DGT has never mentioned the use of carbonyl. There powder is pure nickel. The surface of the particles are processed with a proprietary process to resurface the particle with a Rutile structure.
Please show me a reference to the use of carbonyl in this process. In fact, the use of carbonyl is incompatible with the rutile process. On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 3:00 PM, Bob Higgins <rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com>wrote: > Yes. What is shown is a carbonyl Ni particle. It has no nanowires. It > does have points, but no nanowires. Nanowires would not be visible at the > scale of that micrograph. > On Aug 23, 2013 2:29 PM, "Axil Axil" <janap...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Are you looking at slide 3, fabrication of fuels and reaction cells? >> >> the box of interest starts with the following... >> >> Modified Ni Crystal powders.... >> >> The 5 micron particle is pictured on that page. Can you see it now... >> >> >> On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 1:58 PM, Bob Higgins <rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com>wrote: >> >>> The carbony Ni particles used by DGT, as was shown in Kim's >>> presentation, have NO nanowires at all. >>> >>> >>> On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 1:33 PM, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> Not for the first time, with amazing generosity, DGT has provided us >>>> with a picture of a 5 micron nanowire coated micro-particle in their >>>> ICCF-18 presentation that they have originally engineered base on suggested >>>> information derived from Rossi’s revelations. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> There must be a million nanowires coming off that fuzzy looking >>>> micro-particle. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> If 10 nanoparticle aggregation form on each nanowire tip and 100 hot >>>> spots from inside each aggregation, that drive the NAE count for each >>>> micro-particle up to 10 to the power of 9 hot spots per micro-particle. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> If 10,000,000 micro particles as used in the 3 grams of nickel power >>>> reaction activator, then the NAE count goes up to 10 to the 16 power of >>>> possible NAE sites in a Ni/H reactor. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Clearly, this micro-powder covered with nanowires approach to the >>>> reaction has many orders of magnitude numerical superiority over the crack >>>> regime. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 12:06 PM, Edmund Storms >>>> <stor...@ix.netcom.com>wrote: >>>> >>>>> Peter, I'm simply telling you what your comments mean to me. I'm not >>>>> thinking in your place. If I have gotten the wrong understanding from what >>>>> you have written, than you are free to tell me and to correct your >>>>> writings >>>>> so that other people do not also get the wrong impression, which is >>>>> clearly >>>>> the case. >>>>> >>>>> I do not think a crack is equally active along its length. I'm only >>>>> proposing that somewhere in the gap, the fusion reaction is possible. I >>>>> have described ALL aspects of the model. I'm only giving the broad >>>>> requirements. Once these are accepted, you will be told more details. I >>>>> see no reason to waste my time if the basic claim is rejected. I would >>>>> rather spend my time using the model to make the effect work. >>>>> >>>>> Ed >>>>> On Aug 23, 2013, at 9:53 AM, Peter Gluck wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Dear Ed. >>>>> >>>>> I would ask you to not think in my place, I really don't like it.It is >>>>> typical for dictatures and I had enough from it starting with :"Der Fuhrer >>>>> denkt fur uns alle" and ending with Ceausescu's omniscience. I have the >>>>> right to think independently. >>>>> Citing you: >>>>> *you are assuming that D+Pd involves a different mechanism, a >>>>> different NAE, and different nuclear products. * >>>>> Clearly the products of reaction are different for Pd and Ni H simply >>>>> because >>>>> the reactants are different. I have NOT told that the mechanism of >>>>> reaction >>>>> are different. >>>>> A question for you- a crack however beautiful is inherently very >>>>> asymmetric >>>>> do you think a crack nanometers broad but microns or even millimeters >>>>> long >>>>> is equally active along its entire lengths? Isn't it more plausible >>>>> that inside >>>>> this labyrinthic formation there are some even more preferential short >>>>> areas >>>>> where the activity is focused? And are you convinced that thse short >>>>> areas >>>>> are so different from a nanostructure? Couldn't be the things a bit >>>>> more >>>>> complicated but actually more unitary- as you otherwise also suggest? >>>>> >>>>> I think it is not possible to decide now sitting at our PC's if Nature >>>>> uses >>>>> only one soltion or more for creating excess energy. It is more useful >>>>> to find new ways to force Nature to give us what we need and want >>>>> and not care so much if she is whining a bit for that. >>>>> >>>>> Peter >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 6:16 PM, Edmund Storms >>>>> <stor...@ix.netcom.com>wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Aug 23, 2013, at 9:03 AM, Peter Gluck wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Dear Bob, >>>>>> >>>>>> Thank you for the idea of cracks' aesthetics! I know it well, I think >>>>>> you have remarked the second Motto by Leonard Cohen based >>>>>> on this idea.. >>>>>> It happens that very early in my professional career I learned about >>>>>> the >>>>>> beauty and variety of cracks -when working at the Civil Engineering >>>>>> Faculy of the Timisoara- Polytechnics, Chair of Concrete. It is a >>>>>> world of cracks in concrete see e.g. >>>>>> http://indecorativeconcrete.com/idcn/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/Why-Concrete-Cracks.pdf >>>>>> Mistery and beauty are different from function. Let's admit the >>>>>> possible role >>>>>> cracks in Pd in the FPCell, is this something good for the results? >>>>>> However Paintelli's process is based on very smart and beautiful >>>>>> nanostructures more sophisticated and educated as cracks, and LENR+ uses >>>>>> the high art of nanoplasmonics. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> How do you know this Peter? Besides, you are assuming that D+Pd >>>>>> involves a different mechanism, a different NAE, and different nuclear >>>>>> products. Consequently, the number of miracles is squared rather than >>>>>> reduced. Do you really want to go down that path? What happens the effect >>>>>> occurs using Ti? Does this involve an additional method and mechanism? >>>>>> What how is tritium formed? Is this reaction different in Ni compared to >>>>>> Pd? >>>>>> >>>>>> I believe the phenomenon is so rare and unusual that only one >>>>>> condition and mechanism would be able to cause it. You take the opposite >>>>>> view, that every material and isotope requires a different method and >>>>>> NAE. >>>>>> This gives people a choice. I wonder how the vote would go? >>>>>> >>>>>> Ed >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Peter >>>>>> >>>>>> , >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 5:05 PM, Bob Higgins < >>>>>> rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Recently, Peter published in his blog his reasons for hoping that >>>>>>> the NAE aren’t cracks. After considering it, I believe he misses the >>>>>>> uniqueness, durability, and beauty of the cracks that are being >>>>>>> considered. >>>>>>> **** >>>>>>> >>>>>>> ** ** >>>>>>> >>>>>>> To the uniqueness point… Consider that a crack is different than >>>>>>> just two surfaces in close proximity. A crack is like a horn with a >>>>>>> throat >>>>>>> of minimum gap: the lattice spacing. Imagine the throat at x=0 with the >>>>>>> crack surface spacing widening as x increases. The crack provides a >>>>>>> unique >>>>>>> environment in its smallest regions. Near x=0, the environment for a >>>>>>> hydron asymptotically approaches that of the lattice. In this region, >>>>>>> electron orbitals extend across or at least into the crack. Perhaps in >>>>>>> this near-lattice spacing there is only room for an H+ ion (the case for >>>>>>> Ni, but for Pd there is room at the lattice spacing for a neutral >>>>>>> monatomic >>>>>>> hydron). As x increases, the crack surface spacing (the gap) increases >>>>>>> allowing room for neutral monatomic hydrons. At greater x, the crack >>>>>>> spacing would support neutral H2 molecules, and beyond this, the crack >>>>>>> is >>>>>>> probably uninteresting. This unique gradient of hydron boundary >>>>>>> conditions >>>>>>> always exists in the crack near it throat (near x=0), even if the crack >>>>>>> were to begin zipping itself open.**** >>>>>>> >>>>>>> ** ** >>>>>>> >>>>>>> To the durability point… In my past I had occasion to work with >>>>>>> MEMS structures. When I first saw MEMS cantilever beams being used for >>>>>>> switches and other functions, my first thought was, “Those are going to >>>>>>> break!” What I learned was that a structure’s strength is inversely >>>>>>> proportional to its size. So a building scaled twice as large will be >>>>>>> half >>>>>>> as strong. This is why you can drop an ant from as high as you wish >>>>>>> and he >>>>>>> will hit the ground running. Compare a 3 meter diving board >>>>>>> (cantilever) >>>>>>> to a 3 micron cantilever – the 3 micron cantilever will be a million >>>>>>> times >>>>>>> more robust. The cracks being considered for NAE are nanoscale cracks, >>>>>>> but >>>>>>> our natural experience is with cracks having dimensions of ~1cm. A 10nm >>>>>>> crack, will be a million times more mechanically robust than a 1cm >>>>>>> crack. >>>>>>> At the nanoscale, the two split apart surfaces will be very stiff and >>>>>>> behind the throat of the crack (x<0) there will be compression forces >>>>>>> trying to restore the crack to its closed position. The surfaces may >>>>>>> also >>>>>>> experience a Casimir closing force. A nanoscale crack will have strong >>>>>>> forces trying to heal itself.**** >>>>>>> >>>>>>> **** >>>>>>> >>>>>>> If nanocracks can heal, then how would the nanocrack form in the >>>>>>> first place and what could keep the surfaces apart? I believe a wedge >>>>>>> of >>>>>>> atom(s) or molecule(s) is needed in the gap to keep the crack open, and >>>>>>> perhaps to form it in the first place. That is why I am using >>>>>>> nanoparticles that will alloy with Ni and then I am oxidizing the >>>>>>> structure. I use iron oxide nanoparticles. I put down the oxide >>>>>>> nanoparticles disposed all across the Ni micro-powder surface, reduce >>>>>>> (or >>>>>>> partly reduce) the surface so the iron nanoparticles can alloy with the >>>>>>> Ni, >>>>>>> and then go back and strongly oxidize the metals. When the iron >>>>>>> oxidizes, >>>>>>> it grows in volume and I hypothesize that it will wedge open a >>>>>>> nanocrack. >>>>>>> If the iron is then partly reduced it becomes an H2 splitting catalyst, >>>>>>> right at the site of the crack.**** >>>>>>> >>>>>>> ** ** >>>>>>> >>>>>>> What a beautiful structure I imagine that to be – a nanocrack with a >>>>>>> sweep of hydron boundary conditions with an H2 splitting catalyst at its >>>>>>> mouth.**** >>>>>>> >>>>>>> ** ** >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Bob**** >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Dr. Peter Gluck >>>>>> Cluj, Romania >>>>>> http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Dr. Peter Gluck >>>>> Cluj, Romania >>>>> http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >>
