Hello Bob,
I agree with you that Rossi does NOT use nano sized Ni particles. He has always said that he use micro sized Ni particles. But can you point explicitly a sentence from Rossi saying he use the carbonyl process or is it an assumption? I never haerd such claim by Rossi. It is clear that the Ni particles has a treatment to enhance the loading of H inside the lattice (with Cu or/and La?). There are also nano sized builds that create the SPP that trigger the reaction. The nano sized builds need to survive high temperature. Arnaud _____ From: Bob Higgins [mailto:rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com] Sent: jeudi 24 juillet 2014 00:33 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Review of Ed Storms book: \"The Explanation of Low Energy Nuclear Reaction\" Bob, This is a common misconception. Rossi does NOT use nano-Ni. Rossi uses Ni particles (from the carbonyl process) that have a high external area and particle diameter of 4-8 microns. Rossi adds a catalyst, that is believed to be a nanopowder, to the carbonyl Ni particles and then "grows" features on the Ni. Bob Higgins On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 2:54 PM, Bob Cook <frobertc...@hotmail.com> wrote: Rossi claims that he uses nano-nickel particles. I have no idea what the sintering and melting temperatures of those structures. We know that carbon nano structures have very good high temperature properties. A Ni-H nano structure may even be better at high temperatures. I would not give up on Ni even in the hot cat performance. Something Rossi introduced say white hot conditions. Of course it may be a fake. I think he has been honest with what he has said. He may withhold information also, however. I learned much in reactor design due to early failures. The new designs after failure generally allowed for higher temperature operations and greater power output. I would bet Rossi is not beyond learning from his failures. Bob Sent from Windows Mail From: Roarty, Francis X <mailto:francis.x.roa...@lmco.com> Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2014 7:51 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Axil, nice insight which also gives support to dynamic formation of plasma in the Papp engine. I was also one of those who felt self destruction would bring the reaction to a halt but the Rossi melt down does point to the continued run away reaction even after the geometry has melted. Like they say it gets worse before it gets better :_) Fran From: Axil Axil [mailto:janap...@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2014 11:44 AM To: vortex-l Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Review of Ed Storms book: \"The Explanation of Low Energy Nuclear Reaction\" One of the possibilities is that there are many types of nano-antennas formed in the NiH system. When starting up the major carrier of the reaction are the nanowires. But as the reactor heats up and its energy output is increased, then the reaction sites may form in the spaces between nano-particles. The lesson thought to use by the meltdown of Rossi's reactor when the temperature of the reactor passes 2000C is that the permanent reaction sites will melt and be destroyed by the high heat. However, the reaction still continues at an accelerated pace. In 10 seconds, when control of the reactor is lost, the reactor goes from 1000C to 2000C and produces a power output of a megawatt. During this meltdown process the reaction carrier must have shifted from primarily the nanowire to completely nanoparticles. When the hydrogen containment fails, the reaction carrier must be completely nanoparticles. The take away, there are many ways in which the LENR reaction can be carried. At any given time, the situation will govern which mechanism will denominate. By the way, Ed Storms theory cannot support this dynamic variation is reaction mechanisms. Ed never wanted to add NiH reactor meltdown to his collection of experimental results. On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 5:10 AM, Peter Gluck <peter.gl...@gmail.com> wrote: The simplest answer to these question is YES. A bit longer one; - as you know, DGT works by making hydrogen more reactive and Ni more receptive, if you read their ICCF-17 paper you will see they are increasing the mobility of the surfaces of Ni crystals- we still have to see what exactly can play the role of a nano-antenna, is there unity in diversity or even greater diversity in diversity- details have to be discovered, what i am convinced is- it is not about simple cracks, however the very surace of cracks can be ACTIVE - yes, I think at LENR+ active sites are created very dynamically, we ahve to learn the Know Why and how to accelearte in a controlled way the process (let me repeat I am using NAE in other sense- the NAEnvironment is the complete cell- F& P, or Piantelli etc , the entire E-cat or Hyperion) - i still don't know the details regarding the death, birth and activity of the active sites- it is a captivating story Whatever they are and however they work I also think as AXIL that nanoplasmonics and BEC play a decisive role. We have to study the complete scenario. peter . On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 11:35 AM, Jojo Iznart <jojoiznar...@gmail.com> wrote: Peter, thank you for the kind words. Are you proposing a different mechanism than Axil's Nano antenna NAE to bootstrap the LENR BEC reaction? Your NAE is dynamically created? Do you propose nano structures also for your NAE? If you are, you also have to explain how that surface structure (whatever it is) will survive the temps or be dynamically recreated in quantities sufficient to sustain KW levels of heat. Seems like a lot of NAE being created at these heat levels. Jojo ----- Original Message ----- From: Peter Gluck <mailto:peter.gl...@gmail.com> To: VORTEX <mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com> Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2014 3:42 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Review of Ed Storms book: \"The Explanation of Low Energy Nuclear Reaction\" Very inspiring and well motivated what you say here, Jojo. It leads, in my opinion to a crucial problem, question: What is the essential difference between the classic LENR with Watts of heat release and the new LENR+ a la Rossi and DGT with enhanced heat release at the kWatts level? My answer was, from the start that it is the mechanism of genesis of active sites (NAE), Classic LENR works mainly with pre-formed active sites, limited in number/density while LENR+ is based on a continous generation of new active sites- it is a dynamic equilibrium between the active sites that are destroyed by the high temperature and the new ones that appear, the trick is to have many of these doing their task - a sequence of processes and reactions. You show the destructive side of elevated temperatures, the constructive side must be added and this is the clue of the LENR+ progress. The critical Debye temperature is one at which the dynamics of the atoms at the surface of the metal, changes. I have predicted this decisive role of surface dynamics long ago see please: http://inis.iaea.org/search/search.aspx?orig_q=RN:26035858 Axil describes a part of the details- the coming LENR_ events will reveal a lot, including the role of the dynamic equilibrium of the active sites- with details that can help us to go from principles to theories. Peter On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 12:48 AM, Jojo Iznart <jojoiznar...@gmail.com> wrote: In all this talk about the NAE being a Nanowire, a nanotip, a nanoantenna, a nanomesh, a nanospike, a nano coating on a nano particle, a nano-this and a nano-that; people seems to be forgeting the fact that whatever nano structure the NAE is, it will not survive the temperatures we've seen being demonstrated; especially with Rossi's hotcat. Is it not obvious to anyone that whatever whatever the NAE is, it couldn't possibly be a nanostructure of Nickel. Nickel will be a homogenous blob of partly molten metal at the temperatures we are talking about. And it is known, that it will sinter and reshape itself even at temperatures significantly below its melting temp. In other words, GOODBYE NAE. At best, it is a one-use NAE. An NAE that is a nanostructure Nickel appears to be highly unlikely and improbable. That is why, I'm with Ed on this. People come up with theories that conveniently ignore the chemical environment. In this case, the physical melting or sintering point of Nickel. Axil's theory while sounding erudite and well-researched, has a big hole in the middle of it. Big enough to drive a Mack truck thru. Unless Axil can explain how his Nano antenna NAE can survive the temps, It is my opinion that his theory is dead. I broke my self-imposed exile just to say this. It seems that there are many theories being bandied around that simply breaks very important principles. Whatever you think of Ed's book, he makes a very important point, we should not simply ignore the chemical environment, or physical properties of metals, or thermodynamic principles, etc if they do not fit our theories. Jojo -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
