percentage of that flux. Mu metal is at least 10 times more capable (higher permeability) than nickel to capture near field flux.[/snip] Jones, Nicely said, this idea is a real good candidate for linkage of energy to the walls and plays into issue of atomic vs molecular populations and runaway or starvation of the effect. It would fit into the puzzle nicely! Fran _ *From:* Jones Beene [mailto:jone...@pacbell.net jone...@pacbell.net] *Sent:* Wednesday, March 26, 2014 12:44 PM *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com *Subject:* EXTERNAL: RE: [Vo]:Magnetic permeability and LENR To clarify: If the LENR reaction, at any stage, involves hydrogen flipping rapidly from ortho to para alignment (THz) then that spin-energy could be converted to heat by Mu Metal foil as both the electrode and flux sink the tritium reaction which occurs with deuterium (Claytor) could be the result of heat having been extracted instead of the cause of that heat. This is not as crazy as it sounds, at least not in QM. Imagine a large number of nanocavities which have been formed into nickel, using Mizuno's glow discharge technique. The SEM images indicate that these cavities are like surface blisters, raised on the formerly flat surface. D2 is contained therein and at a threshold temperature, can go into a spin-flipping mode where the molecules flip from ortho-to-para alignment rapidly and/or from atomic to molecular form (or both) like a see-saw. The effective magnetic field of any atom of deuterium is 12.5 T but the molecule is diamagnetic. That creates a strong changing flux pattern (which may not be conserved) but that near-field flux would not be noticed unless the cavity walls can convert it into heat. IOW - an oscillation between bound and unbound modes of two atoms in a nanocavity creates a strong near-field magnetic flux at terahertz frequency which diminishes rapidly with distance. Thus the magnetic permeability of the walls of the cavity are important to capture a percentage of that flux. Mu metal is at least 10 times more capable (higher permeability) than nickel to capture near field flux. Once the two deuterium atoms have given up significant levels of spin energy to their surroundings, then the Oppenheimer-Philips effect happens at a reduced threshold to give tritium. OP is a quantum effect - not a thermonuclear effect. It is the result of excess heat having been already extracted - and not the cause of that heat. In the case of hydrogen, no secondary fusion reaction (or side-effect reaction) is possible as is the case with bosonic deuterium (due to Pauli exclusion). The result with H2 is two energy depleted protons which can no longer shed energy and effectively go cold, or else they capture fractional electrons at close radius and go dark. Mills defines dark energy as highly redundant ground state hydrogen - but he may have missed that the primary way protons can do this is via magnetic spin coupling - and not his way - which involves impossibly high levels of ionization. Both ways are possible, even in the same reaction - but the Rossi effect does not require extreme ionization, and Mills does require it.
RE: [Vo]:Mizuno slides coming
From: Jed Rothwell I will upload this version this morning and then go back to yesterday's version and replace the Japanese text in some of the graphs later on. Thanks to Jed from all of us ! This is most informative, and possibly it is the most important single document in the LENR field to date. For vorticians on the far-fringe, slide 54 could be the most important information in this presentation. Mizuno says Gas of M/e=2 (2D or H2+) appears to be the final product. And the obvious interpretation, since monatomic deuterium is almost impossible to justify is that after the long run, with massive excess energy above chemical - what is left in the reactor is an increased pressure of hydrogen gas, when deuterium was the starting gas. Thus the gain derives from deuterium stripping - but not to helium. And the pressure increase could mean that some of the neutrons which are stripped are decaying back to hydrogen providing more actual molecules of gas than was present at the start ! This is inconsistent with the final product of fusion reactions, which is known to be 4He. Thus, Mizuno is telling us that the traditional explanation for gain, which is deuterium transmuting to helium - GOING BACK 24 YEARS is WRONG. There is no other way to state it. Sorry for the caps, and the amazement of this conclusion - but this could be HUGE in the big picture, since this is perhaps the most important experiment in the field in many years in terms of length of run, net gain, quality of instrumentation, and thoroughness. More on further implications of the discovery that deuterium in not transmuting to helium, later. attachment: winmail.dat
Re: [Vo]:Mizuno slides coming
Going from D to H should be endothermic. Harry On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 11:37 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: From: Jed Rothwell I will upload this version this morning and then go back to yesterday's version and replace the Japanese text in some of the graphs later on. Thanks to Jed from all of us ! This is most informative, and possibly it is the most important single document in the LENR field to date. For vorticians on the far-fringe, slide 54 could be the most important information in this presentation. Mizuno says Gas of M/e=2 (2D or H2+) appears to be the final product. And the obvious interpretation, since monatomic deuterium is almost impossible to justify is that after the long run, with massive excess energy above chemical - what is left in the reactor is an increased pressure of hydrogen gas, when deuterium was the starting gas. Thus the gain derives from deuterium stripping - but not to helium. And the pressure increase could mean that some of the neutrons which are stripped are decaying back to hydrogen providing more actual molecules of gas than was present at the start ! This is inconsistent with the final product of fusion reactions, which is known to be 4He. Thus, Mizuno is telling us that the traditional explanation for gain, which is deuterium transmuting to helium - GOING BACK 24 YEARS is WRONG. There is no other way to state it. Sorry for the caps, and the amazement of this conclusion - but this could be HUGE in the big picture, since this is perhaps the most important experiment in the field in many years in terms of length of run, net gain, quality of instrumentation, and thoroughness. More on further implications of the discovery that deuterium in not transmuting to helium, later.
Re: [Vo]:The prospects for LENR deployment
Axil, No I have not read those articles. A brief look told me that I have had some of the information in other forums. I will look through the entire set of documents later this week. I appreciate the articles, they certainly have value. In addition the articles will improve my knowledge - so Thank You. I appreciate your dedication to the issue. My point is that we need more than one philosophy in order to sort out how LENR will be explained. You are actually using old time knowledge to support your theory and I think that is required. Tesla had his moments but he also managed to leave a lot of holes in the documentation I think. Do not blame the government. Tesla could have secured that information found its way to 'the people'. Papp, Moray et al. they are either very smart but useless in leaving behind a theory documented so later generations could benefit or they were scam artists. I do not know and I am not accusing either one. However, there are mystical stories involved and that would not need to be. It has been relatively easy to communicate since Gutenberg. There is a say what is poorly communicated is based on a weak thought. I think many of the people referred to failed in communication and there is no excuse for that. Was it because of a illogical idea ? As we talk about the deployment one need to engage other disciplines also. I am not looking for a job as I am too old to engage in a venture of this magnitude. However, people with entrepreneurial skills and understanding of marketing and finance are key to get deployment. If you think that will be automatic as the physical scientists find the answer you have to stop and think again. Mr. Tesla is a good example. I know that many people say that he was misunderstood and that J.P. Morgan is accused of stopping his ideas as he saw no way to profit from his endless free electricity. If it was so, then Tesla's mistake was to not seek support from people with the financial knowledge. You can blame JPM but he looked after his interest - good or bad - Tesla failed because he concentrated on the thing he knew. He did not fail because JPM did not do what Tesla thought right. There is a need to take responsibility for one's own mistakes. Keep up looking for the answer but listen to others and engage specialists when need be and not too late is my advice. Best Regards , Lennart Thornros www.StrategicLeadershipSac.com lenn...@thornros.com +1 916 436 1899 6140 Horseshoe Bar Road Suite G, Loomis CA 95650 Productivity is never an accident. It is always the result of a commitment to excellence, intelligent planning, and focused effort. PJM On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 8:51 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: Have you read this? Fusion by Pseudo-Particles Part 1 http://www.egely.hu/letoltes/Fusion-by-Pseudo-Particles-Part1.pdf Part 2 http://www.egely.hu/letoltes/Fusion-by-Pseudo-Particles-Part2.pdf Part 3 http://www.egely.hu/letoltes/Fusion-by-Pseudo-Particles-Part3.pdf This is the story of how many times that LENR has been discovered and lost since the time of Tesla. I will try my best to make sure that this loss does not happen again. On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 11:42 PM, Lennart Thornros lenn...@thornros.comwrote: AXIL, Nobody would be unhappy if we have a LENR product this. year. However deployment is several years out. Ido hope you are right. We do agree that the poligical issues are bigger and I say their is a need for other economical, organizational issues you do not want to see. I do not underestimate the power of the establishment. They are sidestepped bythe long and not agreed to existence of LENR for 25 years are here playing in the hands of normal people. I do not compare cellphones to LENR. Cell phones is just a modern technology being implemented. So from implementation point ofviw they have similarities. Draw from old experiences. Yes Axil greed is here you did not know but it has been here for some time now:) Yeah there is people trying to do harm. Sorry in the long run they do not count. Good luck solving the theory. I will go to sweden (if alife) to see you accept the Nobel price:) On Mar 26, 2014 5:27 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: I am sure your statements has merit. I am not able to determine how accurate you are. The chances are better than even that this will be determined by the end of this year. I do know that it requires that one utilise old experience and new found techniques and all other resources to reach the final stage. The technical challenges are easy compared to the political ones. There are no old experiences that can guide the development of LENR. It is unprecedented and world changing. If this product holds what it promises. It is to late for anyone to keep it away from a commercialization. You underestimate the power of the military industrial complex and the desire for security and military supremacy in the US.
RE: [Vo]:Mizuno slides coming
Neutron decay is exothermic, but the stripping reaction itself - where the neutron is separated from deuterium involves kinetic energy depletion - so yes, the net reaction is not necessarily gainful unless the kinetic energy of the deuteron is supplied in a gainful way, or unless the bond energy is depleted - such as in the nanocavity using a mechanism related to Casimir - cavity QM or spin coupling. The free neutron mass is slightly larger than that of a proton. The lifetime is about 15 minutes. 939.565378 MeV compared to 938.272046 MeV would be the standard values. This is why the Oppenheimer Philips (stripping) reaction could be extremely important to LENR and it has been almost neglected in the past. It should be noted that in the parallel thread on vortex today (Magnetic permeability and LENR) that energy depletion of the deuteron, in the nickel cavity due to spin coupling, could lower the binding energy so that the OP effect happens at a much lower threshold than usual. From: H Veeder Going from D to H should be endothermic. Harry I will upload this version this morning and then go back to yesterday's version and replace the Japanese text in some of the graphs later on. Thanks to Jed from all of us ! This is most informative, and possibly it is the most important single document in the LENR field to date. For vorticians on the far-fringe, slide 54 could be the most important information in this presentation. Mizuno says Gas of M/e=2 (2D or H2+) appears to be the final product. And the obvious interpretation, since monatomic deuterium is almost impossible to justify is that after the long run, with massive excess energy above chemical - what is left in the reactor is an increased pressure of hydrogen gas, when deuterium was the starting gas. Thus the gain derives from deuterium stripping - but not to helium. And the pressure increase could mean that some of the neutrons which are stripped are decaying back to hydrogen providing more actual molecules of gas than was present at the start ! This is inconsistent with the final product of fusion reactions, which is known to be 4He. Thus, Mizuno is telling us that the traditional explanation for gain, which is deuterium transmuting to helium - GOING BACK 24 YEARS is WRONG. There is no other way to state it. Sorry for the caps, and the amazement of this conclusion - but this could be HUGE in the big picture, since this is perhaps the most important experiment in the field in many years in terms of length of run, net gain, quality of instrumentation, and thoroughness. More on further implications of the discovery that deuterium in not transmuting to helium, later.
Re: [Vo]:Mizuno slides coming
Transmutation of neutrons into protons is consistent with the posit that p-mesons are catalyzed out of a degenerate vacuum forced by the application of extreme magnetic fields. for reference: *The **P **and **A **mesons in strong abelian magnetic field in SU(2) lattice gauge theory.* http://arxiv.org/pdf/1203.5699.pdf On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 12:17 PM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: Neutron decay is exothermic, but the stripping reaction itself - where the neutron is separated from deuterium involves kinetic energy depletion - so yes, the net reaction is not necessarily gainful unless the kinetic energy of the deuteron is supplied in a gainful way, or unless the bond energy is depleted - such as in the nanocavity using a mechanism related to Casimir - cavity QM or spin coupling. The free neutron mass is slightly larger than that of a proton. The lifetime is about 15 minutes. 939.565378 MeV compared to 938.272046 MeV would be the standard values. This is why the Oppenheimer Philips (stripping) reaction could be extremely important to LENR and it has been almost neglected in the past. It should be noted that in the parallel thread on vortex today (Magnetic permeability and LENR) that energy depletion of the deuteron, in the nickel cavity due to spin coupling, could lower the binding energy so that the OP effect happens at a much lower threshold than usual. *From:* H Veeder Going from D to H should be endothermic. Harry I will upload this version this morning and then go back to yesterday's version and replace the Japanese text in some of the graphs later on. Thanks to Jed from all of us ! This is most informative, and possibly it is the most important single document in the LENR field to date. For vorticians on the far-fringe, slide 54 could be the most important information in this presentation. Mizuno says Gas of M/e=2 (2D or H2+) appears to be the final product. And the obvious interpretation, since monatomic deuterium is almost impossible to justify is that after the long run, with massive excess energy above chemical - what is left in the reactor is an increased pressure of hydrogen gas, when deuterium was the starting gas. Thus the gain derives from deuterium stripping - but not to helium. And the pressure increase could mean that some of the neutrons which are stripped are decaying back to hydrogen providing more actual molecules of gas than was present at the start ! This is inconsistent with the final product of fusion reactions, which is known to be 4He. Thus, Mizuno is telling us that the traditional explanation for gain, which is deuterium transmuting to helium - GOING BACK 24 YEARS is WRONG. There is no other way to state it. Sorry for the caps, and the amazement of this conclusion - but this could be HUGE in the big picture, since this is perhaps the most important experiment in the field in many years in terms of length of run, net gain, quality of instrumentation, and thoroughness. More on further implications of the discovery that deuterium in not transmuting to helium, later.
Re: [Vo]:Yoshino slides from 2014 MIT Colloquium
Thank you Jed, I have added your version to the Audio files page: http://coldfusionnow.org/2014-cflanr-colloquium-at-mit-audio-files/ Ruby On 3/27/14, 7:40 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote: Finally! The slides are here: http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/YoshinoHreplicable.pdf -- Ruby Carat r...@coldfusionnow.org Skype ruby-carat www.coldfusionnow.org
Re: [Vo]:Yoshino slides from 2014 MIT Colloquium
Thanks Jed. I reviewed the slides and find them most interesting. Slide 23 shows the metal after activation. Does the HV discharge lead to bubbles or are the visible structures holes left in the metal? Could bubbles be a result of local melting of the nickel followed by surface tension drawing the molten metal into blobs? This is a process that I am not familiar with and perhaps someone might explain the structure. Also, how critical is the amount of electrical energy released during each discharge? Does too much energy lead to bumps that are too large? Likewise, would too little energy cause the structures to cease to form? Of course I have to wonder how consistent the surface features are among the many mesh particles. Here, I am curious about how the inner particles are effected by the discharge when they are shielded by the outer ones. Dave -Original Message- From: Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thu, Mar 27, 2014 10:41 am Subject: [Vo]:Yoshino slides from 2014 MIT Colloquium Finally! The slides are here: http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/YoshinoHreplicable.pdf I will replace a few of the graphs that still have Japanese text in them later. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Yoshino slides from 2014 MIT Colloquium
This surface preparation very similar to what Piantelli does to the surface of his nickel bars. Polaritons will be localized in a vortex by either cavities or bumps or both. This is called Anderson localization. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anderson_localization On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 1:15 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: Thanks Jed. I reviewed the slides and find them most interesting. Slide 23 shows the metal after activation. Does the HV discharge lead to bubbles or are the visible structures holes left in the metal? Could bubbles be a result of local melting of the nickel followed by surface tension drawing the molten metal into blobs? This is a process that I am not familiar with and perhaps someone might explain the structure. Also, how critical is the amount of electrical energy released during each discharge? Does too much energy lead to bumps that are too large? Likewise, would too little energy cause the structures to cease to form? Of course I have to wonder how consistent the surface features are among the many mesh particles. Here, I am curious about how the inner particles are effected by the discharge when they are shielded by the outer ones. Dave -Original Message- From: Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thu, Mar 27, 2014 10:41 am Subject: [Vo]:Yoshino slides from 2014 MIT Colloquium Finally! The slides are here: http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/YoshinoHreplicable.pdf I will replace a few of the graphs that still have Japanese text in them later. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Yoshino slides from 2014 MIT Colloquium
It remind me some reports of tritium being produced then consumed... experiments in BARC ? result are strange... interesting. 2014-03-27 15:40 GMT+01:00 Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com: Finally! The slides are here: http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/YoshinoHreplicable.pdf I will replace a few of the graphs that still have Japanese text in them later. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Who has the best Stirling Engine?
Not due to environment, all kinematic (=Siemens style 4 cylinder alpha arrangement) are fundamentally flawed due to highly stressed non-lubricated piston rod seals that only last a few months in continuous use. Alternative free-piston engines (eg infinia) are screwed due to very high tolerances required for gas lubricated bearings/seals and low speed heavy generators. Stirling engines are the perpetual bridesmaids of the heat engine world. Cyclone power looking good if they can deliver the 30%+ eff promised. On 27 March 2014 04:37, AlanG a...@magicsound.us wrote: I believe the SES Stirling engine was designed by Kockums. It had reliability and maintenance problems in the dusty desert environment of the Maricopa solar plant, but is claimed to work well in the original submarine application: http://www.kockums.se/en/products-services/submarines/stirling-aip-system/ AlanG On 3/24/2014 7:42 PM, Kevin O'Malley wrote: There are a few efforts that look like they might break out in 2015, whether it's Rossi or Brullion or Defkalion or whomever. All of them would need to convert heat to electricity. That means a Stirling engine, unless you believe the guys at Deuo Dynamics who have a direct thermoelectric conversion in their LENR diode. Which Stirling Engine is the best? Cyclone Power? They have Dr. Kim Infinia? bankrupt, sold Stirling stuff to qenergy.com Dean Kamen? The Segway inventor went silent on his Stirling patent www.stirlingengine.com/*kamen/dean*_*kamen*_patent.html Any others worth looking at? When LENR hits big, stirling cycle engines will have their day in the sun.
RE: [Vo]:Mizuno slides coming
Attention water-heads (Mizuno literally means 'From Water') Here is another weird and wonderful implication of the recent Mizuno paper which would explain how two deuterons react in such a way as to provide more energy than chemical but with few gamma rays and few neutrons - and with lots of hydrogen as the ash. Imagine that: hydrogen is the ash ! To explain this we must think outside the box, which is the same as inside the cavity. This could be called a QM bi-stripping reaction. It can only happen with two deuterons, and probably with the added requirement of nanocavity confinement. Heisenberg is involved. When a neutron decays to a proton, about 1.3 MeV would be released. But the extended half-life of free neutrons means this energy is not normally available instantaneously. This is where QM enters the picture. The mass of the deuteron is 1875.613 MeV. The mass of a free neutron plus a free proton is 1877.8374 - thus about 2.2 MeV would be required (to be supplied via kinetic energy) in order to split the deuteron - without QM being involved. The net deficit of this reaction is thus ~900 keV. This is why no one ever imagined Oppenheimer Philips as being relevant before now. It looks endothermic, without Heisenberg. However, one can surmise that with time alteration or compression - if two deuterons approach each other so that both undergo the OP splitting reaction instantaneously as a result of the single impact, then it is possible that the same 2.2 MeV of kinetic energy results in a net energy release of 2.6 MeV (from two neutron decays) but the two neutrons have decayed to protons instantly, instead of with an extended half-life. This could indeed be an expected result of Heisenberg uncertainty and other QM principles. Thus the net reaction gain is 400 keV. The big stretch of the imagination is that the same kinetic energy can split both atoms at the same time using what can only be called a quantum time alteration and borrowed energy from the net reaction. Admittedly, this is a stretch, but isn't everything in QM? Adding QM into the mix, we can surmise that most of the 2.2 kinetic energy deficit is supplied from the net energy of the two neutron decay reactions, not a single decay - and also that the normal half life of neutrons is greatly compressed to supply this net energy of 2.6 MeV (2 x 1.3 MeV) as part of the borrowed input. Only then is the net reaction gainful and the beauty of it is that 4 resultant protons carry off the 400 keV net gain - with approximately 100 keV in kinetic energy each, which is at a level which is low enough and consistent with low or no gamma. and bremsstrahlung would not be high energy either. That there would appear to be few gamma rays (occasional) is a given. However, the ash of the reaction is that there would appear to be a lot of hydrogen which replaces the deuterium - which was there at the start. If you don't buy this explanation (that kinetic energy can be shared in such a way that two approaching deuterons are stripped at exactly the same time, and instantly decay) then there are alternatives. They will come up in a later post. In fact, to place this in context - there could be many gainful reactions happening at the same time. This bi-stripping hypothesis is all of a few minutes old, so it needs to be vetted. but hey, in QM terms - a few minutes is a virtual eternity :-) The free neutron mass is slightly larger than that of a proton. The lifetime is about 15 minutes. 939.565378 MeV compared to 938.272046 MeV would be the standard values. This is why the Oppenheimer Philips (stripping) reaction could be extremely important to LENR and it has been almost neglected in the past. It should be noted that in the parallel thread on vortex today (Magnetic permeability and LENR) that energy depletion of the deuteron, in the nickel cavity due to spin coupling, could lower the binding energy so that the OP effect happens at a much lower threshold than usual.
Re: [Vo]:Mizuno slides coming
Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: Attention water-heads (“Mizuno” literally means 'From Water') It means water field (水野) The second character is field or plain. Iwamura (岩村) means rock + village. Dr. Rockville. Most Japanese personal names are descriptions of places. Many English names describe an occupation or trade, such as Smith, Sawyer or Fletcher. My name is Middle English for red + well, a place name. Among other places it is a market town granted a Royal Charter in 1204. http://www.rothwelltown.co.uk/ Beene is probably the legume. The other day I mixed up the names Yoshino and Yoshida. They are similar: 吉野 and 吉田. The second character da or ta means rice paddy, another kind of field. It is also the ta in Toyota: 豊田. Toyo*ta* Motors was started by Toyo*da* family. These are same two characters pronounced differently. ta is more common with toyo. I guess they got tired of telling people the name is 'da' not 'ta.' - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Mizuno slides coming
Like piantelli's approach, this technology is a low gain approach because the SPP pumping is very weak. Both DGT and Rossi have very high levels of polariton pumping including additional nanoparticle generation. They both have the Cat and Mouse architecture where the Mouse pumps SPP and the Cat is stimulated. Brillouin Energy has a low gain architecture also because their pumping is indirect. Strong SPP pumping brings with it high gain. I suggest a high voltage extremely short nanosecond or sub nanosecond (like Brillouin Energy) spark discharge between electrodes with high instansious power levels to get the SPP pumping levels up. On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 2:38 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: Attention water-heads (“Mizuno” literally means 'From Water') It means water field (水野) The second character is field or plain. Iwamura (岩村) means rock + village. Dr. Rockville. Most Japanese personal names are descriptions of places. Many English names describe an occupation or trade, such as Smith, Sawyer or Fletcher. My name is Middle English for red + well, a place name. Among other places it is a market town granted a Royal Charter in 1204. http://www.rothwelltown.co.uk/ Beene is probably the legume. The other day I mixed up the names Yoshino and Yoshida. They are similar: 吉野 and 吉田. The second character da or ta means rice paddy, another kind of field. It is also the ta in Toyota: 豊田. Toyo*ta* Motors was started by Toyo*da* family. These are same two characters pronounced differently. ta is more common with toyo. I guess they got tired of telling people the name is 'da' not 'ta.' - Jed
Re: [Vo]:The prospects for LENR deployment
Lennart and others interested in the commercial side of CF should watch this (if you haven't already). Steve Katinski and David Nagel are setting up an industry association for advancing science and business in LANR Cold Fusion http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TMNSl-nrFXQlist=UUH78efhknLR-cuL9w2hVcUQ Harry On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 12:13 PM, Lennart Thornros lenn...@thornros.comwrote: Axil, No I have not read those articles. A brief look told me that I have had some of the information in other forums. I will look through the entire set of documents later this week. I appreciate the articles, they certainly have value. In addition the articles will improve my knowledge - so Thank You. I appreciate your dedication to the issue. My point is that we need more than one philosophy in order to sort out how LENR will be explained. You are actually using old time knowledge to support your theory and I think that is required. Tesla had his moments but he also managed to leave a lot of holes in the documentation I think. Do not blame the government. Tesla could have secured that information found its way to 'the people'. Papp, Moray et al. they are either very smart but useless in leaving behind a theory documented so later generations could benefit or they were scam artists. I do not know and I am not accusing either one. However, there are mystical stories involved and that would not need to be. It has been relatively easy to communicate since Gutenberg. There is a say what is poorly communicated is based on a weak thought. I think many of the people referred to failed in communication and there is no excuse for that. Was it because of a illogical idea ? As we talk about the deployment one need to engage other disciplines also. I am not looking for a job as I am too old to engage in a venture of this magnitude. However, people with entrepreneurial skills and understanding of marketing and finance are key to get deployment. If you think that will be automatic as the physical scientists find the answer you have to stop and think again. Mr. Tesla is a good example. I know that many people say that he was misunderstood and that J.P. Morgan is accused of stopping his ideas as he saw no way to profit from his endless free electricity. If it was so, then Tesla's mistake was to not seek support from people with the financial knowledge. You can blame JPM but he looked after his interest - good or bad - Tesla failed because he concentrated on the thing he knew. He did not fail because JPM did not do what Tesla thought right. There is a need to take responsibility for one's own mistakes. Keep up looking for the answer but listen to others and engage specialists when need be and not too late is my advice. Best Regards , Lennart Thornros www.StrategicLeadershipSac.com lenn...@thornros.com +1 916 436 1899 6140 Horseshoe Bar Road Suite G, Loomis CA 95650 Productivity is never an accident. It is always the result of a commitment to excellence, intelligent planning, and focused effort. PJM
[Vo]:The DD-BOP reaction in the context of Mizuno's new paper
The recent Mizuno presentation at the MIT colloquium and the surprising implications of hydrogen ash from deuterium as the starting gas - are the instigation for the following ramblings on developing an early stage theory. This developing theory strives to explain how two deuterons can react in such a way as to provide more energy than chemical, without fusion to helium and with few gamma rays and few neutrons - and with hydrogen as the ash. The Oppenheimer-Philips reaction is also known as deuterium stripping. This explanation could be called a QM bi-stripping or BOP reaction (Bi-Oppenheimer-Philips). If it can happen with two deuterons, it probably comes with the added requirement of nanocavity confinement, since there is no evidence of it in plasmas. Heisenberg uncertainty could be involved. However, it is not beta decay of the deuteron - even though it might appear that way. When a free neutron decays to a proton, substantial energy would be released as well as a neutrino, which carries away energy undetected. That is one problem to overcome in a theory where the energy release is not great to begin with. Outside the nucleus, free neutrons are unstable and have a mean lifetime of about 15 minutes. Free neutrons usually beta decay by emission of an electron and electron antineutrino leaving a fairly cold proton. The decay energy for this process which is usable is about 0.78 MeV for the electron. The energy of the emitted neutrino is not well defined and it is really there to resolve problems of conservation of spin. A small fraction of free neutrons decay with an emitted gamma ray (about one in 1000) - thus the gamma, and its disproportion relative to excess heat and its signature energy is another route to falsifiability of this suggestion. The free neutron mass is slightly larger than that of a proton: 939.565378 MeV compared to 938.272046 MeV would be the standard values. The difference is ~1.3 MeV indicating that the neutrino usually carries away about 500 KeV - but is the neutrino really necessary if spin issues are resolved in another way? Since the neutrino was invented, for among other reasons to solve the allowed spin problem in single neutron decay - we must ask if they are necessary when two neutrons decay together in a new kind of reaction of deuterons which do not have enough energy to fuse. Consider the spins of the electron and antineutrino with a net spin of zero. This is called a Fermi decay since the electron and antineutrino take no spin away, and the nuclear spin cannot change. The only other possibility allowed by QM is that the spins of electron and antineutrino combine into a net spin of one; that is called a Gamow-Teller decay. The angular momentum can change by up to one unit in an allowed beta decay. Without neutrinos, then there is a possibility for spin issues to be resolved in the context of two linked decays but what other problems are created? Anyway there is another issue - the extended half-life of free neutrons - which means this energy is not normally available instantaneously to lend in the sense of QM. This is where QM enters the picture in two different ways. The mass of the deuteron is 1875.613 MeV. The mass of a free neutron plus a free proton is 1877.8374 - thus about 2.2 MeV would be required (to be supplied via kinetic energy) in order to split the deuteron - without QM being involved. The net deficit of this reaction is somewhere around ~900 keV if the neutrino is avoided. So far we are still at endotherm. This is why no one ever imagined Oppenheimer Philips as being relevant before now. It looks endothermic, without Heisenberg uncertainty - and even more so with neutrinos to solve spin issues. However, one can surmise that with time alteration or compression - if two deuterons approach each other so that both undergo the OP splitting reaction instantaneously as a result of the single impact, then it is possible that the same 2.2 MeV of kinetic energy results in a net energy release of 2.6 MeV (from two neutron decays without neutrinos) but the two neutrons have decayed to protons instantly, instead of with an extended half-life. This could indeed be an expected result of Heisenberg uncertainty and other QM principles. Thus the net reaction gain is 400 keV. The big stretch of the imagination is that the same kinetic energy can split both atoms at the same time using what can only be called a quantum time alteration and borrowed energy from the net reaction - and that neutrinos are suppressed. Admittedly, this is a stretch, but isn't everything in QM? The reality of this explanation is highly dependent on the accuracy of Mizuno's mass spec in the context of no other possible explanation. If Mizuno is correct, this is not a bad first step. Adding QM into the mix, we can surmise that most of the 2.2 kinetic energy deficit is supplied from the net energy of the two linked neutron decay reactions, not a single decay - and also that the normal half
Re: [Vo]:Yoshino slides from 2014 MIT Colloquium
I uploaded a new version with some minor changes. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:The prospects for LENR deployment
Thank You Harry, I think that is a good idea. It does not eliminate the need to have an organization around an idea and a team with a purpose. However, It makes an environment, which will help. It is a step in the direction I propose. Best Regards , Lennart Thornros www.StrategicLeadershipSac.com lenn...@thornros.com +1 916 436 1899 6140 Horseshoe Bar Road Suite G, Loomis CA 95650 Productivity is never an accident. It is always the result of a commitment to excellence, intelligent planning, and focused effort. PJM On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 1:55 PM, H Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote: Lennart and others interested in the commercial side of CF should watch this (if you haven't already). Steve Katinski and David Nagel are setting up an industry association for advancing science and business in LANR Cold Fusion http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TMNSl-nrFXQlist=UUH78efhknLR-cuL9w2hVcUQ Harry On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 12:13 PM, Lennart Thornros lenn...@thornros.comwrote: Axil, No I have not read those articles. A brief look told me that I have had some of the information in other forums. I will look through the entire set of documents later this week. I appreciate the articles, they certainly have value. In addition the articles will improve my knowledge - so Thank You. I appreciate your dedication to the issue. My point is that we need more than one philosophy in order to sort out how LENR will be explained. You are actually using old time knowledge to support your theory and I think that is required. Tesla had his moments but he also managed to leave a lot of holes in the documentation I think. Do not blame the government. Tesla could have secured that information found its way to 'the people'. Papp, Moray et al. they are either very smart but useless in leaving behind a theory documented so later generations could benefit or they were scam artists. I do not know and I am not accusing either one. However, there are mystical stories involved and that would not need to be. It has been relatively easy to communicate since Gutenberg. There is a say what is poorly communicated is based on a weak thought. I think many of the people referred to failed in communication and there is no excuse for that. Was it because of a illogical idea ? As we talk about the deployment one need to engage other disciplines also. I am not looking for a job as I am too old to engage in a venture of this magnitude. However, people with entrepreneurial skills and understanding of marketing and finance are key to get deployment. If you think that will be automatic as the physical scientists find the answer you have to stop and think again. Mr. Tesla is a good example. I know that many people say that he was misunderstood and that J.P. Morgan is accused of stopping his ideas as he saw no way to profit from his endless free electricity. If it was so, then Tesla's mistake was to not seek support from people with the financial knowledge. You can blame JPM but he looked after his interest - good or bad - Tesla failed because he concentrated on the thing he knew. He did not fail because JPM did not do what Tesla thought right. There is a need to take responsibility for one's own mistakes. Keep up looking for the answer but listen to others and engage specialists when need be and not too late is my advice. Best Regards , Lennart Thornros www.StrategicLeadershipSac.com lenn...@thornros.com +1 916 436 1899 6140 Horseshoe Bar Road Suite G, Loomis CA 95650 Productivity is never an accident. It is always the result of a commitment to excellence, intelligent planning, and focused effort. PJM
Re: [Vo]:Mizuno slides coming
what about the electrons in that stripping, and the neutrino... does it stay positives? what is the equation? naively I imagine np+np - 4p + 2e +2!v is it still positive? electrons cost 511kev to create, about the gain... I don't master enough to be sure of anything 2014-03-27 18:58 GMT+01:00 Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net: Attention water-heads (Mizuno literally means 'From Water') Here is another weird and wonderful implication of the recent Mizuno paper which would explain how two deuterons react in such a way as to provide more energy than chemical but with few gamma rays and few neutrons - and with lots of hydrogen as the ash. Imagine that: hydrogen is the ash ! To explain this we must think outside the box, which is the same as inside the cavity. This could be called a QM bi-stripping reaction. It can only happen with two deuterons, and probably with the added requirement of nanocavity confinement. Heisenberg is involved. When a neutron decays to a proton, about 1.3 MeV would be released. But the extended half-life of free neutrons means this energy is not normally available instantaneously. This is where QM enters the picture. The mass of the deuteron is 1875.613 MeV. The mass of a free neutron plus a free proton is 1877.8374 - thus about 2.2 MeV would be required (to be supplied via kinetic energy) in order to split the deuteron - without QM being involved. The net deficit of this reaction is thus ~900 keV. This is why no one ever imagined Oppenheimer Philips as being relevant before now. It looks endothermic, without Heisenberg. However, one can surmise that with time alteration or compression - if two deuterons approach each other so that both undergo the OP splitting reaction instantaneously as a result of the single impact, then it is possible that the same 2.2 MeV of kinetic energy results in a net energy release of 2.6 MeV (from two neutron decays) but the two neutrons have decayed to protons instantly, instead of with an extended half-life. This could indeed be an expected result of Heisenberg uncertainty and other QM principles. Thus the net reaction gain is 400 keV. The big stretch of the imagination is that the same kinetic energy can split both atoms at the same time using what can only be called a quantum time alteration and borrowed energy from the net reaction. Admittedly, this is a stretch, but isn't everything in QM? Adding QM into the mix, we can surmise that most of the 2.2 kinetic energy deficit is supplied from the net energy of the two neutron decay reactions, not a single decay - and also that the normal half life of neutrons is greatly compressed to supply this net energy of 2.6 MeV (2 x 1.3 MeV) as part of the borrowed input. Only then is the net reaction gainful and the beauty of it is that 4 resultant protons carry off the 400 keV net gain - with approximately 100 keV in kinetic energy each, which is at a level which is low enough and consistent with low or no gamma... and bremsstrahlung would not be high energy either. That there would appear to be few gamma rays (occasional) is a given. However, the ash of the reaction is that there would appear to be a lot of hydrogen which replaces the deuterium - which was there at the start. If you don't buy this explanation (that kinetic energy can be shared in such a way that two approaching deuterons are stripped at exactly the same time, and instantly decay) then there are alternatives. They will come up in a later post. In fact, to place this in context - there could be many gainful reactions happening at the same time. This bi-stripping hypothesis is all of a few minutes old, so it needs to be vetted... but hey, in QM terms - a few minutes is a virtual eternity J The free neutron mass is slightly larger than that of a proton. The lifetime is about 15 minutes. 939.565378 MeV compared to 938.272046 MeV would be the standard values. This is why the Oppenheimer Philips (stripping) reaction could be extremely important to LENR and it has been almost neglected in the past. It should be noted that in the parallel thread on vortex today (Magnetic permeability and LENR) that energy depletion of the deuteron, in the nickel cavity due to spin coupling, could lower the binding energy so that the OP effect happens at a much lower threshold than usual.
RE: [Vo]:Mizuno slides coming
From: alain.coetm...@gmail.com what about the electrons in that stripping, and the neutrino... Alain - I started a new thread to address some of the problems. The DD-BOP reaction in the context of Mizuno's new paper Yes there are problems with this hypothesis - but Mizuno's amazing result of finding hydrogen as the ash is such a profound surprise, that nothing really makes sense other than deuterium stripping of some kind. Maybe someone else can come up with a better explanation. The solution which is offered is falsifiable. In fact Mizuno probably has data which already collected which can validate . or not.
Re: [Vo]:The prospects for LENR deployment
To my mind the greatest impediment to LENR deployment would be the ingrained skepticism of the physics establishment and how that bleeds out into the realm of Wikipedia and mainstream science reporting. Also we have the unwillingness of thekilowatt producers to show us what cards they are holding because they are angling for the billion dollar payout. Anyone acquainted with Dr Mizuno should get on their knees and beg the man to assemble his kilowatt reactor and fire the darn thing up. My other thought was how cool it would be if a major stakeholder were to publicly demand a investigation into LENR developments. I considered the produce growers in California who are facing a horrific drought and will be locked in a life and death struggle for water with the coastal cities. My guess is these people would not be adverse to a technology solution that would lead to affordable desalinization. People with nothing to lose and everything to gain. With that in mind I have started emailing the science and technology person employed by the Western Growers Association but have yet to elicit a response. This could be a pressure point that would turn the tide. Perhaps some of the professor types on Vortex would be interested in helping me to fill her email box with tasty nuggets... Steve High
Re: [Vo]:The prospects for LENR deployment
http://news.yahoo.com/ukraine-spotlights-germanys-nuclear-power-switch-173155269.html *Ukraine spotlights Germany's nuclear power switch* BERLIN (AP) -- The crisis in Ukraine has added an extra dose of uncertainty to German Chancellor Angela Merkel's biggest domestic project: shifting the country from nuclear to renewable energy sources. Merkel launched the drive to transition the country away from nuclear after Japan's 2011 Fukushima disaster. Since then, the Energiewende -- roughly, energy turnaround -- has created increasing headaches. Now, the tensions with Russia could complicate the plans further. Germany, other European countries and the U.S. have slapped some sanctions on Moscow and threatened to impose more. The problem, however, is that Germany and several European economies depend heavily on Russian energy. Germany gets about a third of its natural gas and crude oil from Russia. Merkel is still pushing ahead with the plan to shift away from nuclear energy. But if the situation with Russia escalates and Germany decides to try and reduce its reliance on Russian gas, there could be problems staying on track. This situation is perfect for Germany to accept and deploy LENR NiH reactors to replace both Russian Gas and nuclear power reactors.. On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 11:18 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: There seems to be a confluence of events that provide LENR with an unprecedented opportunity to gain wide acceptance and deployment. Just as war simulated the initial development of nuclear energy, a new commercial and cold war between Russia and the West will stimulate the rapid deployment of the NiH reactor. In the upcoming few years, LENR will be used by western governments as an economic weapon to weaken the Russian economy and reduce the foreign and domestic prerogatives of Putin. This is an ideal opportunity for the first release of the NiH reactor in Europe as a replacement for Russian natural gas, the primary economic weapon to undermine power projection of both the Russian and Iranian governments. LENR will take the energy weapon out of the hands of those who most want to use it. We can expect a fast tracking of the deployment of the NiH reactor in Eastern Europe where Russia has economic leverage through supply of natural gas to these former soviet states. What will Russia and Iran do to counter this attack on their projection of power, their national ambitions, their standard of living, and their international prestige?
[Vo]:Superdielectrics
Perhaps of interest. Just published on Arxiv.org Super Dielectric Materials - Samuel Fromille and Jonathan Phillips* Physics Department Naval Postgraduate School Monterey, CA 93943 ABSTRACT Evidence is provided that a class of materials with dielectric constants greater than 10^5, herein called super dielectric materials (SDM), can be generated readily from common, inexpensive materials. Specifically it is demonstrated that high surface area alumina powders, loaded to the incipient wetness point with a solution of boric acid dissolved in water, have dielectric constants greater than 4*108 in all cases, a remarkable increase over the best dielectric constants previously measured, ca. 10^4. It is postulated that any porous, electrically insulating material (e.g. high surface area powders of silica, titania), filled with a liquid containing a high concentration of ionic species will potentially be an SDM. Capacitors created with the first generated SDM dielectrics (alumina with boric acid solution), herein called New Paradigm Super (NPS) capacitors display typical electrostatic capacitive behavior, such as increasing capacitance with decreasing thickness, and can be cycled, but are limited to a maximum effective operating voltage of about 0.8 V. A simple theory is presented: Water containing relative high concentrations of dissolved ions saturates all, or virtually all, the pores (average diameter 500 Angstrom) of the alumina. In an applied field the positive ionic species migrate to the cathode end, and the negative ions to the anode end of each drop. This creates giant dipoles with high charge, hence leading to high dielectric constant behavior. At about 0.8 volts, water begins to break down, creating enough ionic species to short the individual water droplets. Potentially NPS capacitor stacks can surpass supercapacitors in volumetric energy density. [...] Finally, it is interesting to speculate on the potential value of NPS capacitors ... leads to a remarkable energy density of ~1000 J/cm3. A D-battery (flashlight battery) has a volume of ~53 cm3... a l D-cell sized NPScapacitor could hold 25,000 J. http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1403/1403.6862.pdf Any opinions on feasibility? Any speculations on potential uses? -- Lou Pagnucco
Re: [Vo]:Mizuno slides coming
On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 8:55 AM, H Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote: Going from D to H should be endothermic. Exciting slides. I do not have the wherewithal to assess their calorimetry, so I will assume it is accurate. Here are some exothermic reactions involving generation of H from D: - d + 60Ni → 61Ni + p + Q (6.1 MeV) - d + 61Ni → 62Ni + p + Q (8.9 MeV) - d + 62Ni → 63Ni + p + Q (5.1 MeV) - d + 64Ni → 65Ni + p + Q (7.9 MeV) Note that in the authors' back-of-the-envelope calculations using two d+d branches, yielding 4.03 MeV and 3.27 MeV respectively, they came to an expected energy output that was lower than the one they think they observed. So the higher Qs of the above reactions fit that picture nicely. Their slides on the neutron capture cross sections of nickel suggest that they are also looking at thinking about the d+Ni reactions. Regarding the radiation measurements they have not yet reported on -- I will call out a guess that they will report evidence of beta+ and beta- decay. The treated nickel is interesting looking. I assume this is what the nickel looks like prior to a reaction. Note that there is greater occasion for electrically insulated grains after the treatment than before the treatment. Note that the NiD system is quite different than the oft-studied PdD system. I vaguely recall sometime back that proton and deuteron capture are not favorable in palladium, whereas proton capture is favorable in nickel. What is interesting in the above scenario is that we are looking at the possibility not of proton capture but of neutron capture. Eric
Re: [Vo]:Mizuno slides coming
You only have to compare the mass difference before and after the reaction. No QM can change it. The reaction D to 2p is endothermic! There must be better ideas of watt happened in the experiment. The He4 from CF of Deuterium was find in Pd systems. Maybe the use of Ni changes something. I do not like the transmutations theories but they can at least allow a exothermic reaction. Something like D+Xz Xz+1 +H. X can be a Ni isotope or some contamination as O,C or Si. Or are there He4 trapped in the Ni matrix? The odd result can also be from contamination with ordinary water. For be sure we most wait for replications and better measurements. On Fri, 28 Mar 2014 00:06:21 +0100, Alain Sepeda wrote: what about the electrons in that stripping, and the neutrino... does it stay positives? what is the equation? naively I imagine np+np - 4p + 2e +2!v is it still positive? electrons cost 511kev to create, about the gain... I don't master enough to be sure of anything 2014-03-27 18:58 GMT+01:00 Jones Beene : Attention water-heads (Mizuno literally means 'From Water') Here is another weird and wonderful implication of the recent Mizuno paper which would explain how two deuterons react in such a way as to provide more energy than chemical but with few gamma rays and few neutrons - and with lots of hydrogen as the ash. Imagine that: hydrogen is the ash ! To explain this we must think outside the box, which is the same as inside the cavity. This could be called a QM bi-stripping reaction. It can only happen with two deuterons, and probably with the added requirement of nanocavity confinement. Heisenberg is involved. When a neutron decays to a proton, about 1.3 MeV would be released. But the extended half-life of free neutrons means this energy is not normally available instantaneously. This is where QM enters the picture. The mass of the deuteron is 1875.613 MeV. The mass of a free neutron plus a free proton is 1877.8374 - thus about 2.2 MeV would be required (to be supplied via kinetic energy) in order to split the deuteron - without QM being involved. The net deficit of this reaction is thus ~900 keV. This is why no one ever imagined Oppenheimer Philips as being relevant before now. It looks endothermic, without Heisenberg. However, one can surmise that with time alteration or compression - if two deuterons approach each other so that both undergo the OP splitting reaction instantaneously as a result of the single impact, then it is possible that the same 2.2 MeV of kinetic energy results in a net energy release of 2.6 MeV (from two neutron decays) but the two neutrons have decayed to protons instantly, instead of with an extended half-life. This could indeed be an expected result of Heisenberg uncertainty and other QM principles. Thus the net reaction gain is 400 keV. The big stretch of the imagination is that the same kinetic energy can split both atoms at the same time using what can only be called a quantum time alteration and borrowed energy from the net reaction. Admittedly, this is a stretch, but isn't everything in QM? Adding QM into the mix, we can surmise that most of the 2.2 kinetic energy deficit is supplied from the net energy of the two neutron decay reactions, not a single decay - and also that the normal half life of neutrons is greatly compressed to supply this net energy of 2.6 MeV (2 x 1.3 MeV) as part of the borrowed input. Only then is the net reaction gainful and the beauty of it is that 4 resultant protons carry off the 400 keV net gain - with approximately 100 keV in kinetic energy each, which is at a level which is low enough and consistent with low or no gamma… and bremsstrahlung would not be high energy either. That there would appear to be few gamma rays (occasional) is a given. However, the ash of the reaction is that there would appear to be a lot of hydrogen which replaces the deuterium - which was there at the start. If you don't buy this explanation (that kinetic energy can be shared in such a way that two approaching deuterons are stripped at exactly the same time, and instantly decay) then there are alternatives. They will come up in a later post. In fact, to place this in context - there could be many gainful reactions happening at the same time. This bi-stripping hypothesis is all of a few minutes old, so it needs to be vetted… but hey, in QM terms - a few minutes is a virtual eternity J The free neutron mass is slightly larger than that of a proton. The lifetime is about 15 minutes. 939.565378 MeV compared to 938.272046 MeV would be the standard values. This is why the Oppenheimer Philips (stripping) reaction could be extremely important to LENR and it has been almost neglected in the past. It should be noted that in the parallel thread on vortex today (Magnetic permeability and LENR) that energy depletion of the deuteron, in the nickel cavity due to spin coupling, could lower the binding energy
Re: [Vo]:Mizuno slides coming
I se you was quicker with neutron capture. But the should look for He4 in the Ni metall. On Thu, 27 Mar 2014 20:06:03 -0700, Eric Walker wrote: On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 8:55 AM, H Veeder wrote: Going from D to H should be endothermic. Exciting slides. I do not have the wherewithal to assess their calorimetry, so I will assume it is accurate. Here are some exothermic reactions involving generation of H from D: * d + 60Ni → 61Ni + p + Q (6.1 MeV) * d + 61Ni → 62Ni + p + Q (8.9 MeV) * d + 62Ni → 63Ni + p + Q (5.1 MeV) * d + 64Ni → 65Ni + p + Q (7.9 MeV) Note that in the authors' back-of-the-envelope calculations using two d+d branches, yielding 4.03 MeV and 3.27 MeV respectively, they came to an expected energy output that was lower than the one they think they observed. So the higher Qs of the above reactions fit that picture nicely. Their slides on the neutron capture cross sections of nickel suggest that they are also looking at thinking about the d+Ni reactions. Regarding the radiation measurements they have not yet reported on -- I will call out a guess that they will report evidence of beta+ and beta- decay. The treated nickel is interesting looking. I assume this is what the nickel looks like prior to a reaction. Note that there is greater occasion for electrically insulated grains after the treatment than before the treatment. Note that the NiD system is quite different than the oft-studied PdD system. I vaguely recall sometime back that proton and deuteron capture are not favorable in palladium, whereas proton capture is favorable in nickel. What is interesting in the above scenario is that we are looking at the possibility not of proton capture but of neutron capture. Eric Links: -- [1] mailto:hveeder...@gmail.com
Re: [Vo]:Mizuno slides coming
On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 8:20 PM, torulf.gr...@bredband.net wrote: I se you was quicker with neutron capture. But the should look for He4 in the Ni metall. Good idea. 4He does not migrate in palladium, so it may not migrate in nickel either. Eric
Re: [Vo]:Mizuno slides coming
Eric, I was referring to Jones post where he was taking about stripping the neutron from a deuterium to make hydrogen, but the fusion reactions you listed below are worth considering too. Harry On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 11:06 PM, Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 8:55 AM, H Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote: Going from D to H should be endothermic. Exciting slides. I do not have the wherewithal to assess their calorimetry, so I will assume it is accurate. Here are some exothermic reactions involving generation of H from D: - d + 60Ni → 61Ni + p + Q (6.1 MeV) - d + 61Ni → 62Ni + p + Q (8.9 MeV) - d + 62Ni → 63Ni + p + Q (5.1 MeV) - d + 64Ni → 65Ni + p + Q (7.9 MeV) Note that in the authors' back-of-the-envelope calculations using two d+d branches, yielding 4.03 MeV and 3.27 MeV respectively, they came to an expected energy output that was lower than the one they think they observed. So the higher Qs of the above reactions fit that picture nicely. Their slides on the neutron capture cross sections of nickel suggest that they are also looking at thinking about the d+Ni reactions. Regarding the radiation measurements they have not yet reported on -- I will call out a guess that they will report evidence of beta+ and beta- decay. The treated nickel is interesting looking. I assume this is what the nickel looks like prior to a reaction. Note that there is greater occasion for electrically insulated grains after the treatment than before the treatment. Note that the NiD system is quite different than the oft-studied PdD system. I vaguely recall sometime back that proton and deuteron capture are not favorable in palladium, whereas proton capture is favorable in nickel. What is interesting in the above scenario is that we are looking at the possibility not of proton capture but of neutron capture. Eric
Re: [Vo]:Mizuno slides coming
I wrote: What is interesting in the above scenario is that we are looking at the possibility not of proton capture but of neutron capture. The Oppenheimer-Phillips process (mentioned by Jones) becomes quite interesting in the context of a d+Ni reaction. Given the very strong repulsion of the proton in the deuteron and the protons in the Ni, I assume the deuterons would be pressed into the nickel lattice sites with the neutron facing the nickel atom rather than the proton. Eric
RE: [Vo]:Mizuno slides coming
No Way. That kind of radiation would stand out like a sore thumb. With 150 watts of energy from average 7 MeV protons for 30 days, the Mizuno lab would be a small Fukushima… From: torulf.gr...@bredband.net I see you was quicker with neutron capture. But the should look for He4 in the Ni metal. Eric Walker wrote: H Veeder wrote: Going from D to H should be endothermic. Exciting slides. I do not have the wherewithal to assess their calorimetry, so I will assume it is accurate. Here are some exothermic reactions involving generation of H from D: * d + 60Ni → 61Ni + p + Q (6.1 MeV) * d + 61Ni → 62Ni + p + Q (8.9 MeV) * d + 62Ni → 63Ni + p + Q (5.1 MeV) * d + 64Ni → 65Ni + p + Q (7.9 MeV) Note that in the authors' back-of-the-envelope calculations using two d+d branches, yielding 4.03 MeV and 3.27 MeV respectively, they came to an expected energy output that was lower than the one they think they observed. So the higher Qs of the above reactions fit that picture nicely. Their slides on the neutron capture cross sections of nickel suggest that they are also looking at thinking about the d+Ni reactions. Regarding the radiation measurements they have not yet reported on -- I will call out a guess that they will report evidence of beta+ and beta- decay. The treated nickel is interesting looking. I assume this is what the nickel looks like prior to a reaction. Note that there is greater occasion for electrically insulated grains after the treatment than before the treatment. Note that the NiD system is quite different than the oft-studied PdD system. I vaguely recall sometime back that proton and deuteron capture are not favorable in palladium, whereas proton capture is favorable in nickel. What is interesting in the above scenario is that we are looking at the possibility not of proton capture but of neutron capture. Eric
Re: [Vo]:Mizuno slides coming
Listen to Hagelstein answer a question about fission at the 47:50 min mark. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PUHYf8WZ8w4list=UUH78efhknLR-cuL9w2hVcUQ To explain transmutation from lower to higher mass nuclei he proposes an inverse fractionation process to liberate a neutron from one nucleus coupled with a fractionation process when the neutron is absorbed by another nucleus. Harry On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 11:41 PM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: No Way. That kind of radiation would stand out like a sore thumb. With 150 watts of energy from average 7 MeV protons for 30 days, the Mizuno lab would be a small Fukushima… *From:* torulf.gr...@bredband.net I see you was quicker with neutron capture. But the should look for He4 in the Ni metal. Eric Walker wrote: H Veeder wrote: Going from D to H should be endothermic. Exciting slides. I do not have the wherewithal to assess their calorimetry, so I will assume it is accurate. Here are some exothermic reactions involving generation of H from D: · d + 60Ni → 61Ni + p + Q (6.1 MeV) · d + 61Ni → 62Ni + p + Q (8.9 MeV) · d + 62Ni → 63Ni + p + Q (5.1 MeV) · d + 64Ni → 65Ni + p + Q (7.9 MeV) Note that in the authors' back-of-the-envelope calculations using two d+d branches, yielding 4.03 MeV and 3.27 MeV respectively, they came to an expected energy output that was lower than the one they think they observed. So the higher Qs of the above reactions fit that picture nicely. Their slides on the neutron capture cross sections of nickel suggest that they are also looking at thinking about the d+Ni reactions. Regarding the radiation measurements they have not yet reported on -- I will call out a guess that they will report evidence of beta+ and beta- decay. The treated nickel is interesting looking. I assume this is what the nickel looks like prior to a reaction. Note that there is greater occasion for electrically insulated grains after the treatment than before the treatment. Note that the NiD system is quite different than the oft-studied PdD system. I vaguely recall sometime back that proton and deuteron capture are not favorable in palladium, whereas proton capture is favorable in nickel. What is interesting in the above scenario is that we are looking at the possibility not of proton capture but of neutron capture. Eric
RE: [Vo]:Mizuno slides coming
Guys, You may have missed one huge detail. Did not the gas quantity in the reactor actually increase significantly after 30 days compared to initial conditions ? Maybe I am the one to have misinterpreted that detail, which would be extremely important and would seem to negate the possibility of from D+Ni reactions. See Slide 46. It indicates to me that there was approximately twice the number of gas molecules at the end of the run compared to the start and to the null run. If D2 gas reacts with nickel, not only do you get radioactive ash, which is not mentioned but surely would have been mentioned if it was there, but also a drop in pressure and in the quantity of gas - as hot protons are captured in the metal and neutrons are absorbed. Instead, the number of gas molecules approximately doubles during the run. That is the main reason to look for a reaction where atoms of D2 shift isotopcially to nearly twice the number of atoms of H2 while producing only moderate levels of gamma radiation. That kind of radiation would stand out like a sore thumb. With 150 watts of power from average 7 MeV protons for 30 days, the Mizuno lab would be a small Fukushima… From: torulf.gr...@bredband.net I see you was quicker with neutron capture. But the should look for He4 in the Ni metal. Eric Walker wrote: H Veeder wrote: Going from D to H should be endothermic. Exciting slides. I do not have the wherewithal to assess their calorimetry, so I will assume it is accurate. Here are some exothermic reactions involving generation of H from D: * d + 60Ni → 61Ni + p + Q (6.1 MeV) * d + 61Ni → 62Ni + p + Q (8.9 MeV) * d + 62Ni → 63Ni + p + Q (5.1 MeV) * d + 64Ni → 65Ni + p + Q (7.9 MeV) Note that in the authors' back-of-the-envelope calculations using two d+d branches, yielding 4.03 MeV and 3.27 MeV respectively, they came to an expected energy output that was lower than the one they think they observed. So the higher Qs of the above reactions fit that picture nicely. Their slides on the neutron capture cross sections of nickel suggest that they are also looking at thinking about the d+Ni reactions. Regarding the radiation measurements they have not yet reported on -- I will call out a guess that they will report evidence of beta+ and beta- decay. The treated nickel is interesting looking. I assume this is what the nickel looks like prior to a reaction. Note that there is greater occasion for electrically insulated grains after the treatment than before the treatment. Note that the NiD system is quite different than the oft-studied PdD system. I vaguely recall sometime back that proton and deuteron capture are not favorable in palladium, whereas proton capture is favorable in nickel. What is interesting in the above scenario is that we are looking at the possibility not of proton capture but of neutron capture. Eric attachment: winmail.dat
Re: [Vo]:Mizuno slides coming
On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 9:14 PM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: You may have missed one huge detail. Did not the gas quantity in the reactor actually increase significantly after 30 days compared to initial conditions ? Yes. Interesting detail. I hope they give out more information. If D2 gas reacts with nickel, not only do you get radioactive ash, which is not mentioned I think they're holding off on reporting their radiation measurements until later (there was a slide towards the end that hinted at this). but surely would have been mentioned if it was there, but also a drop in pressure and in the quantity of gas - as hot protons are captured in the metal and neutrons are absorbed. I would have thought that the protons would migrate out and recombine to form H2. But I don't think that would account for a twofold increase. Unless H2 takes up a larger volume than D2/DH/H2? I'm not sure what's going on with this detail. (Note that in early MFMP experiments, there was a weird relationship between pressure and their XP curves, suggesting some kind of artifact, so conceivably there could be something similar going on here.) Eric
