Re: [Vo]:To Radiate or Not to Radiate
In reply to Alain Sepeda's message of Mon, 5 Mar 2012 01:29:31 +0100: Hi, [snip] - gamma seems to be absorbed (or supressed but no mecanism is proposed yet), and at least to be reduced in hardness, transformed in X-rays or UV, quite easily shielded by reactor or heavy materials (lead or heavy polymer) As I have said several times, a severely shrunken Hydrino may preferably react via an Internal Conversion mechanism (due to the proximity of the shrunken electron to the nucleus), resulting in a fast electron rather than a gamma ray. About 1% of these electrons would produce bremsstrahlung x-rays, and only a fraction of those would be at the high energy end of the spectrum. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
Re: [Vo]:To Radiate or Not to Radiate
Axil, I appreciate your ongoing technical and logical explanations, primarily because I can understand them... My one comment about your following statement: * * *Without this radiation suppression mechanism in place and operating AT ALL TIMES, a cold fusion system is of little use.* It seems to me that a cold fusion system with containment is still better than a hot fission system with containment, i.e. Fukushima. since a cold fusion system can cool down by itself without having to dump half the ocean on it... The $20B ITER project will have significant containment to protect against intense neutron bombardment from the core. Also, if Nanospire is creating an assortment of rare earth metals through various transmutations and decays, it seems like that might be a USEFUL thing as long as you contain any radiation during production. Nanospire directed their Rydberg crystals at an aluminum core for initial tests, it seems like Rydberg Spires could be aimed at just about any element's Coulomb Barrier and yield some interesting results... On Sat, Mar 3, 2012 at 12:21 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: *IMHO, we have been correctly told by DGT that their LENR process is a complex one comprised of many related and interconnected but separable sub-processes which when combined together produce heat without the production of intense and long lasting radiation.* * * *I believe that their cold fusion process includes one sub-process that removes or greatly lowers the coulomb barrier to allow various neighboring nucleons to come together in a wide assortment of ways to form new types of nuclei. This process not only produces radiation from the nuclear fusion process but also from resulting newly created isotopes.* * * *The other major sub-process is one that overlays this fusion process and thermalizes this radiation production. This process involves the establishment and maintenance of a quantum mechanical coherent environment within in the nuclear active population of nuclei.* * * *What I am saying is that a large amount of radiation will be generated in a fusion system that is not coherent. * * * *A example of such a system that produces radiation and transmutation is the NanoSpire system. This system is not quantum mechanically coherent and as a result it will generated intense radiation from its intense fusion process. * * * *Rossi’s major concern was to eliminate or at least greatly mitigate any radiation produced by his system. He has pulled this off and this is a major accomplishment of both Rossi and DGT in they mostly produce heat and have suppressed radiation from there systems.* * * *Without this radiation suppression mechanism in place and operating AT ALL TIMES, a cold fusion system is of little use.* * * * * * * On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 11:21 AM, Joseph Hao jth...@hotmail.com wrote: ** Hey Vortex Gang, My primary question motivating this post/query is to get a consensus on whether the presence of radiation is a necessary prerequisite for LENR/Cold Fusion Effects. IOW, is radiation ALWAYS present when an LENR/Cold Fusion effect occurs. On one hand, there appears to be copious evidence that radiation of some form or another is present during an LENR process. On the other hand, many people, including many here in Vortex appears to brush aside the evidence of radiation as circumstantial and unverified. What is the consensus? Is Radiation always present? Is Radiation a foolproof indication of an LENR process? This question is prompted after mulling over what Axil suggested to me a few post back. In his suggestion to my experimental protocols, he suggested I consider integrating a Cloud Chamber into my experiments. Well, after thinking about it for a while and trying to come up with a suitable way of integrating a HOT reactor inside a COLD cloud chamber; I have come to the conclusion that it might be beyond my technical and financial ability to do so. So, instead, I have come up with the second best thing. I have been thinking of integrating my reactor, not into a Cloud Chamber, but rather into an Ion Chamber design. Integrating a hot reactor into an Ion chamber appears to be straightforward and simple. So, instead of using flow calorimetry to detect excess heat in an LENR process, I will be using the Ion chamber to detect radiation. As far as I know, there is no known chemical process that releases radiation, if the reactants start from non-radioactive elements. So, if I detect radiation, high enough to be detectable in a DIY Ion chamber, then that excess radiation must be way above ambient, which means that there is only one possible conclusion - that my reactor inside the Ion chamber is releasing radiation. And since the reactor walls would be thick(er), most of the detected radiation would not be Alphas and Betas, but rather higher energy gammas. And if I am detecting copious gammas,
Re: [Vo]:To Radiate or Not to Radiate
The possibility has been brought to my attention that levels of neutron emission are generally so low that it's unlikely that they can be ascribed to a LENR process. So one might want to be a little skeptical of evidence of neutrons. Eric On Sat, Mar 3, 2012 at 9:12 PM, Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.com wrote: There are reports of low but significant levels of fast neutrons above background. Charles Beaudette describes a 1992 experiment by Akito Takahashi, for example, that found neutrons being emitted from a Pd-D system. In general, however, the level of neutron emission is well below that which would be expected for a nuclear reaction. This is one of the primary obstacles to nuclear physicists giving LENR research their serious attention. If you're interested in specifics, you might take a look at one of the books that provides an overview of the experimental research on LENR. Eric
Re: [Vo]:To Radiate or Not to Radiate
“It seems to me that a cold fusion system with containment is still better than a hot fission system with containment, i.e. Fukushima. since a cold fusion system can cool down by itself without having to dump half the ocean on it...” This is true. But it is worth almost anything to keep the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) out of the cold fusion field completely. The NRC will kill cold fusion like it has done to Nuclear. The NRC has a global reach and their regulatory environment is stifling in the extreme. Rossi could have fielded a heat and radiation generating reactor product years ago but in his great wisdom Rossi went for the gold ring; a product in which the NRC has no business to even track let alone regulate. The NRC regulation is a cost multiplier in order of magnitude dimensions. “Also, if Nanospire is creating an assortment of rare earth metals through various transmutations and decays, it seems like that might be a USEFUL thing as long as you contain any radiation during production. If the rare earth metals customer bought transmutation product from NanoSpire, they would be willing to buy the same type material from reprocessed nuclear fission waste stockpiles. But there is a deep psychological block among the general puplic to accept such products. I just don’t thing that the transmutation metals market is there. Nanospire directed their Rydberg crystals at an aluminum core for initial tests, it seems like Rydberg Spires could be aimed at just about any element's Coulomb Barrier and yield some interesting results...” If a NanoSpire core was fabricated from thorium or uranium instead of aluminum, such a modified reactor might be a huge proliferation risk. The DOE should be building such a reactor right now to exclude this proliferation/dirty bomb possibility. On Sun, Mar 4, 2012 at 10:02 AM, Chemical Engineer cheme...@gmail.comwrote: Axil, I appreciate your ongoing technical and logical explanations, primarily because I can understand them... My one comment about your following statement: * * *Without this radiation suppression mechanism in place and operating AT ALL TIMES, a cold fusion system is of little use.* It seems to me that a cold fusion system with containment is still better than a hot fission system with containment, i.e. Fukushima. since a cold fusion system can cool down by itself without having to dump half the ocean on it... The $20B ITER project will have significant containment to protect against intense neutron bombardment from the core. Also, if Nanospire is creating an assortment of rare earth metals through various transmutations and decays, it seems like that might be a USEFUL thing as long as you contain any radiation during production. Nanospire directed their Rydberg crystals at an aluminum core for initial tests, it seems like Rydberg Spires could be aimed at just about any element's Coulomb Barrier and yield some interesting results... On Sat, Mar 3, 2012 at 12:21 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: *IMHO, we have been correctly told by DGT that their LENR process is a complex one comprised of many related and interconnected but separable sub-processes which when combined together produce heat without the production of intense and long lasting radiation.* * * *I believe that their cold fusion process includes one sub-process that removes or greatly lowers the coulomb barrier to allow various neighboring nucleons to come together in a wide assortment of ways to form new types of nuclei. This process not only produces radiation from the nuclear fusion process but also from resulting newly created isotopes.* * * *The other major sub-process is one that overlays this fusion process and thermalizes this radiation production. This process involves the establishment and maintenance of a quantum mechanical coherent environment within in the nuclear active population of nuclei.* * * *What I am saying is that a large amount of radiation will be generated in a fusion system that is not coherent. * * * *A example of such a system that produces radiation and transmutation is the NanoSpire system. This system is not quantum mechanically coherent and as a result it will generated intense radiation from its intense fusion process. * * * *Rossi’s major concern was to eliminate or at least greatly mitigate any radiation produced by his system. He has pulled this off and this is a major accomplishment of both Rossi and DGT in they mostly produce heat and have suppressed radiation from there systems.* * * *Without this radiation suppression mechanism in place and operating AT ALL TIMES, a cold fusion system is of little use.* * * * * * * On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 11:21 AM, Joseph Hao jth...@hotmail.com wrote: ** Hey Vortex Gang, My primary question motivating this post/query is to get a consensus on whether the presence of radiation is a necessary prerequisite for LENR/Cold
Re: [Vo]:To Radiate or Not to Radiate
if you follow the Widom-Larsen theory, or similar nucleon absorption by nucleus (even hydrino is akind of neutron=e+p-v), the situation could be interpreted as : - no neutrons visible outside , because they are slower than thermal, and are absorbed early , or are not neutrons (hydrinos, protons) - only a few rare decay mode can produce neutrons, who are now more energetic and visible. those decay mode might be rarer than usual even, because of pauli crowded fermionic states, frustrating those decay branch. - many other radiation are produced , alpha, beta, beta+, protons, but they are quickly absorbed in the reactor - gamma seems to be absorbed (or supressed but no mecanism is proposed yet), and at least to be reduced in hardness, transformed in X-rays or UV, quite easily shielded by reactor or heavy materials (lead or heavy polymer) 2012/3/4 Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.com The possibility has been brought to my attention that levels of neutron emission are generally so low that it's unlikely that they can be ascribed to a LENR process. So one might want to be a little skeptical of evidence of neutrons. Eric On Sat, Mar 3, 2012 at 9:12 PM, Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.com wrote: There are reports of low but significant levels of fast neutrons above background. Charles Beaudette describes a 1992 experiment by Akito Takahashi, for example, that found neutrons being emitted from a Pd-D system. In general, however, the level of neutron emission is well below that which would be expected for a nuclear reaction. This is one of the primary obstacles to nuclear physicists giving LENR research their serious attention. If you're interested in specifics, you might take a look at one of the books that provides an overview of the experimental research on LENR. Eric
Re: [Vo]:To Radiate or Not to Radiate
Agree with response 1, although if there is any chance of gamma during startup/shutdown/malfunction/breach I can see the NRC wanting to be in the loop. Response 2, I have no idea. It seems like if the transmuted rare earth metal final product was clean and the economics were right, there might be a market. Response 3, Scary On Sun, Mar 4, 2012 at 6:20 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: “It seems to me that a cold fusion system with containment is still better than a hot fission system with containment, i.e. Fukushima. since a cold fusion system can cool down by itself without having to dump half the ocean on it...” This is true. But it is worth almost anything to keep the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) out of the cold fusion field completely. The NRC will kill cold fusion like it has done to Nuclear. The NRC has a global reach and their regulatory environment is stifling in the extreme. Rossi could have fielded a heat and radiation generating reactor product years ago but in his great wisdom Rossi went for the gold ring; a product in which the NRC has no business to even track let alone regulate. The NRC regulation is a cost multiplier in order of magnitude dimensions. “Also, if Nanospire is creating an assortment of rare earth metals through various transmutations and decays, it seems like that might be a USEFUL thing as long as you contain any radiation during production. If the rare earth metals customer bought transmutation product from NanoSpire, they would be willing to buy the same type material from reprocessed nuclear fission waste stockpiles. But there is a deep psychological block among the general puplic to accept such products. I just don’t thing that the transmutation metals market is there. Nanospire directed their Rydberg crystals at an aluminum core for initial tests, it seems like Rydberg Spires could be aimed at just about any element's Coulomb Barrier and yield some interesting results...” If a NanoSpire core was fabricated from thorium or uranium instead of aluminum, such a modified reactor might be a huge proliferation risk. The DOE should be building such a reactor right now to exclude this proliferation/dirty bomb possibility. On Sun, Mar 4, 2012 at 10:02 AM, Chemical Engineer cheme...@gmail.comwrote: Axil, I appreciate your ongoing technical and logical explanations, primarily because I can understand them... My one comment about your following statement: * * *Without this radiation suppression mechanism in place and operating AT ALL TIMES, a cold fusion system is of little use.* It seems to me that a cold fusion system with containment is still better than a hot fission system with containment, i.e. Fukushima. since a cold fusion system can cool down by itself without having to dump half the ocean on it... The $20B ITER project will have significant containment to protect against intense neutron bombardment from the core. Also, if Nanospire is creating an assortment of rare earth metals through various transmutations and decays, it seems like that might be a USEFUL thing as long as you contain any radiation during production. Nanospire directed their Rydberg crystals at an aluminum core for initial tests, it seems like Rydberg Spires could be aimed at just about any element's Coulomb Barrier and yield some interesting results... On Sat, Mar 3, 2012 at 12:21 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: *IMHO, we have been correctly told by DGT that their LENR process is a complex one comprised of many related and interconnected but separable sub-processes which when combined together produce heat without the production of intense and long lasting radiation.* * * *I believe that their cold fusion process includes one sub-process that removes or greatly lowers the coulomb barrier to allow various neighboring nucleons to come together in a wide assortment of ways to form new types of nuclei. This process not only produces radiation from the nuclear fusion process but also from resulting newly created isotopes.* * * *The other major sub-process is one that overlays this fusion process and thermalizes this radiation production. This process involves the establishment and maintenance of a quantum mechanical coherent environment within in the nuclear active population of nuclei.* * * *What I am saying is that a large amount of radiation will be generated in a fusion system that is not coherent. * * * *A example of such a system that produces radiation and transmutation is the NanoSpire system. This system is not quantum mechanically coherent and as a result it will generated intense radiation from its intense fusion process. * * * *Rossi’s major concern was to eliminate or at least greatly mitigate any radiation produced by his system. He has pulled this off and this is a major accomplishment of both Rossi and DGT in they mostly produce heat and have suppressed
Re: [Vo]:To Radiate or Not to Radiate
the reference of higher than background are scarce and this have been a strong arguments against LENR. from what I've read, there are some moments when the reaction seems to produce some gamma, some neutrons, but not at all at a level compatible with the excess heat, nor dangerous or even alarming... some experiments seems to make the experimentators to think that the radiation happens when the reaction is not correct... like soot for a gaz stove. note that radiation is a key subject for LENr. there is a strong coalition of lobbies that have no other possibilities that spread the FUD abour radiations. the big corp (various energetic groups, like oil or nuke, electric companies, wanabee big corp) who wan't to captur this technology to their sole benefit, by forbidding use by small independent businesses and end-users. LENR can be run at a very small or big size, with no strong limit. unlike oil-refinery or nuke, there is no need for big installation. not even to build the reactor. For di-esther for example the oil-company probably convinced the governments to use di-esther instead of simple filtered vegetable oil, that work too... di-esther need big-corp to be produced, but only farmers are enough for filtered oil. the second group of lobby are the malthusiannists/gaïaists/anti-technology/regressived green lobbies that flourish those days and catch the media and the subsidies ... for them the horror will be the end of scarcity, without the cost on environments... technology have to be bad to force us to stop it... LENR is like the pill or the preservative... it allow orgy of fun withour moral or risk. both those lobbies will try to counvice the basic people, and first the stupid as usual media, that LENr is dangerous, ... as usual they will spread lies. the green lobbies are very efficiant. energetic lobbies will just wait avoiding dangerous lies, for the politicians to block LENR at home, like they do for GMO. then they will propose their service for half price energy, with only 80% of the margin in their pocket.
Re: [Vo]:To Radiate or Not to Radiate
*IMHO, we have been correctly told by DGT that their LENR process is a complex one comprised of many related and interconnected but separable sub-processes which when combined together produce heat without the production of intense and long lasting radiation.* * * *I believe that their cold fusion process includes one sub-process that removes or greatly lowers the coulomb barrier to allow various neighboring nucleons to come together in a wide assortment of ways to form new types of nuclei. This process not only produces radiation from the nuclear fusion process but also from resulting newly created isotopes.* * * *The other major sub-process is one that overlays this fusion process and thermalizes this radiation production. This process involves the establishment and maintenance of a quantum mechanical coherent environment within in the nuclear active population of nuclei.* * * *What I am saying is that a large amount of radiation will be generated in a fusion system that is not coherent. * * * *A example of such a system that produces radiation and transmutation is the NanoSpire system. This system is not quantum mechanically coherent and as a result it will generated intense radiation from its intense fusion process. * * * *Rossi’s major concern was to eliminate or at least greatly mitigate any radiation produced by his system. He has pulled this off and this is a major accomplishment of both Rossi and DGT in they mostly produce heat and have suppressed radiation from there systems.* * * *Without this radiation suppression mechanism in place and operating AT ALL TIMES, a cold fusion system is of little use.* * * * * * * On Fri, Mar 2, 2012 at 11:21 AM, Joseph Hao jth...@hotmail.com wrote: ** Hey Vortex Gang, My primary question motivating this post/query is to get a consensus on whether the presence of radiation is a necessary prerequisite for LENR/Cold Fusion Effects. IOW, is radiation ALWAYS present when an LENR/Cold Fusion effect occurs. On one hand, there appears to be copious evidence that radiation of some form or another is present during an LENR process. On the other hand, many people, including many here in Vortex appears to brush aside the evidence of radiation as circumstantial and unverified. What is the consensus? Is Radiation always present? Is Radiation a foolproof indication of an LENR process? This question is prompted after mulling over what Axil suggested to me a few post back. In his suggestion to my experimental protocols, he suggested I consider integrating a Cloud Chamber into my experiments. Well, after thinking about it for a while and trying to come up with a suitable way of integrating a HOT reactor inside a COLD cloud chamber; I have come to the conclusion that it might be beyond my technical and financial ability to do so. So, instead, I have come up with the second best thing. I have been thinking of integrating my reactor, not into a Cloud Chamber, but rather into an Ion Chamber design. Integrating a hot reactor into an Ion chamber appears to be straightforward and simple. So, instead of using flow calorimetry to detect excess heat in an LENR process, I will be using the Ion chamber to detect radiation. As far as I know, there is no known chemical process that releases radiation, if the reactants start from non-radioactive elements. So, if I detect radiation, high enough to be detectable in a DIY Ion chamber, then that excess radiation must be way above ambient, which means that there is only one possible conclusion - that my reactor inside the Ion chamber is releasing radiation. And since the reactor walls would be thick(er), most of the detected radiation would not be Alphas and Betas, but rather higher energy gammas. And if I am detecting copious gammas, then an LENR reaction must be the source. I'm thinking this might be a more straightforward way of detecting LENR reactions, rather than Heat calorimetry. What do you guys? Is this a good way to hunt for the LENR/Rossi process and catalysts?
Re: [Vo]:To Radiate or Not to Radiate
Von: Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com An: vortex-l@eskimo.com Gesendet: 18:21 Samstag, 3.März 2012 Betreff: Re: [Vo]:To Radiate or Not to Radiate ...their LENR process is a complex one comprised of many related and interconnected but separable sub-processes which when combined together ... Your conclusion is similar to mine. It is the intuition of the experimentalist, who brings those sub-processes together, so that new things happen. In contrast to that, established physics follows a different path: spotting ONE missing link in the theory, and singlemindedly throw billions onto the problem. The Higgs-Boson being a prominent example. Orthodoxy likes ONE problem at a time, and not a can of worms. Do'nt know if this a side-effect of Occam. Current Nuclear Physics seems to be in need to evaluate their axioms. Eg, as I stressed earlier, the axiom of the 'identity' of all atoms of the same type, which to me clearly stands in contradiction to the phenomenon of radioactive decay, where not all atoms are created equal, so to say. Which is my irrefutable private pet-theory. It is basically the mathematicians, who insist eg in 'identity', but are rarely in contact with matter. On the other hand, if the axiom(s) never existed in the first place, physics and a lot of other sciences would not have started in the first place. So there is a riddle here. OK? ...A example of such a system that produces radiation and transmutation is the NanoSpire system. This system is not quantum mechanically coherent and as a result it will generated intense radiation from its intense fusion process. ... The nanospire findings -if true- are even more disturbing than the other -friendly, nonradiating - LENR effects.
[Vo]:To Radiate or Not to Radiate
Does anyone know of any indication of Neutron radiation in any LENR/Cold Fusion experiment. If I remeber Levi correctly, he seems to have said that neutrons were absent in Rossi's E-Cat. Focardi also indicated that he has not measured neutrons at all. I don't recall Celani saying he measured Neutrons when he measured the burst of gammas in one of the Rossi demonstration. Can anyone recall either Focardi, Piantilli, Rossi or Defkalion (or any other) saying that they haved conclusively measured neutrons? I am trying to decide whether I want to sinter elemental Boron onto my Ion Chamber walls to increase sensitivity to Neutrons.
Re: [Vo]:To Radiate or Not to Radiate
There are reports of low but significant levels of fast neutrons above background. Charles Beaudette describes a 1992 experiment by Akito Takahashi, for example, that found neutrons being emitted from a Pd-D system. In general, however, the level of neutron emission is well below that which would be expected for a nuclear reaction. This is one of the primary obstacles to nuclear physicists giving LENR research their serious attention. If you're interested in specifics, you might take a look at one of the books that provides an overview of the experimental research on LENR. Eric On Sat, Mar 3, 2012 at 7:24 PM, Jojo Jaro jth...@hotmail.com wrote: ** Does anyone know of any indication of Neutron radiation in any LENR/Cold Fusion experiment. If I remeber Levi correctly, he seems to have said that neutrons were absent in Rossi's E-Cat. Focardi also indicated that he has not measured neutrons at all. I don't recall Celani saying he measured Neutrons when he measured the burst of gammas in one of the Rossi demonstration. Can anyone recall either Focardi, Piantilli, Rossi or Defkalion (or any other) saying that they haved conclusively measured neutrons? I am trying to decide whether I want to sinter elemental Boron onto my Ion Chamber walls to increase sensitivity to Neutrons.
[Vo]:To Radiate or Not to Radiate
Hey Vortex Gang, My primary question motivating this post/query is to get a consensus on whether the presence of radiation is a necessary prerequisite for LENR/Cold Fusion Effects. IOW, is radiation ALWAYS present when an LENR/Cold Fusion effect occurs. On one hand, there appears to be copious evidence that radiation of some form or another is present during an LENR process. On the other hand, many people, including many here in Vortex appears to brush aside the evidence of radiation as circumstantial and unverified. What is the consensus? Is Radiation always present? Is Radiation a foolproof indication of an LENR process? This question is prompted after mulling over what Axil suggested to me a few post back. In his suggestion to my experimental protocols, he suggested I consider integrating a Cloud Chamber into my experiments. Well, after thinking about it for a while and trying to come up with a suitable way of integrating a HOT reactor inside a COLD cloud chamber; I have come to the conclusion that it might be beyond my technical and financial ability to do so. So, instead, I have come up with the second best thing. I have been thinking of integrating my reactor, not into a Cloud Chamber, but rather into an Ion Chamber design. Integrating a hot reactor into an Ion chamber appears to be straightforward and simple. So, instead of using flow calorimetry to detect excess heat in an LENR process, I will be using the Ion chamber to detect radiation. As far as I know, there is no known chemical process that releases radiation, if the reactants start from non-radioactive elements. So, if I detect radiation, high enough to be detectable in a DIY Ion chamber, then that excess radiation must be way above ambient, which means that there is only one possible conclusion - that my reactor inside the Ion chamber is releasing radiation. And since the reactor walls would be thick(er), most of the detected radiation would not be Alphas and Betas, but rather higher energy gammas. And if I am detecting copious gammas, then an LENR reaction must be the source. I'm thinking this might be a more straightforward way of detecting LENR reactions, rather than Heat calorimetry. What do you guys? Is this a good way to hunt for the LENR/Rossi process and catalysts?
Re: [Vo]:To Radiate or Not to Radiate
I wish you well in your experimentation. It is not clear to me that radiation can be depended upon as a clear proof that useful levels of power are being generated by an LENR source. Others may disagree but the most successful devices that have been put forward appear to emit a minor amount of radiation. On the other hand, it might be in your best interest to monitor neutron and gamma ray emission levels emanating from your experiment for your safety. You might try some variation of an experiment that emits lethal levels of these which you would not detect in time. Dave -Original Message- From: Joseph Hao jth...@hotmail.com To: Vortex Vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Fri, Mar 2, 2012 11:22 am Subject: [Vo]:To Radiate or Not to Radiate Hey Vortex Gang, My primary question motivating this post/query is to get a consensus on whether the presence of radiation is a necessary prerequisite for LENR/Cold Fusion Effects. IOW, is radiation ALWAYS present when an LENR/Cold Fusion effect occurs. On one hand, there appears to be copious evidence that radiation of some form or another is present during an LENR process. On the other hand, many people, including many here in Vortex appears to brush aside the evidence of radiation as circumstantial and unverified. What is the consensus? Is Radiation always present? Is Radiation a foolproof indication of an LENR process? This question is prompted after mulling over what Axil suggested to me a few post back. In his suggestion to my experimental protocols, he suggested I consider integrating a Cloud Chamber into my experiments. Well, after thinking about it for a while and trying to come up with a suitable way of integrating a HOT reactor inside a COLD cloud chamber; I have come to the conclusion that it might be beyond my technical and financial ability to do so. So, instead, I have come up with the second best thing. I have been thinking of integrating my reactor, not into a Cloud Chamber, but rather into an Ion Chamber design. Integrating a hot reactor into an Ion chamber appears to be straightforward and simple. So, instead of using flow calorimetry to detect excess heat in an LENR process, I will be using the Ion chamber to detect radiation. As far as I know, there is no known chemical process that releases radiation, if the reactants start from non-radioactive elements. So, if I detect radiation, high enough to be detectable in a DIY Ion chamber, then that excess radiation must be way above ambient, which means that there is only one possible conclusion - that my reactor inside the Ion chamber is releasing radiation. And since the reactor walls would be thick(er), most of the detected radiation would not be Alphas and Betas, but rather higher energy gammas. And if I am detecting copious gammas, then an LENR reaction must be the source. I'm thinking this might be a more straightforward way of detecting LENR reactions, rather than Heat calorimetry. What do you guys? Is this a good way to hunt for the LENR/Rossi process and catalysts?
RE: [Vo]:To Radiate or Not to Radiate
That is not correct. Many chemical and mechanical processes produce radiation well into the x-ray range - even something as mundane as Scotch tape. http://articles.latimes.com/2008/oct/25/science/sci-tape25 Forget a cloud chamber. You need a dedicated meter with data logging. Although x-rays are commonly found at low intensity in mundane situations, it is the intensity level which is important, and you need comparative counts above background over time - for decent statistical analysis. From: Joseph Hao As far as I know, there is no known chemical process that releases radiation,
Re: [Vo]:To Radiate or Not to Radiate
Yes, dedicated meter with data logging together with data logging of the temperature of the reactor reactants. I plan to correlate radiation spikes with temperature spikes of the reactants. This wuold be a good way of verifying the LENR effects. Yes, there are many radiation sources in our environment, but aren't they all classified as background. If I get a clear reading way above background readings, that would be a clear indication of a nuclear process, wouldn't it? And hence, by inference, a clear indication of an LENR process of some kind. The scotch tape example, wouldn't that be classified as a nuclear process manifesting during a mechanical procedure? It is not a purely mechanical or chemical process per se, but rather a nuclear effect during certain mechanical and chemical conditions. I believe this is similar to Deflakion's chemically assisted nuclear reaction. The process itself is not chemical, ie, not involving the valence electrons, but LENR. This gives me a opportunity to rephrase my origianl statement As far as I know, this is no known process using chemical reactions of reactants that releases radiation due to the chemical reaction. But, I am acutely aware of the limitations of the terminology and my examples and explanations. Suffice it for now, that we can agree, that there is no known chemical process involving nickel, carbon, iron, copper and hydrogen that produces radiation, am I not correct? Please feel free to correct me. 0- Original Message - From: Jones Beene To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Saturday, March 03, 2012 12:53 AM Subject: RE: [Vo]:To Radiate or Not to Radiate That is not correct. Many chemical and mechanical processes produce radiation well into the x-ray range - even something as mundane as Scotch tape. http://articles.latimes.com/2008/oct/25/science/sci-tape25 Forget a cloud chamber. You need a dedicated meter with data logging. Although x-rays are commonly found at low intensity in mundane situations, it is the intensity level which is important, and you need comparative counts above background over time - for decent statistical analysis. From: Joseph Hao As far as I know, there is no known chemical process that releases radiation,
RE: [Vo]:To Radiate or Not to Radiate
Then there is the problem that energetic particles may be oriented in a particular direction, so where do you place your detector? It probably depends somewhat on the geometry of the core, and the orientation of its physical structure. If you have the resources, obtain multiple detectors and place them on the x, y, and z axes. Or just one detector, but do multiple tests moving the detector to a different location. Correlation of energetic particles with temperature excursions would be evidence supporting novel nuclear processes. -Mark From: Jojo Jaro [mailto:jth...@hotmail.com] Sent: Friday, March 02, 2012 9:20 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:To Radiate or Not to Radiate Yes, dedicated meter with data logging together with data logging of the temperature of the reactor reactants. I plan to correlate radiation spikes with temperature spikes of the reactants. This wuold be a good way of verifying the LENR effects. Yes, there are many radiation sources in our environment, but aren't they all classified as background. If I get a clear reading way above background readings, that would be a clear indication of a nuclear process, wouldn't it? And hence, by inference, a clear indication of an LENR process of some kind. The scotch tape example, wouldn't that be classified as a nuclear process manifesting during a mechanical procedure? It is not a purely mechanical or chemical process per se, but rather a nuclear effect during certain mechanical and chemical conditions. I believe this is similar to Deflakion's chemically assisted nuclear reaction. The process itself is not chemical, ie, not involving the valence electrons, but LENR. This gives me a opportunity to rephrase my origianl statement As far as I know, this is no known process using chemical reactions of reactants that releases radiation due to the chemical reaction. But, I am acutely aware of the limitations of the terminology and my examples and explanations. Suffice it for now, that we can agree, that there is no known chemical process involving nickel, carbon, iron, copper and hydrogen that produces radiation, am I not correct? Please feel free to correct me. 0- Original Message - From: Jones Beene mailto:jone...@pacbell.net To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Saturday, March 03, 2012 12:53 AM Subject: RE: [Vo]:To Radiate or Not to Radiate That is not correct. Many chemical and mechanical processes produce radiation well into the x-ray range - even something as mundane as Scotch tape. http://articles.latimes.com/2008/oct/25/science/sci-tape25 Forget a cloud chamber. You need a dedicated meter with data logging. Although x-rays are commonly found at low intensity in mundane situations, it is the intensity level which is important, and you need comparative counts above background over time - for decent statistical analysis. From: Joseph Hao As far as I know, there is no known chemical process that releases radiation,
Re: [Vo]:To Radiate or Not to Radiate
Thanks Mark. My reactor would be totally enclosed inside the cylindrical wall, which is the Ion chamber Anode. The reactor itself will be the Ion chamber Cathode. This would detect any ionizing ray in any which way except when it is perfectly parallel to the axis of the reactor, which would cause it to exit the ends of the cylindrical walls before it has a chance to ionize any gas in the chamber. This event would be unlikely as most of the rays would exit in a random direction and hence would be detected. However, I am unsure how a Ion Chamber with the reactor walls itself as the Cathode would work. In my estimation, the hydrogen inside the reactor would Ionize and would be attracted to negatively charged reactor walls. I suspect this would create some kind of bias current and charge buildup that would be interpreted as a positive hit by the electronics. I could reversed the polarity but that does not remove the charge buildup problem. Not sure if this would work. More experiment is required. - Original Message - From: Mark Iverson-ZeroPoint To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Saturday, March 03, 2012 2:04 AM Subject: RE: [Vo]:To Radiate or Not to Radiate Then there is the problem that energetic particles may be oriented in a particular direction, so where do you place your detector? It probably depends somewhat on the geometry of the core, and the orientation of its physical structure. If you have the resources, obtain multiple detectors and place them on the x, y, and z axes. Or just one detector, but do multiple tests moving the detector to a different location. Correlation of energetic particles with temperature excursions would be evidence supporting novel nuclear processes. -Mark From: Jojo Jaro [mailto:jth...@hotmail.com] Sent: Friday, March 02, 2012 9:20 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:To Radiate or Not to Radiate Yes, dedicated meter with data logging together with data logging of the temperature of the reactor reactants. I plan to correlate radiation spikes with temperature spikes of the reactants. This wuold be a good way of verifying the LENR effects. Yes, there are many radiation sources in our environment, but aren't they all classified as background. If I get a clear reading way above background readings, that would be a clear indication of a nuclear process, wouldn't it? And hence, by inference, a clear indication of an LENR process of some kind. The scotch tape example, wouldn't that be classified as a nuclear process manifesting during a mechanical procedure? It is not a purely mechanical or chemical process per se, but rather a nuclear effect during certain mechanical and chemical conditions. I believe this is similar to Deflakion's chemically assisted nuclear reaction. The process itself is not chemical, ie, not involving the valence electrons, but LENR. This gives me a opportunity to rephrase my origianl statement As far as I know, this is no known process using chemical reactions of reactants that releases radiation due to the chemical reaction. But, I am acutely aware of the limitations of the terminology and my examples and explanations. Suffice it for now, that we can agree, that there is no known chemical process involving nickel, carbon, iron, copper and hydrogen that produces radiation, am I not correct? Please feel free to correct me. 0- Original Message - From: Jones Beene To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Saturday, March 03, 2012 12:53 AM Subject: RE: [Vo]:To Radiate or Not to Radiate That is not correct. Many chemical and mechanical processes produce radiation well into the x-ray range - even something as mundane as Scotch tape. http://articles.latimes.com/2008/oct/25/science/sci-tape25 Forget a cloud chamber. You need a dedicated meter with data logging. Although x-rays are commonly found at low intensity in mundane situations, it is the intensity level which is important, and you need comparative counts above background over time - for decent statistical analysis. From: Joseph Hao As far as I know, there is no known chemical process that releases radiation,
RE: [Vo]:To Radiate or Not to Radiate
JoJo: First, I applaud your open-mindedness and efforts! You stated: This would detect any ionizing ray in any which way except when it is perfectly parallel to the axis of the reactor, which would cause it to exit the ends of the cylindrical walls before it has a chance to ionize any gas in the chamber. This event would be unlikely as most of the rays would exit in a random direction and hence would be detected. Normally I would agree, however, there has been some discussion in the Collective about a year ago on the issue of particle detection, and I remember some discussion on the fact that the longitudinal axis of the E-Cat was pointed in the direction of the room where visitors were waiting, including Celani who had his rad-detector instrument. He noticed a brief period of detector activity, then a few minutes later Rossi entered the room and announced that they fixed some problem and got the E-Cat to running state. In case you aren't aware, there has also been some evidence that particle emission may occur only during startup and shutdown. so, summary is, we cannot assume that particle emission won't occur only longitudinally! It all depends on the internal geometry of the core. and things yet to be discovered! You can proceed with you tests, but if they result in no activity, it might not be conclusive. however, if results are positive, then ignore all the above! Good luck and be careful! -Mark From: Jojo Jaro [mailto:jth...@hotmail.com] Sent: Friday, March 02, 2012 10:41 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:To Radiate or Not to Radiate Thanks Mark. My reactor would be totally enclosed inside the cylindrical wall, which is the Ion chamber Anode. The reactor itself will be the Ion chamber Cathode. This would detect any ionizing ray in any which way except when it is perfectly parallel to the axis of the reactor, which would cause it to exit the ends of the cylindrical walls before it has a chance to ionize any gas in the chamber. This event would be unlikely as most of the rays would exit in a random direction and hence would be detected. However, I am unsure how a Ion Chamber with the reactor walls itself as the Cathode would work. In my estimation, the hydrogen inside the reactor would Ionize and would be attracted to negatively charged reactor walls. I suspect this would create some kind of bias current and charge buildup that would be interpreted as a positive hit by the electronics. I could reversed the polarity but that does not remove the charge buildup problem. Not sure if this would work. More experiment is required. - Original Message - From: Mark Iverson-ZeroPoint mailto:zeropo...@charter.net To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Saturday, March 03, 2012 2:04 AM Subject: RE: [Vo]:To Radiate or Not to Radiate Then there is the problem that energetic particles may be oriented in a particular direction, so where do you place your detector? It probably depends somewhat on the geometry of the core, and the orientation of its physical structure. If you have the resources, obtain multiple detectors and place them on the x, y, and z axes. Or just one detector, but do multiple tests moving the detector to a different location. Correlation of energetic particles with temperature excursions would be evidence supporting novel nuclear processes. -Mark From: Jojo Jaro [mailto:jth...@hotmail.com] Sent: Friday, March 02, 2012 9:20 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:To Radiate or Not to Radiate Yes, dedicated meter with data logging together with data logging of the temperature of the reactor reactants. I plan to correlate radiation spikes with temperature spikes of the reactants. This wuold be a good way of verifying the LENR effects. Yes, there are many radiation sources in our environment, but aren't they all classified as background. If I get a clear reading way above background readings, that would be a clear indication of a nuclear process, wouldn't it? And hence, by inference, a clear indication of an LENR process of some kind. The scotch tape example, wouldn't that be classified as a nuclear process manifesting during a mechanical procedure? It is not a purely mechanical or chemical process per se, but rather a nuclear effect during certain mechanical and chemical conditions. I believe this is similar to Deflakion's chemically assisted nuclear reaction. The process itself is not chemical, ie, not involving the valence electrons, but LENR. This gives me a opportunity to rephrase my origianl statement As far as I know, this is no known process using chemical reactions of reactants that releases radiation due to the chemical reaction. But, I am acutely aware of the limitations of the terminology and my examples and explanations. Suffice it for now, that we can agree, that there is no known chemical process involving nickel, carbon, iron, copper and hydrogen
Re: [Vo]:To Radiate or Not to Radiate
Jojo, Recalled Dr. Santilli evacuated his building and property fearing harmful radiation at one stage of experimenting with unknown consequences. Either I was chatting with him about a year ago at his plant in tarpon Springs, FL or came across it in published literature. The thrust of his work was electric arc excitation of H gas. Something to the effect of neutrons pulsing dangerously after the reaction was shut down. One quick reference to this area of LENR : http://www.neutronstructure.org/neutron-synthesis-1.htm and http://www.google.com/url?q=http://www.scientificethics.org/NeutronSynthesisNCA-I.pdfsa=Uei=CDVRT9ikFofl0QGXgeHzDQved=0CCIQFjAGusg=AFQjCNHb9_SB9BuNDREx7mIRXgSuTh1dDQ He consulted with me on possible methods of stabilizing the product produced which represented some polymer of hydrogen (Crystal?) or in aqueous processes hydrogen and water. It was unstable, a common characteristic or hydrides in general which had been troubling me since 1948 doing classified work on weapons. US Dept of Labor has me under study today because of outcropping of cancer which the VA keeps snipping away at. I must say personally it has been a long fun filled ride through the unfolding of technology regardless of a lack of 2' thick lead shielding and worth the consequences. Passed a huge too do today with fire trucks and crawling with Hasmet people cleaning up a broken bag of Portland cement which fell off a mason's truck. Give me a break! Warm Regards, Reality Mark Iverson-ZeroPoint wrote: JoJo: First, I applaud your open-mindedness and efforts! You stated: “This would detect any ionizing ray in any which way except when it is perfectly parallel t (Snip)
