Dear Bastiaan, It is better, however facts are are facts and truth is truth, and priority is... you can guess it...priority!
FYI- BRIEF HISTORY & CHRONOLOGY OF Ni-H LENR - 16 August 1989. Francesco Piantelli at the Department of Physics of the University of Siena, accidentally discovers the phenomenon of Ni-H while working on a project of Biophysics;the effect of hydrogen on gangliosides on a support of Ni lamina - From December 1989 and January 1990. In the Physics dep. the phenomenon is replicated with the construction of the first cell; - Between January and June 1990. The phenomenon is repeated for two times; - October 1990. Meeting of Piantelli with R. Habel and S.Focardi at the S.I.F.National Congress of Physics held in Trento; start of collaboration, - 1991-1992 First experiment from the collaboration with the two Italian physicists; - 1993 At the Fisiocritici Academy in Siena is made of the first publication about the work of 1990 under the sole name of Piantelli; The paper is: F. Piantelli -"Anornalous Energy Production in Experirnents with H and D Isotopes adsorbed in particular metallic Lattice", Atti Acc. Fis. Serie XV-Tomo XII -(1993) - 1994 Completions of the Piantelli-Habel-Focardi experiment published at Nuovo Cimento; - 1994 R. Habel stops the collaboration; etc., etc. Please take in account that almost all experiments for anomalous heat were done at Siena U. Bologna was focused on the analytical side. As an aside, please let me know how do you interpret Focardi's declaration that he does not know what Rossi's catayst is. Best wishes, Peter On Sun, Nov 27, 2011 at 1:17 AM, Bastiaan Bergman < bastiaan.berg...@gmail.com> wrote: > All, > > Thanks for your input, I updated the paper to incorporate most of your > comments. > @Aussie Thanks; > > @Peter I maintain that Rossi forced the current big breakthrough, > whether it is "just an additive" or not. I agree with you that it is > fair to mention Piantelli and Focardi as founders and completely > revised that section to include it. > > @Rich I believe I did pay a fair amount of attention to the critics. I > summarized all point is the paragraph "What the critics say" and more > in the paragraph about Rossi. I think the critique you summarize is > equally valid for super-conduction. Any paper in professional > literature can be found to "lack of common sense" on some points and > short of some additional measurement that could have been done on > others, once scrutinized by an army of skeptics. However, the sum of > the work done by many independent laboratories using a variety of > different approaches shows, without doubt, a pattern that is difficult > to reject as pathological science. Small government funding for > further investigation is well warranted. No point to criticize > something that doesn't exist, if you don't like it, ignore it. But I > do like your contributions Rich:-) > > @Alain "I feel as if I missed something, about CF or about humanity" > - Exactly! What is going on? I feel like Truman in one of your "human > systems" experiments ;-) > > @Robin I was a bit overly optimistic with the energy density, > corrected it. 3 cubic mile oil - equivalents is our energy > consumption, this includes coal and uranium (and renewables). 1 CMO is > oil alone. I corrected it anyway, no point overstating that. Thanks > for pointing this out, it's not worth getting caught on. > > Some (early version of?) H-bombs use multiple fission bombs, not all, > and maybe none of the modern ones. It doesn't really matter, I feel > like I have to underline the dirtiness of this business anyway. > Intriguing in this regard I find the new studies that point out that > there is very little evidence of the fusion part of these bombs > contributing significantly to the power. Intriguing because the > inventor of the H-bomb is a prominent cold-fusion skeptic, citing the > lack of evidence... > > "Hydrogen atoms do not repel each other. Naked protons repel each other. > That's > why hot fusion is so difficult - they insist on using naked protons." > - I agree. For sake of simplicity I skipped over it. And technically > it isn't wrong. Atoms attract at some length scales, but not at all. > That's why hydrogen does form molecules but doesn't fuse just like > that. I don't like the emphasis some people put on the "stripping off > of electrons", as if that's a big deal in the fusion process, as if > that's hard, as if that gets you close to fusion itself. > > The sentence "no one claims to know,..." is wrong in itself, > obviously. Of course there are many people claiming all sorts of > stuff. The next sentence basically says so too. That cold fusion > actually isn't fusion is a small step, I think. After one accepts that > something happens that we don't understand why it's a small step to > accept that something happens that is unknown all together. I still > have to learn more about the Hydrino theory, a simple introduction to > Hydrino's would be appreciated ;-). > > Thanks for all the style corrections. > > Bastiaan. > > bit.ly/cold-fusion > > > > On Sat, Nov 26, 2011 at 6:12 AM, Marcello Vitale <mvit...@ucsbalum.net> > wrote: > > Thanks, Peter, fantastic citation > > [begin citation] > > Coherence of particles by radio waves is an obscure phenomenon that is > not > > well understood even today. Recent experiments with particle coherers > seem > > to have confirmed the hypothesis that the particles cohere by a > micro-weld > > phenomenon caused by radio frequency electricity flowing across the small > > contact area between particles.[1] The underlying principle of so-called > > "imperfect contact" coherers is also not well understood, but may > involve a > > kind of tunneling of charge carriers across an imperfect junction between > > conductors. > > [end citation] > > > > In a previoous job, I carried out the synthesis of silver nanocrystals > of > > different sizes and with specific surface plasmon light absorption > spectra, > > following some surprising literature. Starting with spherical seeds of > less > > than 5 nm diameter, readily formed chemically, one could obtain thin > (5-10 > > nm thick) platelets of triangular shape and different size simply by > > exposing for some time (1-7 days) the suspension in water to light of > > different wavelength. The literature had used both led's of specific > > wavelength and colored filters, we made our own filters and obtained the > > same results. Thermal tests never led to any platelet formation, although > > they could be formed thermally with different starting materials. But the > > photochemical route was very attractive. > > > > We followed through pushing the process (by changing the irradiation > light > > spectrum) until the silver nanoplatelets were actually about one micron > long > > and absorbed in the NIR. Got a couple of application patents using those. > > Anyway, my point is that there was no theory in the literature as to why > the > > platelets formed that way (and we were not paid to explore theory). The > > electromagnetic effect you are mentioning might be it, finally pushing > > everything in the shape that provides the resonant plasmon. > > > > On Fri, Nov 25, 2011 at 5:54 PM, Peter Heckert <peter.heck...@arcor.de> > > wrote: > >> > >> Am 25.11.2011 13:54, schrieb Marcello Vitale: > >> > >> Very interesting, indeed. Thank you, Peter. Four observations > >> > >> a) MgH2 is more stable than NiHn: Mg might simply suck up the hydrogen > >> b) nonetheless, it is on the surface of Ni powder particles that H2 > breaks > >> up more easily, hence the rationale to use Ni as catalyst for MgH > formation > >> and decomposition > >> c) there do not seem to be the cycling and pulsations, electrochemical, > >> mechanical or electromagnetic, which appear to be needed in order to > start > >> the anomalous heat generation itself. > >> d) even if some anomalous heat had been generated, how to sort it out > from > >> just a faster/more complete hydride formation, anotehr exothermic > process? > >> If cold fusion had happened, in small quantity, it would have been > taken as > >> a funky quirk. > >> > >> I dont think so. > >> In laboratory experiments they will probably measure it accurately. > >> Thermal hysteris is an important parameter for a solidstate hydrogen > >> storage device. > >> The larger the hysteresis, the larger the energetic loss and of course > >> they try to minimize it. > >> If they get negative hysteresis, they have probably found cold fusion > ;-). > >> Also I believe they examines the crystal structures with advanced > methods > >> like x-rays, and when there are transmutation elements, they should > discover > >> them. > >> > >> Here is a link to the munich airport hydrogen project: > >> http://ieahia.org/pdfs/munich_airport.pdf > >> They use a gigantic metalpowder-in pipes arrangement to store 2000 m^3 > >> hydrogen at 250 bar pressure. > >> To unload the hydrogen, heat must be applied. > >> It is clear, they dont build something like this without previous > >> research. > >> This is working for years and succesfully. > >> Again, put Rossis catalyzer inside..... ;-) > >> > >> So, if a catalyzer exists it must be something extraordinary, that > nobody > >> tried before. > >> For example high frequency. RF can make the joints of metal particles > melt > >> or pull them together until electrons tunnel through the barriers. > >> This effect was used in ealy days of wireless telegraphy. > >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coherer > >> [begin citation] > >> Coherence of particles by radio waves is an obscure phenomenon that is > not > >> well understood even today. Recent experiments with particle coherers > seem > >> to have confirmed the hypothesis that the particles cohere by a > micro-weld > >> phenomenon caused by radio frequency electricity flowing across the > small > >> contact area between particles.[1] The underlying principle of so-called > >> "imperfect contact" coherers is also not well understood, but may > involve a > >> kind of tunneling of charge carriers across an imperfect junction > between > >> conductors. > >> [end citation] > >> > >> On Fri, Nov 25, 2011 at 12:14 PM, <peter.heck...@arcor.de> wrote: > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> ----- Original Nachricht ---- > >>> Von: Peter Gluck <peter.gl...@gmail.com> > >>> An: vortex-l@eskimo.com > >>> Datum: 25.11.2011 10:22 > >>> Betreff: Re: Re: [Vo]:bit.ly/cold-fusion > >>> > >>> [snip] > >>> > I will try to get information re the work with metalhydrides at the > >>> > Plank Institute I liked very much the idea from the Chan's Formula to > >>> > use > >>> > metalhydrides as sources of hydrogen in a Ni-H system > >>> > PeterG > >>> > > >>> [snip] > >>> Examples are countless. Some of them: > >>> http://www.mpg.de/1167514/Hydrogen_storage They search a catalysator > for > >>> fast hydrogen loading. > >>> > >>> http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19333448 High temperature heat > >>> storage in metal hydrides. > >>> The full article is here: > >>> http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2662468/ > >>> This is /VERY/ interesting. > >>> They use catalysts and nickel doping and temperatures up to 500 degrees > >>> and pressures upto 100 bar. > >>> The mechanism is precisely explained in the article. > >>> Why dont they get fusion? > >>> Put Rossis catalyst into this container, and it should explode, or kill > >>> anybody around by radiation ;-) > >>> > >>> You will find hundreds of research projects. Metalhydrides are very > >>> important in combustion cells and accus also and are heavily researched > >>> worldwide. > >>> > >>> Peter > >>> > >> > >> > > > > -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
