Re: [Vo]:Wigner effect?
From the info I have Wigner effect seems another bad excuse to reject more simple facts... however if it was true, such a huge storage (still unreliable like many new technologies), would be a HUGE REVOLUTIOn in Science, in Engineering... like we expected for LENR, it is evident that such giant Wigner effect would lead to great application. If LENR is not true, one of the key to future energetic technologies is the storage. Finding a storage a hundred more dense than chemical storage, his MEGA HUGE REVOLUTION. so why those hypocritical who claim it is a Wigner effect dont CLAIM IT LOUD and launche a BIG PROJECT to harness it and CHANGE the WORLD ! of course it is false and they don't believe one word of what they say. in french we call that a clivage (clivage is the operation to cut a gemstone cleanly), a psychotic avatar of cognitive dissonance, when someone sincerely believe a myth but at the same time clearly know it is false and do all he can to protect this myth, to avoid facing it's contradiction, to protect his personality from collapse by facing his failures. If someone repeat that Wigner effect, tell him to launch a research project to check if he believe in what he says. same for any similare excuse. Whatever is FP effect, it deserve a project. In metrology if it is measurement errors. In chemical science if it is chemical, or super chemical. In energy if it any kind of storage. In nuclear science if it is science. In psychiatry if it is groupthink and delusion. those who refuse to launch a study, are simply not believing their lies. 2012/11/28 Andy Findlay andy_find...@orange.net Thanks, Jed, You are implying that you don't believe that the stored Wigner effect energy per gram could be many orders of magnitude higher in Palladium (or Nickel, for that matter) than in graphite because of the 4eV per atom limit. Correct? Please don't get me wrong - I am hoping that I can rule out the Wigner Effect as the source of the anomalies (to my own satisfaction). It would be very disappointing if CF/LENR turned out to be just an unreliable energy storage device. Andy. On 28/11/12 01:54, Jed Rothwell wrote: Accumulation of energy in irradiated graphite has been recorded as high as 2.7 kJ/g, but is typically much lower than this . . . http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/**Wigner_effecthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wigner_effect Cold fusion cathodes of roughly 1 g have produced more than that in many cases, and in a few cases 50 to 150 MJ. In the debate between Fleischmann and Morrison I linked to, the cathode produced 1.1 MJ. As I recall it was small, probably ~1 g. Most of FP's early cathodes were small. The Wigner effect appears to be a form of mechanical storage, as near as I can tell. Generally speaking, when you talk about chemical or mechanical energy storage -- with electron bonds, in other words -- the upper limit is about 4 eV per atom of material. Store more than that and the molecules fall apart. You get plasma, I suppose. Cold fusion devices have produced hundreds to thousands of eV per atom, and the upper limit is unknown.
Re: [Vo]:Wigner effect?
I wrote: On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 4:18 PM, Andy Findlay andy_find...@orange.netwrote: I wasn't aware that hydrogen was capable of beta decay. Beta minus decay is possible under extreme conditions. But you would need to temporarily place the hydrogen you wanted to decay on a core-collapsing star. On second thought, β- decay isn't correct. I'm having a hard time saying for sure exactly what kind of beta decay it is. I don't imagine it's the normal inverse beta decay (inner shell electron capture), since there are probably few inner shell electrons hanging around. But β+ decay implies positron emission, and I don't see evidence of that. Wikipedia refers to it as reversed beta-decay in one place. The reaction seems to be: p + e- → N + v Eric
Re: [Vo]:Wigner effect?
Thanks, Eric, Yes, that fits within my conceptual view of what is possible for hydrogen. I think Stewart has got things a bit muddled. Andy. On 28/11/12 08:29, Eric Walker wrote: I wrote: On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 4:18 PM, Andy Findlay andy_find...@orange.net wrote: I wasn't aware that hydrogen was capable of beta decay. Beta minus decay is possible under extreme conditions. But you would need to temporarily place the hydrogen you wanted to decay on a core-collapsing star. On second thought, β- decay isn't correct. I'm having a hard time saying for sure exactly what kind of beta decay it is. I don't imagine it's the normal inverse beta decay (inner shell electron capture), since there are probably few inner shell electrons hanging around. But β+ decay implies positron emission, and I don't see evidence of that. Wikipedia refers to it as "reversed beta-decay" in one place. The reaction seems to be: p + e- → N + v Eric
Re: [Vo]:Wigner effect?
In reply to Eric Walker's message of Wed, 28 Nov 2012 00:29:16 -0800: Hi, [snip] On second thought, ?- decay isn't correct. I'm having a hard time saying for sure exactly what kind of beta decay it is. I don't imagine it's the normal inverse beta decay (inner shell electron capture), since there are probably few inner shell electrons hanging around. The electrons are present as independent particles in a hot plasma. If they weren't, the plasma would be positively charged, and would then attract electrons. But ?+ decay implies positron emission, and I don't see evidence of that. Wikipedia refers to it as reversed beta-decay in one place. The reaction seems to be: p + e- ? N + v Eric Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
Re: [Vo]:Wigner effect?
Andy,
I don't think Eric said it was not some type of Beta decay, just not Beta
-. There are many people on here brighter than me so I will let
them figure out what type. Maybe the lattice somehow polarizes neutrinos
and you get more collisions.
Stewart
On Wednesday, November 28, 2012, Andy Findlay wrote:
Thanks, Eric,
Yes, that fits within my conceptual view of what is possible for hydrogen.
I think Stewart has got things a bit muddled.
Andy.
On 28/11/12 08:29, Eric Walker wrote:
I wrote:
On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 4:18 PM, Andy Findlay
andy_find...@orange.netjavascript:_e({}, 'cvml',
'andy_find...@orange.net');
wrote:
I wasn't aware that hydrogen was capable of beta decay.
Beta minus decay is possible under extreme conditions. But you would
need to temporarily place the hydrogen you wanted to decay on a
core-collapsing star.
On second thought, β- decay isn't correct. I'm having a hard time saying
for sure exactly what kind of beta decay it is. I don't imagine it's the
normal inverse beta decay (inner shell electron capture), since there are
probably few inner shell electrons hanging around. But β+ decay implies
positron emission, and I don't see evidence of that. Wikipedia refers to
it as reversed beta-decay in one place. The reaction seems to be:
p + e- → N + v
Eric
Re: [Vo]:Wigner effect?
Thanks, Jed, You are implying that you don't believe that the stored Wigner effect energy per gram could be many orders of magnitude higher in Palladium (or Nickel, for that matter) than in graphite because of the 4eV per atom limit. Correct? Please don't get me wrong - I am hoping that I can rule out the Wigner Effect as the source of the anomalies (to my own satisfaction). It would be very disappointing if CF/LENR turned out to be just an unreliable energy storage device. Andy. On 28/11/12 01:54, Jed Rothwell wrote: Accumulation of energy in irradiated graphite has been recorded as high as 2.7 kJ/g, but is typically much lower than this . . . http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wigner_effect Cold fusion cathodes of roughly 1 g have produced more than that in many cases, and in a few cases 50 to 150 MJ. In the debate between Fleischmann and Morrison I linked to, the cathode produced 1.1 MJ. As I recall it was small, probably ~1 g. Most of FP's early cathodes were small. The Wigner effect appears to be a form of mechanical storage, as near as I can tell. Generally speaking, when you talk about chemical or mechanical energy storage -- with electron bonds, in other words -- the upper limit is about 4 eV per atom of material. Store more than that and the molecules fall apart. You get plasma, I suppose. Cold fusion devices have produced hundreds to thousands of eV per atom, and the upper limit is unknown.
[Vo]:Wigner effect?
Does anybody know of a sensible counter-argument (or maybe even a peer reviewed refutation) to the idea that the anomalous heat of cold-fusion/LENR might just be due to a Wigner-(like)-Effect? I had never heard of the Wigner Effect until a couple of days ago when I was reading about the Windscale fire (sorry about the use of Wikipedia links). It got me thinking about whether the documented swelling of palladium during loading could lead to a similar Wigner (like) Effect deformation of the palladium lattice which could then release stored energy abruptly - as happened in the graphite moderators in the Windscale fire. Following up on this, I found Douglas R.O. Morrison's Cold Fusion News article on NET which includes the following paragraph: "Prof. Bockris of Texas AM give a talk entitled "Seven Chemical Explanations of the Fleischmann-Pons effect" where he estimated the heat excess produced but always got values much less than the early claims of F-P and of Huggins of the order of 10 Watts - the highest he calculated was 0.9 W for the Pauling suggestion of PdH2 formation. He was asked about the Wigner effect, but had not considered it [ comment - this is a favourite explanation of many people. It was responsible for a large release of radioactivity in about 1957 at Windscale - the neutrons absorbed by the graphite had stored a lot of energy in the graphite by changing its structure and the subsequent release of this energy caused the trouble. It had previously been predicted by Wigner. Similarly the absorption of hydrogen or of deuterium by palladium causes the palladium to swell and this stores a lot of energy in the cathode. When the loading stops (e.g. the current is switched off or the level of the electrolyte falls and exposes part of the cathode), then this Wigner energy can be released]." Obviously I missed out on part of the cold fusion story. So, counter-arguments? Andy.
Re: [Vo]:Wigner effect?
The Wigner effect cannot produce megajoules per mole. Morrison never understood that concept. That is why he failed to see the significance of a cell that produced 1,700 more energy than any chemical source of energy could. See: http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/Fleischmanreplytothe.pdf Perhaps he did not know the difference between power and energy. He seems to be confusing them in this Report, No. 14-28. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Wigner effect?
If billions of neutrinos are flowing through all matter all of the time, if you pack enough hydrogen in a concentrated area you are bound to get a head on collision now or then leading to beta decay. Probably also leads to hydrogen embrittlement over time and maybe the gravitational acceleration we all experience when we stand on our dark matter nucleus planets... We humans are just the beta decay frosting on the cake. http://theta13.lbl.gov/neutrinos_universe/neutrinos_01.html Stewart Darkmattersalot.com On Tuesday, November 27, 2012, Andy Findlay wrote: Does anybody know of a sensible counter-argument (or maybe even a peer reviewed refutation) to the idea that the anomalous heat of cold-fusion/LENR might just be due to a Wigner-(like)-Effect? I had never heard of the Wigner Effecthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wigner_effectuntil a couple of days ago when I was reading about the Windscale fire http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windscale_fire (sorry about the use of Wikipedia links). It got me thinking about whether the documented swelling of palladium during loading could lead to a similar Wigner (like) Effect deformation of the palladium lattice which could then release stored energy abruptly - as happened in the graphite moderators in the Windscale fire. Following up on this, I found Douglas R.O. Morrison's Cold Fusion Newshttp://newenergytimes.com/v2/archives/DROM/14.shtmlarticle on NETwhich includes the following paragraph: Prof. Bockris of Texas AM give a talk entitled Seven Chemical Explanations of the Fleischmann-Pons effect where he estimated the heat excess produced but always got values much less than the early claims of F-P and of Huggins of the order of 10 Watts - the highest he calculated was 0.9 W for the Pauling suggestion of PdH2 formation. He was asked about the Wigner effect, but had not considered it* [ comment - this is a favourite explanation of many people. It was responsible for a large release of radioactivity in about 1957 at Windscale - the neutrons absorbed by the graphite had stored a lot of energy in the graphite by changing its structure and the subsequent release of this energy caused the trouble. It had previously been predicted by Wigner. Similarly the absorption of hydrogen or of deuterium by palladium causes the palladium to swell and this stores a lot of energy in the cathode. When the loading stops (e.g. the current is switched off or the level of the electrolyte falls and exposes part of the cathode), then this Wigner energy can be released]. *Obviously I missed out on part of the cold fusion story. So, counter-arguments? Andy.
Re: [Vo]:Wigner effect?
Thanks for the link, Jed. I've only skimmed it (so far), but it has given me some insight into Morrison's stance on the issue. And yes, I also get annoyed by people who confuse power with energy (Rossi, conspicuously). However, the pdf does not mention the Wigner effect. You state that the Wigner effect cannot produce megajoules per mole - well that is the sort of information I'm looking for but could you point me to a paper (or even an idiots guide) that shows this to be so? After all, it did manage to overwhelm the cooling system at Windscale. Incidentally, congratulations on the new look lenr-canr site. A great improvement! Andy. On 27/11/12 22:50, Jed Rothwell wrote: The Wigner effect cannot produce megajoules per mole. Morrison never understood that concept. That is why he failed to see the significance of a cell that produced 1,700 more energy than any chemical source of energy could. See: http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/Fleischmanreplytothe.pdf Perhaps he did not know the difference between power and energy. He seems to be confusing them in this Report, No. 14-28. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Wigner effect?
I wasn't aware that hydrogen was capable of beta decay. Andy. On 27/11/12 23:03, ChemE Stewart wrote: If billions of neutrinos are flowing through all matter all of the time, if you pack enough hydrogen in a concentrated area you are bound to get a head on collision now or then leading to beta decay. Probably also leads to hydrogen embrittlement over time and maybe the gravitational acceleration we all experience when we stand on our dark matter nucleus planets... We humans are just the beta decay frosting on the cake. http://theta13.lbl.gov/neutrinos_universe/neutrinos_01.html Stewart Darkmattersalot.com On Tuesday, November 27, 2012, Andy Findlay wrote: Does anybody know of a sensible counter-argument (or maybe even a peer reviewed refutation) to the idea that the anomalous heat of cold-fusion/LENR might just be due to a Wigner-(like)-Effect? I had never heard of the Wigner Effect until a couple of days ago when I was reading about the Windscale fire (sorry about the use of Wikipedia links). It got me thinking about whether the documented swelling of palladium during loading could lead to a similar Wigner (like) Effect deformation of the palladium lattice which could then release stored energy abruptly - as happened in the graphite moderators in the Windscale fire. Following up on this, I foundDouglas R.O. Morrison's Cold Fusion News article on NET which includes the following paragraph: "Prof. Bockris of Texas AM give a talk entitled "Seven Chemical Explanations of the Fleischmann-Pons effect" where he estimated the heat excess produced but always got values much less than the early claims of F-P and of Huggins of the order of 10 Watts - the highest he calculated was 0.9 W for the Pauling suggestion of PdH2 formation. He was asked about the Wigner effect, but had not considered it [ comment - this is a favourite explanation of many people. It was responsible for a large release of radioactivity in about 1957 at Windscale - the neutrons absorbed by the graphite had stored a lot of energy in the graphite by changing its structure and the subsequent release of this energy caused the trouble. It had previously been predicted by Wigner. Similarly the absorption of hydrogen or of deuterium by palladium causes the palladium to swell and this stores a lot of energy in the cathode. When the loading stops (e.g. the current is switched off or the level of the electrolyte falls and exposes part of the cathode), then this Wigner energy can be released]." Obviously I missed out on part of the cold fusion story. So, counter-arguments? Andy.
Re: [Vo]:Wigner effect?
Andy Findlay andy_find...@orange.net wrote: You state that the Wigner effect cannot produce megajoules per mole - well that is the sort of information I'm looking for but could you point me to a paper . . . According to ahem, cough, cough Wikipedia: Accumulation of energy in irradiated graphite has been recorded as high as 2.7 kJ/g, but is typically much lower than this . . . http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wigner_effect Cold fusion cathodes of roughly 1 g have produced more than that in many cases, and in a few cases 50 to 150 MJ. In the debate between Fleischmann and Morrison I linked to, the cathode produced 1.1 MJ. As I recall it was small, probably ~1 g. Most of FP's early cathodes were small. The Wigner effect appears to be a form of mechanical storage, as near as I can tell. Generally speaking, when you talk about chemical or mechanical energy storage -- with electron bonds, in other words -- the upper limit is about 4 eV per atom of material. Store more than that and the molecules fall apart. You get plasma, I suppose. Cold fusion devices have produced hundreds to thousands of eV per atom, and the upper limit is unknown. Anyway, Morrison was talking about the power level, which is irrelevant. No one has ever claimed the cold fusion is nuclear based on the power level. The power from a sample of impure radium is very low, but the sample remains hot for thousands of years, so the energy release is immense. I expect that if you could arrange to keep a gas loaded cold fusion device gas tight for hundreds of years, it would release heat the whole time, so the overall energy release would be immense. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Wigner effect?
Andy, Check out the picture on the link below http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutrino If it happens in the atmosphere we call it a warm sunny day. If it happens in a void with hydrogen in the dark we gaze in amazement and ask for money. Go figure. Stewart Darkmattersalot.com On Tuesday, November 27, 2012, Andy Findlay wrote: I wasn't aware that hydrogen was capable of beta decay. Andy. On 27/11/12 23:03, ChemE Stewart wrote: If billions of neutrinos are flowing through all matter all of the time, if you pack enough hydrogen in a concentrated area you are bound to get a head on collision now or then leading to beta decay. Probably also leads to hydrogen embrittlement over time and maybe the gravitational acceleration we all experience when we stand on our dark matter nucleus planets... We humans are just the beta decay frosting on the cake. http://theta13.lbl.gov/neutrinos_universe/neutrinos_01.html Stewart Darkmattersalot.com On Tuesday, November 27, 2012, Andy Findlay wrote: Does anybody know of a sensible counter-argument (or maybe even a peer reviewed refutation) to the idea that the anomalous heat of cold-fusion/LENR might just be due to a Wigner-(like)-Effect? I had never heard of the Wigner Effecthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wigner_effectuntil a couple of days ago when I was reading about the Windscale fire http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windscale_fire (sorry about the use of Wikipedia links). It got me thinking about whether the documented swelling of palladium during loading could lead to a similar Wigner (like) Effect deformation of the palladium lattice which could then release stored energy abruptly - as happened in the graphite moderators in the Windscale fire. Following up on this, I found Douglas R.O. Morrison's Cold Fusion Newshttp://newenergytimes.com/v2/archives/DROM/14.shtmlarticle on NETwhich includes the following paragraph: Prof. Bockris of Texas AM give a talk entitled Seven Chemical Explanations of the Fleischmann-Pons effect where he estimated the heat excess produced but always got values much less than the early claims of F-P and of Huggins of the order of 10 Watts - the highest he calculated was 0.9 W for the Pauling suggestion of PdH2 formation. He was asked about the Wigner effect, but had not considered it* [ comment - this is a favourite explanation of many people. It was responsible for a large release of radioactivity in about 1957 at Windscale - the neutrons absorbed by the graphite had stored a lot of energy in the graphite by changing its structure and the subsequent release of this energy caused the trouble. It had previously been predicted by Wigner. Similarly the absorption of hydrogen or of deuterium by palladium causes the palladium to swell and this stores a lot of energy in the cathode. When the loading stops (e.g. the current is switched off or the level of the electrolyte falls and exposes part of the cathode), then this Wigner energy can be released]. *Obviously I missed out on part of the cold fusion story. So, counter-arguments? Andy.
Re: [Vo]:Wigner effect?
Do you suppose all of those climate models take into account the energy released to Earth through natural Beta decay and LENR reactions from billions of tons of neutrinos and other dark matter stuff? NOT. It also does not take into account what happens when a large dark matter nucleus from a WIMP(hurricane) or comet nuclei sucks the energy from our world back to a dark/vacuum energy state. CO2 is just fluff. Civilizations in the past have thrived as the Earth has warmed, it is not until the impact event of multiple comet nuclei or major solar storms that we are thrown back into an ice age. In this day in age, even If we are smart enough to survive the ice age event, which is doubtful, our fission reactor meltdowns will most likely insure we are fried. Best we spread our DNA off this rock ASAP and pay close attention to those crop circles letting us know when the dark stuff is going to hit us in the head. Stewart Darkmattersalot.com On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 9:06 PM, ChemE Stewart cheme...@gmail.com wrote: Andy, Check out the picture on the link below http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutrino If it happens in the atmosphere we call it a warm sunny day. If it happens in a void with hydrogen in the dark we gaze in amazement and ask for money. Go figure. Stewart Darkmattersalot.com On Tuesday, November 27, 2012, Andy Findlay wrote: I wasn't aware that hydrogen was capable of beta decay. Andy. On 27/11/12 23:03, ChemE Stewart wrote: If billions of neutrinos are flowing through all matter all of the time, if you pack enough hydrogen in a concentrated area you are bound to get a head on collision now or then leading to beta decay. Probably also leads to hydrogen embrittlement over time and maybe the gravitational acceleration we all experience when we stand on our dark matter nucleus planets... We humans are just the beta decay frosting on the cake. http://theta13.lbl.gov/neutrinos_universe/neutrinos_01.html Stewart Darkmattersalot.com On Tuesday, November 27, 2012, Andy Findlay wrote: Does anybody know of a sensible counter-argument (or maybe even a peer reviewed refutation) to the idea that the anomalous heat of cold-fusion/LENR might just be due to a Wigner-(like)-Effect? I had never heard of the Wigner Effecthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wigner_effectuntil a couple of days ago when I was reading about the Windscale fire http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windscale_fire (sorry about the use of Wikipedia links). It got me thinking about whether the documented swelling of palladium during loading could lead to a similar Wigner (like) Effect deformation of the palladium lattice which could then release stored energy abruptly - as happened in the graphite moderators in the Windscale fire. Following up on this, I found Douglas R.O. Morrison's Cold Fusion Newshttp://newenergytimes.com/v2/archives/DROM/14.shtmlarticle on NETwhich includes the following paragraph: Prof. Bockris of Texas AM give a talk entitled Seven Chemical Explanations of the Fleischmann-Pons effect where he estimated the heat excess produced but always got values much less than the early claims of F-P and of Huggins of the order of 10 Watts - the highest he calculated was 0.9 W for the Pauling suggestion of PdH2 formation. He was asked about the Wigner effect, but had not considered it* [ comment - this is a favourite explanation of many people. It was responsible for a large release of radioactivity in about 1957 at Windscale - the neutrons absorbed by the graphite had stored a lot of energy in the graphite by changing its structure and the subsequent release of this energy caused the trouble. It had previously been predicted by Wigner. Similarly the absorption of hydrogen or of deuterium by palladium causes the palladium to swell and this stores a lot of energy in the cathode. When the loading stops (e.g. the current is switched off or the level of the electrolyte falls and exposes part of the cathode), then this Wigner energy can be released]. *Obviously I missed out on part of the cold fusion story. So, counter-arguments? Andy.
Re: [Vo]:Wigner effect?
On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 4:18 PM, Andy Findlay andy_find...@orange.netwrote: I wasn't aware that hydrogen was capable of beta decay. Beta minus decay is possible under extreme conditions. But you would need to temporarily place the hydrogen you wanted to decay on a core-collapsing star. Eric
