The COP of the Fleischmann Pons Effect appears in two primary modes:
Barely Measurable (COP perhaps 10% or so over unity).
Obvious (COP frequently infinite and long-duration).
I've never seen a breakdown of the literature into these two categories,
yet it seems this is important for 2 reasons:
http://www.infinite-energy.com/images/pdfs/NIWeekCravens.pdf
Cravens experiment was ongoing at infinite COP for 2.5 months before NI
Week, and he indicated that he would keep it going (that needs to be
confirmed).
If true, this one has been ongoing for almost 10 months at infinite COP.
How expensive is it to replicate?
On Sat, Mar 22, 2014 at 9:14 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:
http://www.infinite-energy.com/images/pdfs/NIWeekCravens.pdf
Cravens experiment was ongoing at infinite COP for 2.5 months before NI
Week, and he indicated that he would keep it
it looks like the evidence that proved Radium ?
2014-03-22 15:14 GMT+01:00 Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net:
http://www.infinite-energy.com/images/pdfs/NIWeekCravens.pdf
Cravens experiment was ongoing at infinite COP for 2.5 months before NI
Week, and he indicated that he would keep it
James,
The thread about the H-Cat, as an inexpensive but meaningful experiment in
its base-level incarnation - raised the possibility that an automotive
catalytic converter ($40 -$100) - filled with hydrogen. It could show a
steady temperature gain over ambient of more than Cravens' ongoing gain
James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote:
I've made this point before but it bears repeating that in a resource
starved field that is beset by inquisitorial true believers holding
positions of power . . .
Who are these inquisitorial true believers?!? What constitutes holding
power in this
Caveat:
There is no present indication that an automotive catalytic converter (CC)
will show thermal gain in an unpowered hydrogen experiment, similar to
Cravens work - but essentially there is a valid expectation of this result,
based on experiments going back to Arata... and it is easily
On Sat, Mar 22, 2014 at 9:54 AM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote:
I've made this point before but it bears repeating that in a resource
starved field that is beset by inquisitorial true believers holding
positions of power . . .
Who are
On Sat, Mar 22, 2014 at 9:52 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:
James,
The thread about the H-Cat, as an inexpensive but meaningful experiment in
its base-level incarnation - raised the possibility that an automotive
catalytic converter ($40 -$100) - filled with hydrogen
Don't you
Jones, let me try to simplify this suggestion. The LENR process requires a
special condition that is difficult to create in a material. Unless this
special condition is created (I call the NAE) no treatment will cause LENR.
This what 25 years of study of the effect has demonstrated and what
founded in other
research that have considered local micro magnetic fields of significant
magnitude.
Bob Cook
- Original Message -
From: Jones Beene
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Saturday, March 22, 2014 7:14 AM
Subject: RE: [Vo]:2 Modes of the FPE
http
From: James Bowery
The thread about the H-Cat, as an inexpensive but meaningful
experiment in its base-level incarnation - raised the possibility that an
automotive catalytic converter ($40 -$100) - filled with hydrogen
Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com wrote:
Consequently, a kit or test is useless unless the material has been made
active. We do not know how Rossi does this. We do not know how Cravens does
this. Until this knowledge is revealed and a material can be treated in a
way to make it active,
I agree that scientifically the affair is done since 1991-1992.
Since then there is effort to progress in reliability, intensity,
understanding...
the denial will only be resolved by mass adoption, of a working technology.
Turkey reality can only be proven on thanksgiving.
I know that LENR is
Jed--
Getting Cravens AND Gimpel is a good idea.
Do you know where Gimpel lives in Washington. He may be a neighbor of mine.
Bob
- Original Message -
From: Jed Rothwell
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Saturday, March 22, 2014 9:20 AM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:2 Modes of the FPE
On Mar 22, 2014, at 10:20 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com wrote:
Consequently, a kit or test is useless unless the material has been made
active. We do not know how Rossi does this. We do not know how Cravens does
this. Until this knowledge is revealed and a
Ed,
Sorry, but once again, you are only half-right. It is fairly clear to anyone
who is paying close attention that you fear and will lobby against positive
results from any kind of democratic experimental effort - since it will
further marginalize your own theory if successful.
Ed's theory is
Once again Jones, you make the discussion personal by arrogant descriptions of
what you think I believe.
My description does not involve a theory, at least not at this stage. It is a
simple description of what has been observed by hundreds of experiments. You
are free to accept this
On Sat, Mar 22, 2014 at 11:46 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:
Caveat:
There is no present indication that an automotive catalytic converter (CC)
will show thermal gain in an unpowered hydrogen experiment, similar to
Cravens work - but essentially there is a valid expectation of this
-Original Message-
From: Edmund Storms
Once again Jones, you make the discussion personal by arrogant
descriptions of what you think I believe.
From my perspective, arrogance was not intended- and if seen, then it must
have been a result of mirroring of the initial comment, which as
-Original Message-
From: Terry Blanton
Caveat:
There is no present indication that an automotive catalytic converter (CC)
will show thermal gain in an unpowered hydrogen experiment, similar to
Cravens work - but essentially there is a valid expectation of this result,
based on
On Sat, Mar 22, 2014 at 11:35 AM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.comwrote:
Based on my theory, the active material are nano-cracks. Making these at
the require size is the challenge. Cracks can be made many different ways,
but getting the right size is the problem.
Might there be a
Let me say this again as simply and as unambiguously as possible. LENR has been
studied for 24 years. Hundreds of papers describing the behavior and the
required conditions have been published. This data set shows what is required
and what does not work. My comments are not a theory. I'm simply
Terry, you need to now that Arata explored many sources of palladium black
before be found one that worked. He never revealed his source or what made the
particular batch active. Dissociation, loading and liquids are not the
essential requirements. An essential requirement exists in a
There, there... Terry
pat, pat, pat
It's all gonna be ok...
:-)
-Mark
-Original Message-
From: Terry Blanton [mailto:hohlr...@gmail.com]
Sent: Saturday, March 22, 2014 10:10 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:2 Modes of the FPE
On Sat, Mar 22, 2014 at 11:46 AM, Jones Beene
- Original Message -
From: James Bowery
To: vortex-l
Sent: Saturday, March 22, 2014 10:28 AM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:2 Modes of the FPE
On Sat, Mar 22, 2014 at 11:35 AM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com wrote:
Based on my theory, the active material are nano-cracks
Yes, getting a wide variety of sizes is easy. Getting enough of the right size
in this distribution is the problem. Only a few of the right size will not give
enough energy to be detected. When radiation or tritium is used to detect the
occurrence of LENR, the effect can be seen using fewer
If you are running a Cravens style simultaneous, colocated control
experiment with infinite COP your odds of detecting a tiny temperature
difference economically are vastly improved. Basically you just integrate
the voltage out of a bimetallic (thermocoupling) wall separating the
treated material
James, I feel much more comfortable using a calorimeter design I can trust and
that has been used in the past. The Cravens device is a nice demonstration but
it proves nothing. I have made calorimeters that do the job much better and
give absolute values for power. No need exists to reinvent.
Ed, I'm attacking a different problem: Cost.
Since we're in a quasi-Edisonian phase of scientific research, keeping the
cost per experiment as low as possible seems to be the bottleneck to
getting a protocol that has reproduces the FPE to any statistically
significant degree.
Developing a
Perhaps I can illustrate by avoiding thermal detection and going with
tritium:
Since tritium production is inherently time integrated, setting up a
Cravens style dual experiment with a one treated to have a wide range of
crack sizes, and both identical in all other respects, puts the primary
cost
So am I. A person gets what they pay for. It proves nothing if a person claims
to see heat using a method that no one will accept as showing excess energy no
matter how cheap the method. That has been a major problem in getting LENR
accepted in the first place. If heating power is sought, it
Tritium can not be detected easily using a beta detector. The best way is to
convert the gas to water and measure the tritium using the scintillation
metaod. The allows the sample to be studied over a period of time by many
people if they wish.
Ed Storms
On Mar 22, 2014, at 1:02 PM, James
Is there a paper describing the technique(s) for generating a wide
distribution of crack sizes?
On Sat, Mar 22, 2014 at 2:11 PM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.comwrote:
Tritium can not be detected easily using a beta detector. The best way is
to convert the gas to water and measure the
I know of no single paper that describes how cracks are formed. However, a huge
literature exists that describe how cracks are produced in materials and how
this destructive process can be avoided. I have 69 papers in my collection that
address this issue. Unless you are prepared to do a lot
I may have inadequately expressed what I was looking for:
A technique to generate, in a single sample, a wide and relatively flat
(very low kurtosis) distribution of crack sizes (and a large number of such
cracks of course).
This, as opposed to a wide array of techniques, each of which generates
If I had such a method, I would first write a patent. Unfortunately, that is
the method we are trying to find. I can make cracks anytime I want but I can
not make the most effective distribution at will, although I get lucky
sometimes.
Ed Storms
On Mar 22, 2014, at 1:58 PM, James Bowery
Someone asked about crack formation. What work I have done was to
prevent them rather than make them.
Basically you heat the object up and then cool the surface sufficiently
rapidly that a tensile stress is created that exceeds the tensile
strength of the material. Much easier to do with
Dear Ed,
The most dangerous aspect of the addiction of CF to cracks is that caracks
are destroying the active material, so technologically speaking the crack
theory is a death sentence. It can be true for palladium, but less noble
transition metals are working hopefully in a different way. PdD
It sounds like amorphous metals may be a fruitful avenue of research.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amorphous_metal
On Sat, Mar 22, 2014 at 3:45 PM, a.ashfield a.ashfi...@verizon.net wrote:
Someone asked about crack formation. What work I have done was to
prevent them rather than make them.
Perter, what you say is not true based on my understanding. Cracks can be made
stable. However, LENR does have a lifetime problem that will limit the upper
temperature and/or the time before the active material has to replaced.
Yes, I know that some people including yourself think PdD and NiH
Regarding this post:
There is more than one way to skin a cat. LENR active cracks can be
produced in more than one way. The way Rossi produces NAE is different than
the way Ed Storms produces NAE, and Rossi is far more productive and robust
at it.
Rossi produces NAE with his mouse which is a
beyond cracks , maybe is there some topological defect, longitudinal
defects, crystallographic-phase change planes...
is there document about hydroton.
naively among possibilities I imagine a circular hydroton ring and thing
about a superconductor.. to explain magnetic fields.
maybe stupid...
James Bowery
http://www.mail-archive.com/search?l=vortex-l@eskimo.comq=from:%22James+Bowery%22
Sat, 22 Mar 2014 14:14:49 -0700
http://www.mail-archive.com/search?l=vortex-l@eskimo.comq=date:20140322
It sounds like amorphous metals may be a fruitful avenue of research.
Yes, I imagine
Alain, you can find the description of the Hydroton at
http://coldfusionnow.org/iccf-18-presentation-videos-monday-july-22/
http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/StormsEexplaining.pdf
Ed Storms
On Mar 22, 2014, at 3:37 PM, Alain Sepeda wrote:
beyond cracks , maybe is there some topological defect,
Nanometer scale metallic glass particles would appear to be a natural
result of this method of metal nanoparticle
synthesishttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nanoparticle#Synthesis
:
Inert-gas condensation is frequently used to make nanoparticles from metals
with low melting points. The metal is
These guys studied amorphous Pd nanoparticles:
http://www.sci.unich.it/~dalessandro/letteratura_chimica_pdf/2003_0236.pdf
Of course, in order to get a broad range of crack sizes, one must have a
wide range of sizes of amorphous Pd particles -- not just nanoparticles.
Unfortunately, most of the
; they can't think out of the bulk-matter-box.
So keep up the informed and researched speculations, cuz that's what we
Vorts are good at! J
-Mark Iverson
From: James Bowery [mailto:jabow...@gmail.com]
Sent: Saturday, March 22, 2014 4:17 PM
To: vortex-l
Subject: Re: [Vo]:2 Modes of the FPE
the informed and researched speculations, cuz that’s what we Vorts
are good at! J
-Mark Iverson
From: James Bowery [mailto:jabow...@gmail.com]
Sent: Saturday, March 22, 2014 4:17 PM
To: vortex-l
Subject: Re: [Vo]:2 Modes of the FPE
These guys studied amorphous Pd nanoparticles
speculations, cuz that's what we
Vorts are good at! J
-Mark Iverson
*From:* James Bowery [mailto:jabow...@gmail.com]
*Sent:* Saturday, March 22, 2014 4:17 PM
*To:* vortex-l
*Subject:* Re: [Vo]:2 Modes of the FPE
These guys studied amorphous Pd nanoparticles:
http://www.sci.unich.it
From: Edmund Storms
Of course nanoparticles have unusual chemical and physical properties. The
question is , Are these properties able to initiate a nuclear reaction? A
huge ignorance exists about the difference between a nuclear reaction and a
chemical change. You would do well to actually
.
Bob
From: Axil Axil
To: vortex-l
Sent: Saturday, March 22, 2014 6:35 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:2 Modes of the FPE
Nano-particles allow for the collection and amplification of EMF(light) to an
extreme level in optical cavities sufficient to overcome the coulomb barrier.
This mechanism
Suppose only 2% of the material in a catalytic converter has the NAE
capable of producing the putative excess heat. Since a catalytic converter
contains so much more potentially NAE than a familiar CF cell it is like
running a thousand CF cells at the same time of which only twenty produce
excess
)
result from nuclear reactions without high energies required to over come the
coulomb barriers between such particles.
Bob
From: Axil Axil
To: vortex-l
Sent: Saturday, March 22, 2014 6:35 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:2 Modes of the FPE
Nano-particles allow for the collection
come the coulomb barriers between such particles.
Bob
*From:* Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com
*To:* vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
*Sent:* Saturday, March 22, 2014 6:35 PM
*Subject:* Re: [Vo]:2 Modes of the FPE
Nano-particles allow for the collection and amplification of EMF(light
55 matches
Mail list logo
