Re: [Vo]:Oxygen to hydrogen?
In reply to Axil Axil's message of Sat, 3 May 2014 01:44:13 -0400: Hi, [snip] Take a look at the third party test results. http://pesn.com/2014/04/29/9602478_Solar-Hydrogen-Trends_revolutionizing-all-energy/SHT_performance%20_test.pdf I could not find how long this test ran. Another problem is that it isn't clear if the moisture percentage is by volume or by weight. If it's by volume (Volumetric flow rate), and comprises liquid water droplets (likely at 80 ºF) , then it could be a significant proportion of the weight. In short much of the water may still have been water rather than Hydrogen. (Ultrasound is frequently used to create cold mist). [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
Re: [Vo]:Oxygen to hydrogen?
Axil-- Where did you find the information about the use of TETA? If it is in the third party report details, it seems those are only available with a NDA. It (TETA) does not show up in the cover page of the full report and Sterling Alan, regarding his interview with SHT, does not mention it, TMK. Alan only seems to think H2O is used up. The interview with SHT does question the source of N, however, it is dismissed by SHT as being a contamination from an unknown source. I did not see or hear anything in the interview that addressed the Ar. It seems I must be missing some of the report in the link you provided or not have fully digested the interview with SHT. Bob - Original Message - From: Axil Axil To: vortex-l Sent: Friday, May 02, 2014 10:44 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Oxygen to hydrogen? Take a look at the third party test results. http://pesn.com/2014/04/29/9602478_Solar-Hydrogen-Trends_revolutionizing-all-energy/SHT_performance%20_test.pdf I could not find how long this test ran. On Sat, May 3, 2014 at 12:07 AM, mix...@bigpond.com wrote: In reply to Axil Axil's message of Fri, 2 May 2014 16:28:20 -0400: Hi, [snip] On Fri, May 2, 2014 at 3:41 PM, Bob Cook frobertc...@hotmail.com wrote: How much energy does it take to make TETA? Its an old radioactive chelating agent and not cheap used in decontamination. However, it production costs may have improved since the time we used it US $20-22 / *Liter* *( FOB Price)* 800 Liters *(Min. Order)* The economic flaw in this system is the cost of the consumables. I wonder if they have taken into account all possible sources of energy in the system? The temperatures available during cavitation would likely catalyze any chemical reaction that was energetically possible, and then there is the energy from ultrasound generators etc. as well. I don't expect that the latter would contribute much, however the chemical energy could be considerable. I would like to see a proper accounting, especially given the claim that they can get 1 kg H2 from 1 kg H2O. That claim is most likely a simple mistake, but might be true if the Hydrogen is also coming from other chemicals in the mix. In order for it to be true for only water, they would have to be converting all the Oxygen into Hydrogen too, which apparently is what they believe is happening. If so, then they are being extraordinarily wasteful. In order to split Oxygen into Hydrogen you need to supply roughly the binding energy of Oxygen which is about 127,000,000 eV. Having spent 127,000,000 eV converting Oxygen into Hydrogen, they then get back about 12 eV in chemical energy, when the Hydrogen is burnt using atmospheric oxygen, about 1 part in 10 million of the energy input. They might do better to find a means of tapping the original energy source more directly. ;) Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
Re: [Vo]:Oxygen to hydrogen?
Yes, look at how little oxygen is present in the exhaust gas, verified by a reputable testing company. I'm assuming that this ain't hydrolysis-wouldn't hydrolysis give you roughly one third oxygen? Listen to the interview if you have the time. The inventor appears to be blithely suggesting that there is wholesale conversion of oxygen to hydrogen taking place in there. Huh what? I find it fascinating that a person with the integrative skills to produce the patents we find in his résumé, would be able to smilingly suggest that he has a machine that uses 700 watts of electric power to convert oxygen to hydrogen. Wouldn't that be a rather endothermic procedure? It increasingly feels like we are peering through a looking glass at what could mildly be described as an Alice-in-Wonderland parallel universe. Once the door is open wide enough something is bound to come through. Are you prepared to meet the Red Queen, or perhaps the Singularity that surpasses all understanding? I really want to be around to hear the Rest of the Story! Steve High On May 3, 2014, at 1:44 AM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: Take a look at the third party test results. http://pesn.com/2014/04/29/9602478_Solar-Hydrogen-Trends_revolutionizing-all-energy/SHT_performance%20_test.pdf I could not find how long this test ran. On Sat, May 3, 2014 at 12:07 AM, mix...@bigpond.com wrote: In reply to Axil Axil's message of Fri, 2 May 2014 16:28:20 -0400: Hi, [snip] On Fri, May 2, 2014 at 3:41 PM, Bob Cook frobertc...@hotmail.com wrote: How much energy does it take to make TETA? Its an old radioactive chelating agent and not cheap used in decontamination. However, it production costs may have improved since the time we used it US $20-22 / *Liter* *( FOB Price)* 800 Liters *(Min. Order)* The economic flaw in this system is the cost of the consumables. I wonder if they have taken into account all possible sources of energy in the system? The temperatures available during cavitation would likely catalyze any chemical reaction that was energetically possible, and then there is the energy from ultrasound generators etc. as well. I don't expect that the latter would contribute much, however the chemical energy could be considerable. I would like to see a proper accounting, especially given the claim that they can get 1 kg H2 from 1 kg H2O. That claim is most likely a simple mistake, but might be true if the Hydrogen is also coming from other chemicals in the mix. In order for it to be true for only water, they would have to be converting all the Oxygen into Hydrogen too, which apparently is what they believe is happening. If so, then they are being extraordinarily wasteful. In order to split Oxygen into Hydrogen you need to supply roughly the binding energy of Oxygen which is about 127,000,000 eV. Having spent 127,000,000 eV converting Oxygen into Hydrogen, they then get back about 12 eV in chemical energy, when the Hydrogen is burnt using atmospheric oxygen, about 1 part in 10 million of the energy input. They might do better to find a means of tapping the original energy source more directly. ;) Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
Re: [Vo]:Oxygen to hydrogen?
*Robin van Spaandonk is right when he says that the amount of energy required to produce the oxygen to hydrogen separation is inconceivable in its magnitude. Because the amount of oxygen produced is substantial, the energy to break up that much oxygen into hydrogen would be in the hundreds of gigawatts of energy output, the energy production capacity of a few hundred nuclear reactors, or the energy produced by a good sized nuclear device.* *This transmutation of oxygen into hydrogen is endothermic. Where is all that energy coming from? * On Sat, May 3, 2014 at 12:07 AM, mix...@bigpond.com wrote: In reply to Axil Axil's message of Fri, 2 May 2014 16:28:20 -0400: Hi, [snip] On Fri, May 2, 2014 at 3:41 PM, Bob Cook frobertc...@hotmail.com wrote: How much energy does it take to make TETA? Its an old radioactive chelating agent and not cheap used in decontamination. However, it production costs may have improved since the time we used it US $20-22 / *Liter* *( FOB Price)* 800 Liters *(Min. Order)* The economic flaw in this system is the cost of the consumables. I wonder if they have taken into account all possible sources of energy in the system? The temperatures available during cavitation would likely catalyze any chemical reaction that was energetically possible, and then there is the energy from ultrasound generators etc. as well. I don't expect that the latter would contribute much, however the chemical energy could be considerable. I would like to see a proper accounting, especially given the claim that they can get 1 kg H2 from 1 kg H2O. That claim is most likely a simple mistake, but might be true if the Hydrogen is also coming from other chemicals in the mix. In order for it to be true for only water, they would have to be converting all the Oxygen into Hydrogen too, which apparently is what they believe is happening. If so, then they are being extraordinarily wasteful. In order to split Oxygen into Hydrogen you need to supply roughly the binding energy of Oxygen which is about 127,000,000 eV. Having spent 127,000,000 eV converting Oxygen into Hydrogen, they then get back about 12 eV in chemical energy, when the Hydrogen is burnt using atmospheric oxygen, about 1 part in 10 million of the energy input. They might do better to find a means of tapping the original energy source more directly. ;) Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
RE: [Vo]:Oxygen to hydrogen?
From: Steve High Yes, look at how little oxygen is present in the exhaust gas, verified by a reputable testing company. I'm assuming that this ain't hydrolysis-wouldn't hydrolysis give you roughly one third oxygen? Listen to the interview if you have the time. The inventor appears to be blithely suggesting that there is wholesale conversion of oxygen to hydrogen taking place in there. Huh what? It gets worse, the closer one looks, or should I say more humorous. This is science by PR release and hucksterism . not that MIT does not do the same thing, on occasion. In fact some of MIT's more notorious escapades - which are the many overhyped but failed hydrogen inventions of Prof. Dan Nocera, are but a slight improvement. At least Nocera is arguably honest, at some base level, but in the case of SHT, there is doubt about true intentions. In both case$ the goal is the $ame. I happened to be in the vicinity of Solar Hydrogen's Menlo Park address the other day (it is next door to SRI) so I stopped in to have a look. It turns out that they actually have no corporate office nor lab at all ! . bizarre - the address listed on all of their PR releases is that of a Law Office. and one that would not acknowledge at first that SHT is even a client ! Aggressively promoting this kind of energy miracle crap makes everyone in alternative-energy look bad (even more so when they blindly accept it). But then again, with Nocera/MIT as your model, this kind of science by PR release is becoming standard operating procedure.
Re: [Vo]:Oxygen to hydrogen?
On Sat, May 3, 2014 at 10:15 AM, Bob Cook frobertc...@hotmail.com wrote: Axil-- Where did you find the information about the use of TETA? If it is in the third party report details, it seems those are only available with a NDA. I looked into the metal separation technology that Jackob Aganyan of Solar Hydrogen Trends(JA) said his system sprang from. Without exception, this mining technology requires the use of TETA or a similar amine to perform the metal separation. The presence of nitrogen in the gas output is indicative that he speculation of this secret sauce is on track. JA says he cannot understand where the nitrogen is coming from, but that is a statement to cover the secret of his secret sauce. When Rossi discovered nickel produced his reaction during his initial revelatory experiment, nickel remains a mainstay of his reaction. I speculate the same is true for TETA or another similar amine, but I could be wrong, time will tell. It (TETA) does not show up in the cover page of the full report and Sterling Alan, regarding his interview with SHT, does not mention it, TMK. Alan only seems to think H2O is used up. The interview with SHT does question the source of N, however, it is dismissed by SHT as being a contamination from an unknown source. I did not see or hear anything in the interview that addressed the Ar. It seems I must be missing some of the report in the link you provided or not have fully digested the interview with SHT. Bob - Original Message - *From:* Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com *To:* vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com *Sent:* Friday, May 02, 2014 10:44 PM *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:Oxygen to hydrogen? Take a look at the third party test results. http://pesn.com/2014/04/29/9602478_Solar-Hydrogen-Trends_revolutionizing-all-energy/SHT_performance%20_test.pdf I could not find how long this test ran. On Sat, May 3, 2014 at 12:07 AM, mix...@bigpond.com wrote: In reply to Axil Axil's message of Fri, 2 May 2014 16:28:20 -0400: Hi, [snip] On Fri, May 2, 2014 at 3:41 PM, Bob Cook frobertc...@hotmail.com wrote: How much energy does it take to make TETA? Its an old radioactive chelating agent and not cheap used in decontamination. However, it production costs may have improved since the time we used it US $20-22 / *Liter* *( FOB Price)* 800 Liters *(Min. Order)* The economic flaw in this system is the cost of the consumables. I wonder if they have taken into account all possible sources of energy in the system? The temperatures available during cavitation would likely catalyze any chemical reaction that was energetically possible, and then there is the energy from ultrasound generators etc. as well. I don't expect that the latter would contribute much, however the chemical energy could be considerable. I would like to see a proper accounting, especially given the claim that they can get 1 kg H2 from 1 kg H2O. That claim is most likely a simple mistake, but might be true if the Hydrogen is also coming from other chemicals in the mix. In order for it to be true for only water, they would have to be converting all the Oxygen into Hydrogen too, which apparently is what they believe is happening. If so, then they are being extraordinarily wasteful. In order to split Oxygen into Hydrogen you need to supply roughly the binding energy of Oxygen which is about 127,000,000 eV. Having spent 127,000,000 eV converting Oxygen into Hydrogen, they then get back about 12 eV in chemical energy, when the Hydrogen is burnt using atmospheric oxygen, about 1 part in 10 million of the energy input. They might do better to find a means of tapping the original energy source more directly. ;) Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
Re: [Vo]:Oxygen to hydrogen?
http://revolution-green.com/hydrogen-production-breakthrough/ Here is more info from Revolution Green web site. Konstantine Balakiryan, PhD, is a founder and CEO at Solar Hydrogen Trends Inc. As a chief scientist he is the driving force behind the 7 models of the hydrogen reactor. Konstantine was a Professor and head of physics, chemistry and mathematics department at the Russian University of Friendship (Moscow). He received his Master Degree in Physics from Moscow Lomonosov University and PhD in Physics from Russian Academy of Science. I had the following letter forwarded to me and asked if it could be included in the story Dear Colleagues, I am closely following all the discussions on multiple forums. I really like your judgments and their proximity to understanding the processes that occur in reality in the hydrogen reactor “Symphony 7A”. Unfortunately, according to the existing ethics in the scientific community, the authors are not encouraged to discuss about any research results with the media before they are published in scientific journals. However, in order for you to understand what a great discovery GOD gave to us all please try to find answers in the following questions: 1. If the working substance in the reactor is water, how come the output is almost only hydrogen ? 2. After splitting water where do molecules of oxygen disappear? 3. What role in stunning efficiency of “Symphony 7A” plays a collective excitation of nucleons in the nuclei of atoms of oxygen? 4. Is it possible at a rate of 0.5 kW energy hour and at operating temperature 60 degrees centigrade, to have a nuclear fission and fusion? 5 . To produce 1kg of hydrogen it is necessary to split 9 liters of water, then how or in what way in this hydrogen reactor “Symphony 7A”, it takes only 1 liter? Sincerely, Konstantin Balakiryan PhD, Professor This explanation does sound very simplistic. On Sat, May 3, 2014 at 12:18 PM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: *From:* Steve High Yes, look at how little oxygen is present in the exhaust gas, verified by a reputable testing company. I'm assuming that this ain't hydrolysis-wouldn't hydrolysis give you roughly one third oxygen? Listen to the interview if you have the time. The inventor appears to be blithely suggesting that there is wholesale conversion of oxygen to hydrogen taking place in there. Huh what? It gets worse, the closer one looks, or should I say “more humorous”. This is science by PR release and hucksterism … not that MIT does not do the same thing, on occasion. In fact some of MIT’s more notorious escapades – which are the many overhyped but failed hydrogen inventions of Prof. Dan Nocera, are but a slight improvement. At least Nocera is arguably honest, at some base level, but in the case of SHT, there is doubt about true intentions. In both case$ the goal is the $ame. I happened to be in the vicinity of Solar Hydrogen’s Menlo Park address the other day (it is next door to SRI) so I stopped in to have a look. It turns out that they actually have no corporate office nor lab at all ! … bizarre - the address listed on all of their PR releases is that of a Law Office… and one that would not acknowledge at first that SHT is even a client ! Aggressively promoting this kind of “energy miracle” crap makes everyone in alternative-energy look bad (even more so when they blindly accept it). But then again, with Nocera/MIT as your model, this kind of science by PR release is becoming standard operating procedure.
Re: [Vo]:Oxygen to hydrogen?
Jones-- I had the same impressions in listening to the interview. It sounds like Sterling and Mike were trying to promote an interest that was unfounded, especially since they glossed over obvious questions. Bob - Original Message - From: Jones Beene To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Saturday, May 03, 2014 9:18 AM Subject: RE: [Vo]:Oxygen to hydrogen? From: Steve High Yes, look at how little oxygen is present in the exhaust gas, verified by a reputable testing company. I'm assuming that this ain't hydrolysis-wouldn't hydrolysis give you roughly one third oxygen? Listen to the interview if you have the time. The inventor appears to be blithely suggesting that there is wholesale conversion of oxygen to hydrogen taking place in there. Huh what? It gets worse, the closer one looks, or should I say more humorous. This is science by PR release and hucksterism . not that MIT does not do the same thing, on occasion. In fact some of MIT's more notorious escapades - which are the many overhyped but failed hydrogen inventions of Prof. Dan Nocera, are but a slight improvement. At least Nocera is arguably honest, at some base level, but in the case of SHT, there is doubt about true intentions. In both case$ the goal is the $ame. I happened to be in the vicinity of Solar Hydrogen's Menlo Park address the other day (it is next door to SRI) so I stopped in to have a look. It turns out that they actually have no corporate office nor lab at all ! . bizarre - the address listed on all of their PR releases is that of a Law Office. and one that would not acknowledge at first that SHT is even a client ! Aggressively promoting this kind of energy miracle crap makes everyone in alternative-energy look bad (even more so when they blindly accept it). But then again, with Nocera/MIT as your model, this kind of science by PR release is becoming standard operating procedure.
Re: [Vo]:Oxygen to hydrogen?
Axil-- The thought that JA was covering up the use of TETA entered my mind also. It would be interesting to see if the disassociation of TETA in a water solution 98% TETA and 2% H2O could produce a ratio of the gases that were observed. Stirling should ask for a sample of the liquid in the plastic storage tank shown in the video and check if it is pure water. Your guess that it is some, if not mostly, TETA may be correct. It may be that the Ar has to be added to keep the mixture below 4% O to avoid the obvious hazard. Bob - Original Message - From: Axil Axil To: vortex-l Sent: Saturday, May 03, 2014 9:25 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Oxygen to hydrogen? On Sat, May 3, 2014 at 10:15 AM, Bob Cook frobertc...@hotmail.com wrote: Axil-- Where did you find the information about the use of TETA? If it is in the third party report details, it seems those are only available with a NDA. I looked into the metal separation technology that Jackob Aganyan of Solar Hydrogen Trends(JA) said his system sprang from. Without exception, this mining technology requires the use of TETA or a similar amine to perform the metal separation. The presence of nitrogen in the gas output is indicative that he speculation of this secret sauce is on track. JA says he cannot understand where the nitrogen is coming from, but that is a statement to cover the secret of his secret sauce. When Rossi discovered nickel produced his reaction during his initial revelatory experiment, nickel remains a mainstay of his reaction. I speculate the same is true for TETA or another similar amine, but I could be wrong, time will tell. It (TETA) does not show up in the cover page of the full report and Sterling Alan, regarding his interview with SHT, does not mention it, TMK. Alan only seems to think H2O is used up. The interview with SHT does question the source of N, however, it is dismissed by SHT as being a contamination from an unknown source. I did not see or hear anything in the interview that addressed the Ar. It seems I must be missing some of the report in the link you provided or not have fully digested the interview with SHT. Bob - Original Message - From: Axil Axil To: vortex-l Sent: Friday, May 02, 2014 10:44 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Oxygen to hydrogen? Take a look at the third party test results. http://pesn.com/2014/04/29/9602478_Solar-Hydrogen-Trends_revolutionizing-all-energy/SHT_performance%20_test.pdf I could not find how long this test ran. On Sat, May 3, 2014 at 12:07 AM, mix...@bigpond.com wrote: In reply to Axil Axil's message of Fri, 2 May 2014 16:28:20 -0400: Hi, [snip] On Fri, May 2, 2014 at 3:41 PM, Bob Cook frobertc...@hotmail.com wrote: How much energy does it take to make TETA? Its an old radioactive chelating agent and not cheap used in decontamination. However, it production costs may have improved since the time we used it US $20-22 / *Liter* *( FOB Price)* 800 Liters *(Min. Order)* The economic flaw in this system is the cost of the consumables. I wonder if they have taken into account all possible sources of energy in the system? The temperatures available during cavitation would likely catalyze any chemical reaction that was energetically possible, and then there is the energy from ultrasound generators etc. as well. I don't expect that the latter would contribute much, however the chemical energy could be considerable. I would like to see a proper accounting, especially given the claim that they can get 1 kg H2 from 1 kg H2O. That claim is most likely a simple mistake, but might be true if the Hydrogen is also coming from other chemicals in the mix. In order for it to be true for only water, they would have to be converting all the Oxygen into Hydrogen too, which apparently is what they believe is happening. If so, then they are being extraordinarily wasteful. In order to split Oxygen into Hydrogen you need to supply roughly the binding energy of Oxygen which is about 127,000,000 eV. Having spent 127,000,000 eV converting Oxygen into Hydrogen, they then get back about 12 eV in chemical energy, when the Hydrogen is burnt using atmospheric oxygen, about 1 part in 10 million of the energy input. They might do better to find a means of tapping the original energy source more directly. ;) Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
RE: [Vo]:Oxygen to hydrogen?
From: Axil Axil Here is more info from Revolution Green web site. Konstantine Balakiryan, PhD, is a founder and CEO at Solar Hydrogen Trends Inc. As a chief scientist he is the driving force behind the 7 models of the hydrogen reactor. Konstantine was a Professor and head of physics, chemistry and mathematics department at the Russian University of Friendship (Moscow). Funny thing, Axil. Most PhD’s have a few relevant publications, especially in an advanced technology if they are promoting that technology and trying to raise tens of millions. Or at least a Patent or two. Are there any patents or publications for Balakiryan? I’ve been unable to find them if they are out there. However – look at the picture of the impressive “reactor” which appears on the SHT website: http://www.solarhydrogentrends.com/img/laboratory.jpg Indeed, one would need something like this to handle 16 different chemical reactions, as they claim? OTOH, doesn’t that pic look remarkably like this bottling machine from China: http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-166130981/stock-photo-drinks-production-plant-in-china.html Coincidence? Maybe the same company designed both? In the case of Balakiryan, a quick googling turns up zero publications, no discussion on Physics boards, and no patents … yet a number of telling comments like this one: Dear Kourtney, I have an idea for a new line of jeans named ”Salvador Dali” by Kourtney Kardashian. This innovative concept will astonish the fashion world. Please call me, so I can send you some of the designs. 602 618 4222. Konstantin Balakiryan PhD, Professor Yes, this is/was indeed the Telephone # of a person named “Dr Konstantin Balakiryan,” but maybe it is his son, who is also a young professor ? - instead of the genius who is now CEO of Solar Hydrogen Trends. All of this is circumstantial and means nothing really, if KB is really a top scientist, and if there is truth to these claims. Yet since SHT are actively seeking money which could go into honest alternative energy RD, should the commentators on Vortex not question whether or not he is a real scientist or a con artist instead? Of course, maybe he is just interested in getting into Kourtney’s jeans at the same time as he is saving the World by converting oxygen into hydrogen :-) The point being – it is probably wise for vocal proponents of LENR to “wait and see” if there really is any small shred of evidence for these incredible claims - besides that of a SoCal smog tester dude who does not want to talk about the SHT testing on the record.
Re: [Vo]:Oxygen to hydrogen?
On Sat, May 3, 2014 at 7:40 AM, Steve High diamondweb...@gmail.com wrote: Wouldn't that be a rather endothermic procedure? If you could get a process going that efficiently splits oxygen nuclei into protons (and neutrons), Robin's calculations suggest the device would make a fantastic freezer. Better have large source of power to drive the thing. Eric
Re: [Vo]:Oxygen to hydrogen?
Re the shutterstock image. It's the same picture. You can crop the Shutterstock image to match the truncated piece of whatever that is that's on the SH(i)T website and everything matches exactly detail for detail. A remarkable piece of sleuthing,Jones. Is there actually software that allows one to input an image that can then be matched against everything on the web? That would sure be the bane of every two bit scam artist. Steve High On May 3, 2014, at 1:56 PM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: From: Axil Axil Here is more info from Revolution Green web site. Konstantine Balakiryan, PhD, is a founder and CEO at Solar Hydrogen Trends Inc. As a chief scientist he is the driving force behind the 7 models of the hydrogen reactor. Konstantine was a Professor and head of physics, chemistry and mathematics department at the Russian University of Friendship (Moscow). Funny thing, Axil. Most PhD’s have a few relevant publications, especially in an advanced technology if they are promoting that technology and trying to raise tens of millions. Or at least a Patent or two. Are there any patents or publications for Balakiryan? I’ve been unable to find them if they are out there. However – look at the picture of the impressive “reactor” which appears on the SHT website: http://www.solarhydrogentrends.com/img/laboratory.jpg Indeed, one would need something like this to handle 16 different chemical reactions, as they claim? OTOH, doesn’t that pic look remarkably like this bottling machine from China: http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-166130981/stock-photo-drinks-production-plant-in-china.html Coincidence? Maybe the same company designed both? In the case of Balakiryan, a quick googling turns up zero publications, no discussion on Physics boards, and no patents … yet a number of telling comments like this one: Dear Kourtney, I have an idea for a new line of jeans named ”Salvador Dali” by Kourtney Kardashian. This innovative concept will astonish the fashion world. Please call me, so I can send you some of the designs. 602 618 4222. Konstantin Balakiryan PhD, Professor Yes, this is/was indeed the Telephone # of a person named “Dr Konstantin Balakiryan,” but maybe it is his son, who is also a young professor ? - instead of the genius who is now CEO of Solar Hydrogen Trends. All of this is circumstantial and means nothing really, if KB is really a top scientist, and if there is truth to these claims. Yet since SHT are actively seeking money which could go into honest alternative energy RD, should the commentators on Vortex not question whether or not he is a real scientist or a con artist instead? Of course, maybe he is just interested in getting into Kourtney’s jeans at the same time as he is saving the World by converting oxygen into hydrogen J The point being – it is probably wise for vocal proponents of LENR to “wait and see” if there really is any small shred of evidence for these incredible claims - besides that of a SoCal smog tester dude who does not want to talk about the SHT testing on the record.
Re: [Vo]:Oxygen to hydrogen?
I have been waiting and seeing, but with the advent of a third party test, I thought it was time to get additional information from the experts here on vortex. I had heard about this company a few months ago. I was copied on this message from Michael Mc Kubre over a month ago. I have not heard if the visit can off, or if it did what MM’s evaluation of it was. If you can find out, let me know. *From: Michael Mc Kubre [mailto:michael.mcku...@sri.com michael.mcku...@sri.com] Sent: Monday, March 17, 2014 3:10 PM To: Jim Dunn Subject: Re: possible 'breakthru' in Hydrogen production by Menlo Park research group ?* *Hi Jim * *Yes, you are not the first to forward this (maybe the Menlo Park context?). I am traveling ATM and this seemed so ridiculous that I did not follow up. When I return I will pulse them and see if they will accept a visit. It will either be entertaining or revolutionary. Just looking at the mass numbers these guys are either claiming to create mass (H), or turn O into H, with very little energy cost. About the only two laws I absolutely trust are the first law of thermodynamics and Einstein’s equivalence of mass an energy. One is violated here. I hope all is well with you.* *Best,* *m* Like the deuterium to hydrogen experiment we talked about recently and the associated extraction of energy from the vacuum, just because it seems impossible, it does not mean it cannot happen. On Sat, May 3, 2014 at 1:56 PM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: *From:* Axil Axil Here is more info from Revolution Green web site. Konstantine Balakiryan, PhD, is a founder and CEO at Solar Hydrogen Trends Inc. As a chief scientist he is the driving force behind the 7 models of the hydrogen reactor. Konstantine was a Professor and head of physics, chemistry and mathematics department at the Russian University of Friendship (Moscow). Funny thing, Axil. Most PhD’s have a few relevant publications, especially in an advanced technology if they are promoting that technology and trying to raise tens of millions. Or at least a Patent or two. Are there any patents or publications for Balakiryan? I’ve been unable to find them if they are out there. However – look at the picture of the impressive “reactor” which appears on the SHT website: http://www.solarhydrogentrends.com/img/laboratory.jpg Indeed, one would need something like this to handle 16 different chemical reactions, as they claim? OTOH, doesn’t that pic look remarkably like this bottling machine from China: http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-166130981/stock-photo-drinks-production-plant-in-china.html Coincidence? Maybe the same company designed both? In the case of Balakiryan, a quick googling turns up zero publications, no discussion on Physics boards, and no patents … yet a number of telling comments like this one: Dear Kourtney, I have an idea for a new line of jeans named ”Salvador Dali” by Kourtney Kardashian. This innovative concept will astonish the fashion world. Please call me, so I can send you some of the designs. 602 618 4222. Konstantin Balakiryan PhD, Professor Yes, this is/was indeed the Telephone # of a person named “Dr Konstantin Balakiryan,” but maybe it is his son, who is also a young professor ? - instead of the genius who is now CEO of Solar Hydrogen Trends. All of this is circumstantial and means nothing really, if KB is really a top scientist, and if there is truth to these claims. Yet since SHT are actively seeking money which could go into honest alternative energy RD, should the commentators on Vortex not question whether or not he is a real scientist or a con artist instead? Of course, maybe he is just interested in getting into Kourtney’s jeans at the same time as he is saving the World by converting oxygen into hydrogen J The point being – it is probably wise for vocal proponents of LENR to “wait and see” if there really is any small shred of evidence for these incredible claims - besides that of a SoCal smog tester dude who does not want to talk about the SHT testing on the record.
Re: [Vo]:Oxygen to hydrogen?
Jones is the best. This is why vortex is a great resource for evaluation and critique. This info must be explained by this vender. On Sat, May 3, 2014 at 2:55 PM, Steve High diamondweb...@gmail.com wrote: Re the shutterstock image. It's the same picture. You can crop the Shutterstock image to match the truncated piece of whatever that is that's on the SH(i)T website and everything matches exactly detail for detail. A remarkable piece of sleuthing,Jones. Is there actually software that allows one to input an image that can then be matched against everything on the web? That would sure be the bane of every two bit scam artist. Steve High On May 3, 2014, at 1:56 PM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: *From:* Axil Axil Here is more info from Revolution Green web site. Konstantine Balakiryan, PhD, is a founder and CEO at Solar Hydrogen Trends Inc. As a chief scientist he is the driving force behind the 7 models of the hydrogen reactor. Konstantine was a Professor and head of physics, chemistry and mathematics department at the Russian University of Friendship (Moscow). Funny thing, Axil. Most PhD’s have a few relevant publications, especially in an advanced technology if they are promoting that technology and trying to raise tens of millions. Or at least a Patent or two. Are there any patents or publications for Balakiryan? I’ve been unable to find them if they are out there. However – look at the picture of the impressive “reactor” which appears on the SHT website: http://www.solarhydrogentrends.com/img/laboratory.jpg Indeed, one would need something like this to handle 16 different chemical reactions, as they claim? OTOH, doesn’t that pic look remarkably like this bottling machine from China: http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-166130981/stock-photo-drinks-production-plant-in-china.html Coincidence? Maybe the same company designed both? In the case of Balakiryan, a quick googling turns up zero publications, no discussion on Physics boards, and no patents … yet a number of telling comments like this one: Dear Kourtney, I have an idea for a new line of jeans named ”Salvador Dali” by Kourtney Kardashian. This innovative concept will astonish the fashion world. Please call me, so I can send you some of the designs. 602 618 4222. Konstantin Balakiryan PhD, Professor Yes, this is/was indeed the Telephone # of a person named “Dr Konstantin Balakiryan,” but maybe it is his son, who is also a young professor ? - instead of the genius who is now CEO of Solar Hydrogen Trends. All of this is circumstantial and means nothing really, if KB is really a top scientist, and if there is truth to these claims. Yet since SHT are actively seeking money which could go into honest alternative energy RD, should the commentators on Vortex not question whether or not he is a real scientist or a con artist instead? Of course, maybe he is just interested in getting into Kourtney’s jeans at the same time as he is saving the World by converting oxygen into hydrogen J The point being – it is probably wise for vocal proponents of LENR to “wait and see” if there really is any small shred of evidence for these incredible claims - besides that of a SoCal smog tester dude who does not want to talk about the SHT testing on the record.
RE: [Vo]:Oxygen to hydrogen?
From: Steve High Is there actually software that allows one to input an image that can then be matched against everything on the web? That would sure be the bane of every two bit scam artist. Actually, I’d like to take credit - but this duplicity was caught by someone else online. I should give them credit, but I’ve lost the url.
RE: [Vo]:Oxygen to hydrogen?
About 2/3 of the way down this page http://www.energeticforum.com/renewable-energy/16708-hydrogen-production-beyond-belief.html From: Steve High Is there actually software that allows one to input an image that can then be matched against everything on the web? That would sure be the bane of every two bit scam artist. Actually, I’d like to take credit - but this duplicity was caught by someone else online. I should give them credit, but I’ve lost the url.
RE: [Vo]:Oxygen to hydrogen?
One other detail is that you will not find on the SHT website is the patent and the patent #, but apparently there really is a European patent… yet that’s the problem which has forced them to go for a quick investment in the USA, based on vastly inflated claims instead of scientific validation. The patent is said to be owned by the University of Armenia and there is a legal proceeding over the rights – according to an off-the-record discussion. The reason that two of the SHT employees are not given last names on the web site may relate to an attempt to limit tracking of the document. Even if this document turns up – the chances of it being a major breakthrough are small, but there could be an energy anomaly of some kind. Most likely it involves a consumable, very much like the Pacheco device. http://www.rexresearch.com/pacheco/pacheco.htm
Re: [Vo]:Oxygen to hydrogen?
I posted this picture of the STI reactor to the pure energy systems site. It did not pass moderation. I wonder why??? The opinion of Sterling D. Allanhttp://pureenergysystems.com/about/personnel/SterlingDAllan/index.htmlof *Pure Energy Systems News has diminished markedly as a result of this action.* On Sat, May 3, 2014 at 3:34 PM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote: All I did was cropping and resizing http://imgur.com/lZYMTOx
Re: [Vo]:Oxygen to hydrogen?
Correction: STI should read SHT On Sat, May 3, 2014 at 3:48 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: I posted this picture of the STI reactor to the pure energy systems site. It did not pass moderation. I wonder why??? The opinion of Sterling D. Allanhttp://pureenergysystems.com/about/personnel/SterlingDAllan/index.htmlof *Pure Energy Systems News has diminished markedly as a result of this action.* On Sat, May 3, 2014 at 3:34 PM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote: All I did was cropping and resizing http://imgur.com/lZYMTOx
Re: [Vo]:Oxygen to hydrogen?
Yup. I just did the same thing and did not pass moderation. BTW I checked the website of the foundation that SH(i)T claims provided a grant. Any guesses which name does NOT appear among the list of grantees to date? Steve High On May 3, 2014, at 3:51 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: Correction: STI should read SHT On Sat, May 3, 2014 at 3:48 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: I posted this picture of the STI reactor to the pure energy systems site. It did not pass moderation. I wonder why??? The opinion of Sterling D. Allan of Pure Energy Systems News has diminished markedly as a result of this action. On Sat, May 3, 2014 at 3:34 PM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote: All I did was cropping and resizing http://imgur.com/lZYMTOx
Re: [Vo]:Oxygen to hydrogen?
PESN never claimed to be fair and balanced. :-)
RE: [Vo]:Oxygen to hydrogen?
Most likely, the SHT device involves using a consumable, very much like the Pacheco device. However, there is the remote possibility that the consumable can be recycled in situ if the gain is strong. Here is a most interesting Armenian paper of interest, sent to me by an interested party who wants to see credit given where it is due, http://syreen.gov.sy/archive/docs/File/ICRE8-5-2010/ICRE-ARTICLES/Fuel%20cel ls%20and%20Hydrogen%20Energy/009-116.pdf Pacheco’s patent is US 6834623, 1975. http://www.rexresearch.com/pacheco/pacheco.htm Of course, the geniuses at Solar Hydrogen Trends may have “forgotten” to mention the consumable in all their excitement over raising millions. Anyway, let’s revisit Pacheco from an LENR context. There are a number of choices for consumable hydrogen carriers, including the one used by Rossi which may give added synergy. Magnesium hydride is a consumable which could be used for copious hydrogen as it contains 7.7 % by weight, and can yield twice as much hydrogen when reacted with water (or more). The normal water reaction: MgH2 + 2 H2O → 2 H2 + Mg(OH)2 But with slight changes and some electrical current added, one can possibly get more hydrogen, which is what Pacheco supposedly achieved. Plus with added current there is the further possibility of LENR. A few researchers thought that that the Pacheco hydrogen anomaly was due to producing a superoxide, such as magnesium superoxide. Mg + 4 H2O → 4 H2 + Mg(O2) 2 MgH2 + 4 H2O → 5 H2 + Mg(O2)2 But there is no adequate proof of that, and superoxides are unstable, rare and tricky, even explosive - and moreover, there is an inherent violation of CoE if this were to be accomplished robustly without an outside energy input. That is where LENR comes into the picture. It would be sad to think that SHT had actually found a real anomaly in being able to split water into a superoxide mode on a regular gainful basis - but instead of having that gain verified scientifically, they have tried to build a scam on top of it by vastly overstating the case and hiding the use of a consumable, which provides most of the energy. It would be equally sad to not give “someone” from Armenia credit, if they have actually done this correctly - and are in a legal struggle to set thing right. Anyway - to produce the kg of hydrogen from the added kg of water - which is essentially the claim of SHT – one would need to start with about 5 kg of magnesium hydride (hydrated) … which would of course be in the reactor at the start, so no one is the wiser. That assumes no recycling. ‘fonly …as they say… ‘fonly they avoided the inevitable explosion and recycled the superoxide, which (on paper) is much easier to do than recycling the normal oxide then even the 5 kg could be reduced to almost a marginal level… thus the overunity… ‘fonly… Yet, in all honesty, the “recycled Mg superoxide route + LENR” cannot be ruled out based on what is known and what is unknown. Never mind improbability. As they say in Yerevan «Ով գիտի» attachment: winmail.dat
Re: [Vo]:Oxygen to hydrogen?
In reply to Axil Axil's message of Sat, 3 May 2014 12:13:28 -0400: Hi, [snip] *Robin van Spaandonk is right when he says that the amount of energy required to produce the oxygen to hydrogen separation is inconceivable in its magnitude. Because the amount of oxygen produced is substantial, the energy to break up that much oxygen into hydrogen would be in the hundreds of gigawatts of energy output, the energy production capacity of a few hundred nuclear reactors, or the energy produced by a good sized nuclear device.* *This transmutation of oxygen into hydrogen is endothermic. Where is all that energy coming from? * BTW a couple small side notes: 1) If you add a small Hydrinohydride ion to an Oxygen atom, it might take up a close orbit around the Oxygen nucleus, effectively reducing the charge of the Oxygen by one, and making it appear chemically to be Nitrogen (but with a mass of 17 rather than 14). 2) Both Ar+ O++ are Mills catalysts. If Ar were deliberately added to the mix then both species of ion might be present in a sono-luminescence bubble, created by the ultra-sound. I suspect strongly that this crowd is hanging onto Mills' coat tails, and providing a nonsense explanation for the operation of their device to cover the fact. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
Re: [Vo]:Oxygen to hydrogen?
In reply to Axil Axil's message of Sat, 3 May 2014 12:13:28 -0400: Hi, [snip] BTW a couple small side notes: 1) If you add a small Hydrinohydride ion to an Oxygen atom, it might take up a close orbit around the Oxygen nucleus, effectively reducing the charge of the Oxygen by one, and making it appear chemically to be Nitrogen (but with a mass of 17 rather than 14). 3) If you use potassium as your electrolyte during the electrolysis, then by the same mechanism, you get 39K + Hy- gives something that is chemically equivalent to Argon and has the same mass too. IOW is essentially indistinguishable from Argon (unless you hit it very hard indeed). Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
Re: [Vo]:Oxygen to hydrogen?
In reply to Axil Axil's message of Sat, 3 May 2014 15:06:00 -0400: Hi, [snip] *Hi Jim * *Yes, you are not the first to forward this (maybe the Menlo Park context?). I am traveling ATM and this seemed so ridiculous that I did not follow up. When I return I will pulse them and see if they will accept a visit. It will either be entertaining or revolutionary. Just looking at the mass numbers these guys are either claiming to create mass (H), or turn O into H, with very little energy cost. About the only two laws I absolutely trust are the first law of thermodynamics and Einsteins equivalence of mass an energy. One is violated here. I hope all is well with you.* *Best,* *m* Like the deuterium to hydrogen experiment we talked about recently and the associated extraction of energy from the vacuum, just because it seems impossible, it does not mean it cannot happen. BTW note that no energy is actually lost in converting O into H as it can be retrieved again by fusing the H back into O. So The first law would not violated by such a reaction. However the source of the energy would still be a mystery. BTW 4 In the film clip JA talks about particles from the Sun being collected and manipulated, both charged and neutral. However charged particles from the Sun don't usually make it to Earth, they get stopped by the atmosphere (as do most neutral particles). (Neutrinos of course do make it to Earth, and usually keep right on going out the other side again ;) If we assume for arguments sake that they are using the neutrinos (not anti-neutrinos BTW), then as previously calculated on this forum, there is about 80 W / m^2 available (Sunlight is much easier to utilize). Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
Re: [Vo]:Oxygen to hydrogen?
An acknowledgement: as of Sunday Morning the PESN moderator did pass through the reports from Axil and myself concerning the Chinese soda bottle factory affair. I therefore withdraw any cynicism I may have evidenced Steve High On May 3, 2014, at 3:51 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: Correction: STI should read SHT On Sat, May 3, 2014 at 3:48 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: I posted this picture of the STI reactor to the pure energy systems site. It did not pass moderation. I wonder why??? The opinion of Sterling D. Allan of Pure Energy Systems News has diminished markedly as a result of this action. On Sat, May 3, 2014 at 3:34 PM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote: All I did was cropping and resizing http://imgur.com/lZYMTOx
Re: [Vo]:Oxygen to hydrogen?
One thing that's different about this free energy scheme is how easy it would be to close the loop ie use the output to provide the input and disconnect the system from any power supply. My assumption is that a gas powered generator could be or already has been modified to run on hydrogen gas. That makes it a no brainer to use the hydrogen output to provide the electric power at the front end. That also makes this company's scientific claims (400 times over unity) so easily falsifiable. If the company won't agree to close the loop take your money off the table. Steve High On May 1, 2014, at 11:23 PM, Patrick Ellul ellulpatr...@gmail.com wrote: I must say, the acronym for the company name is SHT. On Fri, May 2, 2014 at 12:41 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qYliDUI8bY4#t=173 See story at http://pesn.com/2014/04/29/9602478_So... Interview: Solar Hydrogen Trends is revolutionizing all energy I calculate 577 x overunity based on their third-party test results of 697 Watt input producing 2322 liters of gas/minute, equating to 402 kW output, from a device twice the size of a microwave oven, drawing from 16 different simultaneous phenomena creating what they call their Symphony, including turning O into H and controlling particles. They're ready to go into production manufacturing these. This might be a cavatation system what uses a shock wave. Or it could be a scam, time will tell. -- Patrick www.tRacePerfect.com The daily puzzle everyone can finish but not everyone can perfect! The quickest puzzle ever!
RE: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Oxygen to hydrogen?
It is intriguing that they seem to be shotgunnning every approach to force an anomaly out of the mix but for a 400x gain to happen in an ongoing repeatable gas producing system it has to be either a mistake or they have instead exploited the self destructive mechanism that all the other researchers have encountered. If the results are not in error or an outright hoax then one might consider a system where runaway is avoided by disassociating water – a Patterson cell on steroids. As long as the active material is kept wet it simply produces more hydrogen while trying to runaway – not saying that runaway is eliminated but rather a window created instead of trying to balance on the head of a pin. Fran From: Steve High [mailto:diamondweb...@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, May 02, 2014 8:31 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Oxygen to hydrogen? One thing that's different about this free energy scheme is how easy it would be to close the loop ie use the output to provide the input and disconnect the system from any power supply. My assumption is that a gas powered generator could be or already has been modified to run on hydrogen gas. That makes it a no brainer to use the hydrogen output to provide the electric power at the front end. That also makes this company's scientific claims (400 times over unity) so easily falsifiable. If the company won't agree to close the loop take your money off the table. Steve High On May 1, 2014, at 11:23 PM, Patrick Ellul ellulpatr...@gmail.commailto:ellulpatr...@gmail.com wrote: I must say, the acronym for the company name is SHT. On Fri, May 2, 2014 at 12:41 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.commailto:janap...@gmail.com wrote: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qYliDUI8bY4#t=173 See story at http://pesn.com/2014/04/29/9602478_So...http://pesn.com/2014/04/29/9602478_Solar-Hydrogen-Trends_revolutionizing-all-energy/ Interview: Solar Hydrogen Trends is revolutionizing all energy I calculate 577 x overunity based on their third-party test results of 697 Watt input producing 2322 liters of gas/minute, equating to 402 kW output, from a device twice the size of a microwave oven, drawing from 16 different simultaneous phenomena creating what they call their Symphony, including turning O into H and controlling particles. They're ready to go into production manufacturing these. This might be a cavatation system what uses a shock wave. Or it could be a scam, time will tell. -- Patrick www.tRacePerfect.comhttp://www.tRacePerfect.com The daily puzzle everyone can finish but not everyone can perfect! The quickest puzzle ever!
Re: [Vo]:Oxygen to hydrogen?
If hydrogen is the output gas derived from oxygen, how much risk is there for explosion? The mixture of these gases is highly explosive at just about any concentration of hydrogen. Dave -Original Message- From: Steve High diamondweb...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Fri, May 2, 2014 8:31 am Subject: Re: [Vo]:Oxygen to hydrogen? One thing that's different about this free energy scheme is how easy it would be to close the loop ie use the output to provide the input and disconnect the system from any power supply. My assumption is that a gas powered generator could be or already has been modified to run on hydrogen gas. That makes it a no brainer to use the hydrogen output to provide the electric power at the front end. That also makes this company's scientific claims (400 times over unity) so easily falsifiable. If the company won't agree to close the loop take your money off the table. Steve High On May 1, 2014, at 11:23 PM, Patrick Ellul ellulpatr...@gmail.com wrote: I must say, the acronym for the company name is SHT. On Fri, May 2, 2014 at 12:41 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qYliDUI8bY4#t=173 See story at http://pesn.com/2014/04/29/9602478_So... Interview: Solar Hydrogen Trends is revolutionizing all energy I calculate 577 x overunity based on their third-party test results of 697 Wattinput producing 2322 liters of gas/minute, equating to 402 kW output, from adevice twice the size of a microwave oven, drawing from 16 differentsimultaneous phenomena creating what they call their Symphony,including turning O into H and controlling particles. They're ready to go intoproduction manufacturing these. This might be a cavatation system what usesa shock wave. Or it could be a scam, time will tell. -- Patrick www.tRacePerfect.com The daily puzzle everyone can finish but not everyone can perfect! The quickest puzzle ever!
Re: [Vo]:Oxygen to hydrogen?
On Fri, May 2, 2014 at 11:23 AM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: If hydrogen is the output gas derived from oxygen, how much risk is there for explosion? The mixture of these gases is highly explosive at just about any concentration of hydrogen. Reference: http://people.clarkson.edu/~wwilcox/Design/flamlim2.pdf It takes 4% oxygen to make the hydrogen/oxygen mixture farmable. In the third party gas composition test, of the four runs performed, only one had a oxygen percent mixture above 4%. But there was an unspecified concentration of argon mixed in with the oxygen.
Re: [Vo]:Oxygen to hydrogen?
Why is there so much nitrogen in the gas output and so little oxygen? Nitrogen (14N) is a notoriously non-reactive LENR gas because it has a non-zero nuclear spin, whereas oxygen (16O) is a wonderful LENR gas because its nuclear spin is zero. The cavitation based reaction in the SHT system must be magnetic based on nanoplasmonic principles derived from nanoparticle formation in site. On Fri, May 2, 2014 at 2:17 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: I looked into the metal separation technology that Jackob Aganyan of Solar Hydrogen Trends(JA) said his system sprang from. What JA said in the video is consistent with the technology that he says his system comes from. In the patent as follows: http://www.google.ca/patents/US4659512 *Fixation of dissolved metal species with a complexing agent* *US 4659512 A* *“A process for removing metal species from solution comprising passing the liquid over a composition comprising a support such as a porous silicate glass or silica gel or charcoal having interconnected pores and containing water soluble amine complexing agents absorbed on the support capable of forming a stable complex with the metal species. The preferred amine complexing agent is triethylenetetramine.”* In this process, cavitation is produced using sound. *“**The patent also describes a decontamination method which comprises immersing a radioactively contaminated article in a solution comprised of water, ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid, sodium sulfate, sodium hydroxide, manganese dioxide and carbon black, and subjecting said solution to ultrasonic vibration forces sufficient to produce cavitation therein.”* Triethylenetetramine (TETA) seems to be used throughout this technology including the variant that extracts gold, palladium, and platinum from minerals and may be the source for the nitrogen in the gas output. TETA is a hydrogen nitrogen compound. The secret sauce (assume TETA) is said to be consumed in the process. If this technology is in fact real, its high COP makes it the paramount system in the LENR sweepstakes. On Fri, May 2, 2014 at 1:42 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, May 2, 2014 at 11:23 AM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.comwrote: If hydrogen is the output gas derived from oxygen, how much risk is there for explosion? The mixture of these gases is highly explosive at just about any concentration of hydrogen. Reference: http://people.clarkson.edu/~wwilcox/Design/flamlim2.pdf It takes 4% oxygen to make the hydrogen/oxygen mixture farmable. In the third party gas composition test, of the four runs performed, only one had a oxygen percent mixture above 4%. But there was an unspecified concentration of argon mixed in with the oxygen.
Re: [Vo]:Oxygen to hydrogen?
How much energy does it take to make TETA? Its an old radioactive chelating agent and not cheap used in decontamination. However, it production costs may have improved since the time we used it. Bob - Original Message - From: Axil Axil To: vortex-l Sent: Friday, May 02, 2014 11:17 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Oxygen to hydrogen? I looked into the metal separation technology that Jackob Aganyan of Solar Hydrogen Trends(JA) said his system sprang from. What JA said in the video is consistent with the technology that he says his system comes from. In the patent as follows: http://www.google.ca/patents/US4659512 Fixation of dissolved metal species with a complexing agent US 4659512 A “A process for removing metal species from solution comprising passing the liquid over a composition comprising a support such as a porous silicate glass or silica gel or charcoal having interconnected pores and containing water soluble amine complexing agents absorbed on the support capable of forming a stable complex with the metal species. The preferred amine complexing agent is triethylenetetramine.” In this process, cavitation is produced using sound. “The patent also describes a decontamination method which comprises immersing a radioactively contaminated article in a solution comprised of water, ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid, sodium sulfate, sodium hydroxide, manganese dioxide and carbon black, and subjecting said solution to ultrasonic vibration forces sufficient to produce cavitation therein.” Triethylenetetramine (TETA) seems to be used throughout this technology including the variant that extracts gold, palladium, and platinum from minerals and may be the source for the nitrogen in the gas output. TETA is a hydrogen nitrogen compound. The secret sauce (assume TETA) is said to be consumed in the process. If this technology is in fact real, its high COP makes it the paramount system in the LENR sweepstakes. On Fri, May 2, 2014 at 1:42 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, May 2, 2014 at 11:23 AM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: If hydrogen is the output gas derived from oxygen, how much risk is there for explosion? The mixture of these gases is highly explosive at just about any concentration of hydrogen. Reference: http://people.clarkson.edu/~wwilcox/Design/flamlim2.pdf It takes 4% oxygen to make the hydrogen/oxygen mixture farmable. In the third party gas composition test, of the four runs performed, only one had a oxygen percent mixture above 4%. But there was an unspecified concentration of argon mixed in with the oxygen.
Re: [Vo]:Oxygen to hydrogen?
- Original Message - From: Axil Axil To: vortex-l Sent: Friday, May 02, 2014 12:29 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Oxygen to hydrogen? Why is there so much nitrogen in the gas output and so little oxygen? Nitrogen (14N) is a notoriously non-reactive LENR gas because it has a non-zero nuclear spin, whereas oxygen (16O) is a wonderful LENR gas because its nuclear spin is zero. The cavitation based reaction in the SHT system must be magnetic based on nanoplasmonic principles derived from nanoparticle formation in site. On Fri, May 2, 2014 at 2:17 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: I looked into the metal separation technology that Jackob Aganyan of Solar Hydrogen Trends(JA) said his system sprang from. What JA said in the video is consistent with the technology that he says his system comes from. In the patent as follows: http://www.google.ca/patents/US4659512 Fixation of dissolved metal species with a complexing agent US 4659512 A “A process for removing metal species from solution comprising passing the liquid over a composition comprising a support such as a porous silicate glass or silica gel or charcoal having interconnected pores and containing water soluble amine complexing agents absorbed on the support capable of forming a stable complex with the metal species. The preferred amine complexing agent is triethylenetetramine.” In this process, cavitation is produced using sound. “The patent also describes a decontamination method which comprises immersing a radioactively contaminated article in a solution comprised of water, ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid, sodium sulfate, sodium hydroxide, manganese dioxide and carbon black, and subjecting said solution to ultrasonic vibration forces sufficient to produce cavitation therein.” Triethylenetetramine (TETA) seems to be used throughout this technology including the variant that extracts gold, palladium, and platinum from minerals and may be the source for the nitrogen in the gas output. TETA is a hydrogen nitrogen compound. The secret sauce (assume TETA) is said to be consumed in the process. If this technology is in fact real, its high COP makes it the paramount system in the LENR sweepstakes. On Fri, May 2, 2014 at 1:42 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, May 2, 2014 at 11:23 AM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: If hydrogen is the output gas derived from oxygen, how much risk is there for explosion? The mixture of these gases is highly explosive at just about any concentration of hydrogen. Reference: http://people.clarkson.edu/~wwilcox/Design/flamlim2.pdf It takes 4% oxygen to make the hydrogen/oxygen mixture farmable. In the third party gas composition test, of the four runs performed, only one had a oxygen percent mixture above 4%. But there was an unspecified concentration of argon mixed in with the oxygen.
Re: [Vo]:Oxygen to hydrogen?
TETA is an amine and has lots of N in its composition. Bob - Original Message - From: Axil Axil To: vortex-l Sent: Friday, May 02, 2014 12:29 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Oxygen to hydrogen? Why is there so much nitrogen in the gas output and so little oxygen? Nitrogen (14N) is a notoriously non-reactive LENR gas because it has a non-zero nuclear spin, whereas oxygen (16O) is a wonderful LENR gas because its nuclear spin is zero. The cavitation based reaction in the SHT system must be magnetic based on nanoplasmonic principles derived from nanoparticle formation in site. On Fri, May 2, 2014 at 2:17 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: I looked into the metal separation technology that Jackob Aganyan of Solar Hydrogen Trends(JA) said his system sprang from. What JA said in the video is consistent with the technology that he says his system comes from. In the patent as follows: http://www.google.ca/patents/US4659512 Fixation of dissolved metal species with a complexing agent US 4659512 A “A process for removing metal species from solution comprising passing the liquid over a composition comprising a support such as a porous silicate glass or silica gel or charcoal having interconnected pores and containing water soluble amine complexing agents absorbed on the support capable of forming a stable complex with the metal species. The preferred amine complexing agent is triethylenetetramine.” In this process, cavitation is produced using sound. “The patent also describes a decontamination method which comprises immersing a radioactively contaminated article in a solution comprised of water, ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid, sodium sulfate, sodium hydroxide, manganese dioxide and carbon black, and subjecting said solution to ultrasonic vibration forces sufficient to produce cavitation therein.” Triethylenetetramine (TETA) seems to be used throughout this technology including the variant that extracts gold, palladium, and platinum from minerals and may be the source for the nitrogen in the gas output. TETA is a hydrogen nitrogen compound. The secret sauce (assume TETA) is said to be consumed in the process. If this technology is in fact real, its high COP makes it the paramount system in the LENR sweepstakes. On Fri, May 2, 2014 at 1:42 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, May 2, 2014 at 11:23 AM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: If hydrogen is the output gas derived from oxygen, how much risk is there for explosion? The mixture of these gases is highly explosive at just about any concentration of hydrogen. Reference: http://people.clarkson.edu/~wwilcox/Design/flamlim2.pdf It takes 4% oxygen to make the hydrogen/oxygen mixture farmable. In the third party gas composition test, of the four runs performed, only one had a oxygen percent mixture above 4%. But there was an unspecified concentration of argon mixed in with the oxygen.
Re: [Vo]:Oxygen to hydrogen?
From the large percentage amount of nitrogen in the gas flow, the consumption rate of the nitrogen carrying compound must by fierce. On Fri, May 2, 2014 at 3:44 PM, Bob Cook frobertc...@hotmail.com wrote: TETA is an amine and has lots of N in its composition. Bob - Original Message - *From:* Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com *To:* vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com *Sent:* Friday, May 02, 2014 12:29 PM *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:Oxygen to hydrogen? Why is there so much nitrogen in the gas output and so little oxygen? Nitrogen (14N) is a notoriously non-reactive LENR gas because it has a non-zero nuclear spin, whereas oxygen (16O) is a wonderful LENR gas because its nuclear spin is zero. The cavitation based reaction in the SHT system must be magnetic based on nanoplasmonic principles derived from nanoparticle formation in site. On Fri, May 2, 2014 at 2:17 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: I looked into the metal separation technology that Jackob Aganyan of Solar Hydrogen Trends(JA) said his system sprang from. What JA said in the video is consistent with the technology that he says his system comes from. In the patent as follows: http://www.google.ca/patents/US4659512 *Fixation of dissolved metal species with a complexing agent* *US 4659512 A* *“A process for removing metal species from solution comprising passing the liquid over a composition comprising a support such as a porous silicate glass or silica gel or charcoal having interconnected pores and containing water soluble amine complexing agents absorbed on the support capable of forming a stable complex with the metal species. The preferred amine complexing agent is triethylenetetramine.”* In this process, cavitation is produced using sound. *“**The patent also describes a decontamination method which comprises immersing a radioactively contaminated article in a solution comprised of water, ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid, sodium sulfate, sodium hydroxide, manganese dioxide and carbon black, and subjecting said solution to ultrasonic vibration forces sufficient to produce cavitation therein.”* Triethylenetetramine (TETA) seems to be used throughout this technology including the variant that extracts gold, palladium, and platinum from minerals and may be the source for the nitrogen in the gas output. TETA is a hydrogen nitrogen compound. The secret sauce (assume TETA) is said to be consumed in the process. If this technology is in fact real, its high COP makes it the paramount system in the LENR sweepstakes. On Fri, May 2, 2014 at 1:42 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, May 2, 2014 at 11:23 AM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.comwrote: If hydrogen is the output gas derived from oxygen, how much risk is there for explosion? The mixture of these gases is highly explosive at just about any concentration of hydrogen. Reference: http://people.clarkson.edu/~wwilcox/Design/flamlim2.pdf It takes 4% oxygen to make the hydrogen/oxygen mixture farmable. In the third party gas composition test, of the four runs performed, only one had a oxygen percent mixture above 4%. But there was an unspecified concentration of argon mixed in with the oxygen.
Re: [Vo]:Oxygen to hydrogen?
On Fri, May 2, 2014 at 3:41 PM, Bob Cook frobertc...@hotmail.com wrote: How much energy does it take to make TETA? Its an old radioactive chelating agent and not cheap used in decontamination. However, it production costs may have improved since the time we used it US $20-22 / *Liter* *( FOB Price)* 800 Liters *(Min. Order)* The economic flaw in this system is the cost of the consumables.
Re: [Vo]:Oxygen to hydrogen?
In reply to Axil Axil's message of Fri, 2 May 2014 16:28:20 -0400: Hi, [snip] On Fri, May 2, 2014 at 3:41 PM, Bob Cook frobertc...@hotmail.com wrote: How much energy does it take to make TETA? Its an old radioactive chelating agent and not cheap used in decontamination. However, it production costs may have improved since the time we used it US $20-22 / *Liter* *( FOB Price)* 800 Liters *(Min. Order)* The economic flaw in this system is the cost of the consumables. I wonder if they have taken into account all possible sources of energy in the system? The temperatures available during cavitation would likely catalyze any chemical reaction that was energetically possible, and then there is the energy from ultrasound generators etc. as well. I don't expect that the latter would contribute much, however the chemical energy could be considerable. I would like to see a proper accounting, especially given the claim that they can get 1 kg H2 from 1 kg H2O. That claim is most likely a simple mistake, but might be true if the Hydrogen is also coming from other chemicals in the mix. In order for it to be true for only water, they would have to be converting all the Oxygen into Hydrogen too, which apparently is what they believe is happening. If so, then they are being extraordinarily wasteful. In order to split Oxygen into Hydrogen you need to supply roughly the binding energy of Oxygen which is about 127,000,000 eV. Having spent 127,000,000 eV converting Oxygen into Hydrogen, they then get back about 12 eV in chemical energy, when the Hydrogen is burnt using atmospheric oxygen, about 1 part in 10 million of the energy input. They might do better to find a means of tapping the original energy source more directly. ;) Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
Re: [Vo]:Oxygen to hydrogen?
Take a look at the third party test results. http://pesn.com/2014/04/29/9602478_Solar-Hydrogen-Trends_revolutionizing-all-energy/SHT_performance%20_test.pdf I could not find how long this test ran. On Sat, May 3, 2014 at 12:07 AM, mix...@bigpond.com wrote: In reply to Axil Axil's message of Fri, 2 May 2014 16:28:20 -0400: Hi, [snip] On Fri, May 2, 2014 at 3:41 PM, Bob Cook frobertc...@hotmail.com wrote: How much energy does it take to make TETA? Its an old radioactive chelating agent and not cheap used in decontamination. However, it production costs may have improved since the time we used it US $20-22 / *Liter* *( FOB Price)* 800 Liters *(Min. Order)* The economic flaw in this system is the cost of the consumables. I wonder if they have taken into account all possible sources of energy in the system? The temperatures available during cavitation would likely catalyze any chemical reaction that was energetically possible, and then there is the energy from ultrasound generators etc. as well. I don't expect that the latter would contribute much, however the chemical energy could be considerable. I would like to see a proper accounting, especially given the claim that they can get 1 kg H2 from 1 kg H2O. That claim is most likely a simple mistake, but might be true if the Hydrogen is also coming from other chemicals in the mix. In order for it to be true for only water, they would have to be converting all the Oxygen into Hydrogen too, which apparently is what they believe is happening. If so, then they are being extraordinarily wasteful. In order to split Oxygen into Hydrogen you need to supply roughly the binding energy of Oxygen which is about 127,000,000 eV. Having spent 127,000,000 eV converting Oxygen into Hydrogen, they then get back about 12 eV in chemical energy, when the Hydrogen is burnt using atmospheric oxygen, about 1 part in 10 million of the energy input. They might do better to find a means of tapping the original energy source more directly. ;) Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
Re: [Vo]:Oxygen to hydrogen?
I must say, the acronym for the company name is SHT. On Fri, May 2, 2014 at 12:41 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qYliDUI8bY4#t=173 See story at http://pesn.com/2014/04/29/9602478_So...http://pesn.com/2014/04/29/9602478_Solar-Hydrogen-Trends_revolutionizing-all-energy/ Interview: Solar Hydrogen Trends is revolutionizing all energy I calculate 577 x overunity based on their third-party test results of 697 Watt input producing 2322 liters of gas/minute, equating to 402 kW output, from a device twice the size of a microwave oven, drawing from 16 different simultaneous phenomena creating what they call their Symphony, including turning O into H and controlling particles. They're ready to go into production manufacturing these. This might be a cavatation system what uses a shock wave. Or it could be a scam, time will tell. -- Patrick www.tRacePerfect.com The daily puzzle everyone can finish but not everyone can perfect! The quickest puzzle ever!
