[Vo]: Affect of Specific Heat on behavior of outlet temperature...
Josh: Would not any material with a significant heat capacity cause a sort of a low-pass filter effect; delaying and smoothing out the temperature fluctuations??? Well we have three material in this system that have high specific heats: - In the reactor we have water (4.18) and hydrogen gas (14). - if we're talking about the output of steam from the hose, then the hose itself has a heat capacity that is about half (2) that of water. I covered this in a previous post... So when the reactor fluctuates to the high side, most of that energy is absorbed by the hydrogen and or water, and when it fluctuates down, that enregy gets released... not unlike what happens in an electrical capacitor if tailored properly to the behavior of the electrical circuit. The NET result is a fairly steady temperature 'downwind' from the reactor in the chimney's vapor. -Mark
[Vo]:Re: Ad Hominem against Joshua Cude, or is that Ad Pseudonym against Joshua Cude ?
Re: Ad Hominem against Joshua Cude, or is that Ad Pseudonym against Joshua Cude ? https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ui=2shva=1#label/Fusion2011/130bdafaefd392d9 Jed said to Joshua: So you will stick to the Krivit demo and ignore the others. You look at one piece of data at a time while ignoring other pieces. That is a common technique used by people who are determined to deny reality. Rich: This is denigrating Joshua. https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ui=2shva=1#label/Fusion2011/130bf3abecbfc708 On June 23 -- I believe Jed later admitted to getting too heated: You can nitpick Rossi. Anyone can. But you cannot find an error in any mainstream scientific paper. You never have, you never will. You are a faker. A pseudo-skeptic true believer! You think the laws of thermodynamics are wrong, but you have no reason. You think you can compare a Loch Ness photo to SRI calorimetry and that's a valid argument. You don't get a free pass. Anyone can see you have zero credibility. I am sick of your puerile nonsense. I will not respond to you again. If you ever have the guts to write a real paper, let us know. https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ui=2shva=1#label/Fusion2011/130b734895c2f2ec Abd, June 22, talking about Joshua, actually is pretty skeptical about the Rossi claims: The Krivit video does not show the steam production rate, that's the problem. It shows what's left after the steam runs through three meters of rubber hose. We know that steam will condense in this hose, and some estimates have been made of how much. It's quite enough to explain that weak showing. All this means is that the demo is a piece of crap. It would only convince someone who is inclined to believe. It is not in any way proof that the E-Cat is *not* producing excess power. That conclusion would only come from someone who is inclined to disbelieve. My sense, from the weak steam coming out of the end, is that what seems to be marginal at the end is an indication that more power is being generated than the input electrical power, but I'd not want to claim that this demo shows that, it's way too shaky. The sad thing about this is that a convincing demo -- absent true and serious fraud -- could be easily done. I've pointed out many times that there is no way, with a demo controlled by the inventor or close allies of the inventor, to rule out a sophisticated fraud. But the demo Krivit video'd, that isn't a sophisticated fraud, it's an obviously deficient demo! If Rossi were interested in fooling people, he could manage much better than this! Look, Rossi, attacking Krivit, looks like a complete nut case. Jed excuses this as an idiosyncracy of an inventor. Maybe. I'm skeptical. I suspect that Rossi is smarter than that, that he knows how he looks and is deliberately creating the impressions that he's creating. I can think of a number of reasons for this, both psychological and practical or economic. And, of course, none of this helps us to actually know how much power this kitten is producing. Kullander and Essen did see a more convincing demo, and apparently did see (directly) the quality of the steam, at least at one point. Unfortunately, their report doesn't allow us to rule out that significant water may have been flowing out the outlet tube, consider the possibility that their inspection of this tube was controlled precisely how Rossi controlled it with Krivit. Measuring steam quality with their meter, even if it actually worked for that purpose, would not rule out this water flow problem. I love it, in a way. The situation causes many observers to reveal their biases, by how they respond. However, I'll caution myself that Rothwell, for example, does claim to have private information that he trusts, and private information can create an appearance of bias. Still, Jed's attachment to the expert testimony here is not a good sign, I urge him to quickly climb down from that! The sooner the better! It's fascinating to me that the Levi paper included detailed information about the calibration of the fundamentally irrelevant radiation measurements, and nothing, in fact, on the steam quality measurements. The results of those measurements was not even reported, it was merely *implied* that the issue was addressed. And then everone is falling all over themselves over whether the non-reported measurements were based on mass or volume! It would be like arguing over the result of zero divided by zero. Hey! my result checks correctly and perfectly, therefore your different result is wrong! Rich: So I couldn't manage to find any quotes by Abd that were Ad Psdudonym against Joshua, so I retract that claim and regret my error and remind myself how very easy it is to shift into criticizing and judging our fellows... I like his humorous, wry appreciation of how we all get tangled up in the Rossi web. In mutual service, Rich
Re: [Vo]: Affect of Specific Heat on behavior of outlet temperature...
On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 1:09 AM, Mark Iverson zeropo...@charter.net wrote: ** So when the reactor fluctuates to the high side, most of that energy is absorbed by the hydrogen and or water, If the water absorbs heat, then it either gets hotter, or it changes phase. If the device is already changing the phase of all the water, the extra heat has to go into making the steam hotter. and when it fluctuates down, that enregy gets released... not unlike what happens in an electrical capacitor if tailored properly to the behavior of the electrical circuit. The NET result is a fairly steady temperature 'downwind' from the reactor in the chimney's vapor. Coincidentally at the boiling point of water? In every case? The sort of regulation you're talking about doesn't happen before the boiling point is reached. And I don't just mean that the temperature is increasing, but that the curve is bumpy on a fairly short time scale. There is no bumpiness like this after the bp is reached.
Re: [Vo]:Re: Ad Hominem against Joshua Cude, or is that Ad Pseudonym against Joshua Cude ?
On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 1:40 AM, Rich Murray rmfor...@gmail.com wrote: Rich: So I couldn't manage to find any quotes by Abd that were Ad Psdudonym against Joshua, so I retract that claim and regret my error and remind myself how very easy it is to shift into criticizing and judging our fellows... I like his humorous, wry appreciation of how we all get tangled up in the Rossi web. Lomax hasn't called me anything worse than a liar and a pseudo-skeptic, and I think he'd argue those were supportable labels. Water off a duck... I've called him a CF advocate, and a pathological believer, and probably dishonest too, and I'd argue they are supportable too. No harm either way, as far as I can see. It adds a little color to some pretty dull gibberish.
Re: [Vo]:Krivit's Napoli visit? To all Italian-reading Vorts
On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 11:21 PM, Mark Iverson zeropo...@charter.net wrote: To all Vorts that read/speak Italian: Could you please visit the website that Harry Veeder supplied and report back to The Collective! http://www.ioriocirillo.com/eng/index.php There is little english content; but, here is one paper on the site: THE GDPE CELL Energy balance analysis (Some explanations about the energy anomalies inside the cell) September, 2008 Vincenzo Iorio, Domenico Cirillo Caserta (Italy) Abstract: The electrolytic cell we've been studying - known better as its own acronym GDPE cell- does not show that energy gain we initially stated in a previous report of ours. Our research team has now realized that some measurement mistakes were made, due to very high frequency energy fluctuations produced by the cell itself. Vice versa, transmutations over the tungsten cathode still need to be verified as such anomalous matter is so far detected and confirmed throughout our experiments. Description: Unfortunately, totally due to logistic reasons, this research has been carried out few hours a week: the whole work could be simply sum up in a matter of some Saturdays and Sundays as well; as result, it lasted several months. This document aims to disclose a very important considerationgrown at the end of the previous summer (2008) and, since then, it's going to require a good deal oftime to be solved with accuracy. So far, investigations about the electrolytic cell followed different paths: measurements of energy anomalies (that is the optimum efficiency which, from its initial values very close to 1.2 - 1.4, is now settled to a value higher than 2) and the transmutations into the tungsten cathode which were soon detected since the early tests at the beginning of 2004. While transmutations still remain singular phenomenon as they are very often confirmed by experience, the matter of energetic anomalies took a different tum. Since both the instruments used for outgoing thermal energy reading and the ones adopted to read the incoming electric power have been tuned to their optimum accuracy, we got the conclusion that the whole measurement test bench (we mean both the electrical and the calorimetric one) suffers intrinsic systemic errors which, to a deep analysis, does not allow to express a definite consideration about the real magnitude of the energy values involved. In a word, after a five-year experiment we fully realized that our measurement systems are not accurate and, as a consequence, all the measurements carried out so far cannot be used to provide any sort of datum about the existence of energy anomalies inherent to the phenomena, neither positive nor negative. So, let's have a deep look at the measurement system weak points and to the relevant reasons. Since the early months of 2004 (we won't mention the early experiments made at the end of summer 2003) we were fully aware that the cell itself showed its own electric characteristics establishing some very peculiar transient conditions. Measurements realized through a spectrum analyzer coupled with EM! antenna showed frequency bands hit at about 300 MHz with energy distributions up to some GHz. The cell steady conditions (strongly affected by geometric, electric and chemical specifications) are caused by an effect very similar (but not exactly the same) to the wellknown Wehnelt one. Defining the GDPE cell as the evidence ofWehnelt effect is in practice a forced way to describe how it works; nevertheless it may be a practical fashion to outline it. Towards the end of 1800, the well-known Wehnelt electrochemical switch was employed to make Rumkhorff coils working at higher dynamic regimes. And some aspects ofthe GDPE intermittent way of working are just connected to the speed of those regimes. Something similar just happens into the GDPE cell. The sudden power cut caused by reiterated cathode polarizations due to gas streams as well as to heated vapours associated with pulsating regimes of electric arch into the electrolyte, leads to discontinuous current absorptions by the cell making the instantaneous electric power measurement extremely hard. The instantaneous electric power applied to the cell is a very important parameter in order to estimate the presupposed cell efficiency. Another important parameter is the thermal energy absorbed by water which heats and leads to the electrolyte evaporation. A very accurate measurement ofthese two parameters can lead to meet the GDPE energy efficiency. The instantaneous electric power can be easily time quadrate to the whole length ofthe experiment in order to get the energy value absorbed by the cell. On the other hand, calories provided with the cell can be calculated by measuring the total amount of evaporated water as well as the cell heating during the total length ofthe test. The test has to last longer than 500 seconds in order to minimize any sort of measurement errors: usually, 1200 seconds may be
[Vo]:Cirillo And Iorio Transmutation of metal
http://jlnlabs.online.fr/cfr/files/CirilloDtransmutat.pdf Caserta, Italy is about 30 km north of Naples
Re: [Vo]:Rossi responds to movie professor and Peter Ekstrom's analysis
nothing to get all steamed up about...
Re: [Vo]:Re: Ad Hominem against Joshua Cude, or is that Ad Pseudonym against Joshua Cude ?
I was concerned there might be a group think dynamic of applying dismissive labels to Joshua Cude to establish a group social norm of just dismissing an extremely capable person who brings unusual clarity and celerity of thought to our table...
Re: [Vo]:Krivit's Napoli visit? To all Italian-reading Vorts
This team was competent enough to dismiss their own excess energy claims. Transmutations and isotope shifts may well be the most convincing evidence for low levels of LENR -- widely reported in a variety of setups -- has this area been reviewed in detail? -- Joshua Cude, where are you, we need you...
[Vo]:Re: Ad Hominem against Joshua Cude, or is that Ad Pseudonym against Joshua Cude ?
At 02:40 AM 6/30/2011, Rich Murray wrote: Re: Ad Hominem against Joshua Cude, or is that Ad Pseudonym against Joshua Cude ? Rich: So I couldn't manage to find any quotes by Abd that were Ad Psdudonym against Joshua, so I retract that claim and regret my error and remind myself how very easy it is to shift into criticizing and judging our fellows... I like his humorous, wry appreciation of how we all get tangled up in the Rossi web. Thanks, Rich. My operating position has become that the public information does not allow us to come to clear conclusions about the Rossi claims. If I'm correct, then those who do, in fact, make claims of clear conclusion, either way, are merely displaying bias. It shouldn't be suprising, bias is normal for human beings. We tend to see what we want to see, and it's a constant effort for anyone interested in science to overcome this, and we fail, often. I've come to a hypothesis regarding how the Rossi excess heat results -- in the public demos -- could be *very* incorrect, but that hypothesis has not been tested, even though it would be easy to test, should Rossi care to clear this up. Jed is aware that there are problems with the demos, and that Rossi has effectively refused to address them. Krivit's latest report seems sober to me (somewhat to my surprise), what I see is that Krivit reported what has been called gossip, without fixing or claiming some conclusion from that. The gossip addresses reasons to suspect Rossi, on character grounds. That human interest is actually important, for much depends, here, on our judgment of the character of the claimant and his associates. In the end, though, Rossi is correct in that if he succeeds with the Defkalion demo, it's all moot. I've mentioned that there may be both psychological and economic reasons for Rossi's apparent con game character here. Consider this: Rossi was heavily attacked, prosecuted, and even jailed for alleged fraud or illegal activity. It would be a device to recover from that, to create an impression of a repeat, to make his behavior seem really, really fishy, and then pull the sheet off the hidden proof, vindicating himself. If he's playing that game, he loves it when he's attacked, because he believes that all these attacks will look like idiocy, later. Of course, this is unfair, because he's creating the appearance that attracts those attacks. But people are perfectly capable of thinking and acting like this. In a sense, he's attempting to vindicate himself, because if it is revealed that his appearance of fraud now was an illusion, it will carry with it, by association, his past. Perhaps his intentions were good then, too. Perhaps the old allegations were also false. Perhaps his factory fire was truly an accident. Etc. Joshua has played a useful role in the discussions on the Vortex list. I'm hoping that there will be further cooperation, in exploring what is behind the overall cold fusion controversy. I have, in the past, excoriated Joshua for pseudoskepticism combined with anonymity. I'm not going to belabor whether or not that was justified, but I'd urge him to abandon the anonymity, if possible. There is nothing shameful about real skepticism. I am aware, though, of a certain risk to him if he does so. I've had correspondence with some skeptics who are afraid of retaliation from *other skeptics,* for even giving cold fusion the time of day. It was something like if it became known that I debated cold fusion, my career would be over. Which I find fascinating as a window into the oppressive character of orthodoxy. If that kind of pressure exists, much is explained. I've encountered a taste of this, myself, where a long-time colleague went ballistic over my mention that cold fusion might be real. The man had no knowledge or understanding of the research work that has led me to that possibility, all he knew was theory. (He's a mathematician, who has some substantial knowledge of quantum mechanics.) It seemed impossible to penetrate his firm conviction. He believed I'd been conned. When I mentioned that I'd put thousands of dollars into cold fusion kits, he assumed that I'd bought kits from some fraudster, he clearly believes that anyone involved with cold fusion is either massively deluded or a con artist. When I explained that, no, I was making kits for sale, to replicate a published experiment, he advised me, firmly, to get my money back, as much as possible, by selling the materials and equipment, since there could be no possible value to actually experimenting with this. A mutual friend, a close associate of the mathematician, who became privy to the correspondence, could see what was going on and tried to mediate, to no avail. I was consigned, by this long-time friend, to the outer darkness, and there were consequences within the organization where we had cooperated. His kind of science is cargo cult science, where belief
[Vo]:Deuterium vs. Hydrogen (wrt Rossi and Ahern)
An unusual predicament is lurking in the background of the field of LENR, due to Rossi's (apparent) success. Prior to Rossi, palladium-deuterium - Pd-D - was king. Now it is looking like Ni-H will be the heir to the throne. Generally this change in focus away from exotic materials seems like a good thing, to the extent Rossi's results can be trusted. However, several dozen of the top researchers in the LENR field were a bit miffed by this change in direction, since they had built careers around Pd-D; and many of them may have jumped ship. After all, getting rid of two expensive components in an experiment should be win-win - IF - Rossi's extraordinary results can be duplicated without them. The reason I am bringing this point up is that there could be a promising middle ground which is ignored in a rush to switch to Ni-H. It is possible that this middle ground has a valid end-use, even if the Rossi effect is proved. That end use would be dense deuterium in a matrix which does not require precious metals and in a situation where one might desire actual fusion. As a few of you might have guessed, the big opportunity for this would be 'targets' for ICF hot fusion. A target which contains a low cost alloy which is loaded with dense deuterium could be most important in the big picture, since it might then be possible to employ tabletop accelerators to provide inertia, instead of giant lasers, etc. More on that later First issue - we do know that Rossi says that deuterium quenches the heat reaction in his reactor. In fact, he claimed to use deuterium for that very purpose: quenching. But like so many Rossi-isms, this one may be another exaggeration. Moreover - a null result with what 'should be' the more active isotope - may be true only for the precise materials Rossi is using; and in other combinations it may be possible to find results with deuterium which have special advantages (such as for ICF targets, etc) and where you do not want extra energy until it is needed. We do know that prior researchers have gotten mixed results with nickel and deuterium, but far less than with Pd-D. However, the major problem is that nickel alone does NOT load to high levels, and even nano-nickel does not load well. In Pd-D LENR, the one criterion which is deemed important is loading of close to 1:1. That would be one atom of deuterium for every atom of palladium. This ratio is hard to achieve without palladium, BUT a ratio of over 4:1 has been achieved in an alloy of nickel and palladium. This is the famous Arata-Zhang alloy. The effort now is to move to alloys of nickel but without exotic metals, and that is where Brian Ahern's work can possibly help those researchers who want to stay with deuterium, yet get away from palladium - and still achieve excellent loading. It is estimate that Pd would cost $5,000 ounce if used in LENR or in ICF fusion due to the demand/supply situation. A few days ago, Brian was running a new alloy of Zr65%-Ni25%-Cu5%-Fe5%. This was spin cast, calcined in air and ground in a ball mill, so that in the end there is a ceramic support composed of zirconia, ZrO2 - in which are imbedded nano-islands of the alloy, which is metallic nickel-copper-iron. This is identical to his recent presentation at MIT, except for the addition of iron to the alloy. When baked at mid-range of temperature, zirconium wants to oxidize preferentially and that is the physical property that makes nano-islands of alloy a natural feature of this technique. The support particles are ground to 50 microns or so, and the result is millions of nanoislands of alloy embedded in each ceramic particle. Here is where it might get interesting for the deuterium researchers. This material loaded to a ratio of 2.5:1 ! And that is based on the ceramic mass as well, so it could be way more than double wrt to only the metal atoms. This is spectacular, under either circumstance. There is no apparent reason why it should not load to the same high level with deuterium, but this will not be tried by Brian, and that is why I am mentioning it now. Ahern is very concerned about the energy crisis - and is open about his results, and wants to see the benefit of them spread to as many areas as possible. This is the first nanopowder alloy to load well containing no precious metal. All of Brian's previous nano-nickel alloys have not loaded well unless palladium was a component in the alloy. This is a fine point to the casual observer, but there will be a few here who will appreciate the implications. I do not think that ICF can be economically feasible if palladium is required, for instance. The curious thing about all of this is that the nano-nickel which did not load was still producing net heat gain, ala Rossi. And wouldn't you know it - this one, which loads well, has yet to produce net excess heat. Go figure. That is why LENR is so frustrating. The devil is in the details. Again - this is a FIRST, in the sense of the first common
Re: [Vo]:Deuterium vs. Hydrogen (wrt Rossi and Ahern)
On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 1:28 PM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: The curious thing about all of this is that the nano-nickel which did not load was still producing net heat gain, ala Rossi. And wouldn't you know it - this one, which loads well, has yet to produce net excess heat. Go figure. That is why LENR is so frustrating. The devil is in the details. From all of what I have read, it seems to me that the reactions are not occurring within the perfected cells of the metal lattice but at the discontinuities or imperfections. There's something happening at the crystal boundries which causes the nuclear reactions. T
Re: [Vo]:Rossi responds to movie professor and Peter Ekstrom's analysis
Thanks Rich, I am done debating the steam issue. Until someone builds a *trustworthy* demo that can simulate the behaviour of the eCat with 600-800 watts input, I am unimpressed by the method of debunking by calculation. Harry - Original Message - From: Rich Murray rmfor...@gmail.com To: Harry Veeder hlvee...@yahoo.com Cc: Sent: Wednesday, June 29, 2011 11:32:59 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Rossi responds to movie professor and Peter Ekstrom's analysis I'd like to see a practical person rig up an empty demo version of the Rossi device -- about the same power electric heater inside a chamber with a water inlet from a constant rate pump, and short outlet chimney, etc. with two faucets at the top of the outlet tube: one to allow fast sequential measures of any exiting invisible steam that turns into a mist in a few cm, then to be condensed and dripped into a container for measurement of weight and volume, and the other faucet leading to a transparent glass tube 3 m long that drains into a second measuring container, via weight and volume. I wager anomalous excess money that the heat input can be adjusted to closely replicate what we saw in the Krivit video. Be a neat project for a high school science fair...
Re: [Vo]:Re: Ad Hominem against Joshua Cude, or is that Ad Pseudonym against Joshua Cude ?
Abd wrote: My operating position has become that the public information does not allow us to come to clear conclusions about the Rossi claims. If I'm correct, then those who do, in fact, make claims of clear conclusion, either way, are merely displaying bias. It shouldn't be suprising, bias is normal for human beings. We tend to see what we want to see, and it's a constant effort for anyone interested in science to overcome this, and we fail, often. This is the very point of whole discussion. Besides Levi's private 18 hour test, there is absolutely not even a single one valid test made. Therefore we can only trust or distrust Rossi as a person. It is just plain foolishness to suggest that Rossi is incompetent to make appropriate measurements that can be done with high school chemistry skills. If Rossi is malicious as a person, there are better and easier ways to fake results, e.g. cleverly placed heating element near thermometer sensor renders all calculations meaningless. —Jouni
Re: [Vo]:Deuterium vs. Hydrogen (wrt Rossi and Ahern)
In reply to Jones Beene's message of Thu, 30 Jun 2011 10:28:30 -0700: Hi, [snip] I'm somewhat surprised that no one tries Lanthanum alloys, since these are used for Hydrogen storage, implying high loading. An unusual predicament is lurking in the background of the field of LENR, due to Rossi's (apparent) success. Prior to Rossi, palladium-deuterium - Pd-D - was king. Now it is looking like Ni-H will be the heir to the throne. Generally this change in focus away from exotic materials seems like a good thing, to the extent Rossi's results can be trusted. However, several dozen of the top researchers in the LENR field were a bit miffed by this change in direction, since they had built careers around Pd-D; and many of them may have jumped ship. After all, getting rid of two expensive components in an experiment should be win-win - IF - Rossi's extraordinary results can be duplicated without them. The reason I am bringing this point up is that there could be a promising middle ground which is ignored in a rush to switch to Ni-H. It is possible that this middle ground has a valid end-use, even if the Rossi effect is proved. That end use would be dense deuterium in a matrix which does not require precious metals and in a situation where one might desire actual fusion. As a few of you might have guessed, the big opportunity for this would be 'targets' for ICF hot fusion. A target which contains a low cost alloy which is loaded with dense deuterium could be most important in the big picture, since it might then be possible to employ tabletop accelerators to provide inertia, instead of giant lasers, etc. More on that later First issue - we do know that Rossi says that deuterium quenches the heat reaction in his reactor. In fact, he claimed to use deuterium for that very purpose: quenching. But like so many Rossi-isms, this one may be another exaggeration. Moreover - a null result with what 'should be' the more active isotope - may be true only for the precise materials Rossi is using; and in other combinations it may be possible to find results with deuterium which have special advantages (such as for ICF targets, etc) and where you do not want extra energy until it is needed. We do know that prior researchers have gotten mixed results with nickel and deuterium, but far less than with Pd-D. However, the major problem is that nickel alone does NOT load to high levels, and even nano-nickel does not load well. In Pd-D LENR, the one criterion which is deemed important is loading of close to 1:1. That would be one atom of deuterium for every atom of palladium. This ratio is hard to achieve without palladium, BUT a ratio of over 4:1 has been achieved in an alloy of nickel and palladium. This is the famous Arata-Zhang alloy. The effort now is to move to alloys of nickel but without exotic metals, and that is where Brian Ahern's work can possibly help those researchers who want to stay with deuterium, yet get away from palladium - and still achieve excellent loading. It is estimate that Pd would cost $5,000 ounce if used in LENR or in ICF fusion due to the demand/supply situation. A few days ago, Brian was running a new alloy of Zr65%-Ni25%-Cu5%-Fe5%. This was spin cast, calcined in air and ground in a ball mill, so that in the end there is a ceramic support composed of zirconia, ZrO2 - in which are imbedded nano-islands of the alloy, which is metallic nickel-copper-iron. This is identical to his recent presentation at MIT, except for the addition of iron to the alloy. When baked at mid-range of temperature, zirconium wants to oxidize preferentially and that is the physical property that makes nano-islands of alloy a natural feature of this technique. The support particles are ground to 50 microns or so, and the result is millions of nanoislands of alloy embedded in each ceramic particle. Here is where it might get interesting for the deuterium researchers. This material loaded to a ratio of 2.5:1 ! And that is based on the ceramic mass as well, so it could be way more than double wrt to only the metal atoms. This is spectacular, under either circumstance. There is no apparent reason why it should not load to the same high level with deuterium, but this will not be tried by Brian, and that is why I am mentioning it now. Ahern is very concerned about the energy crisis - and is open about his results, and wants to see the benefit of them spread to as many areas as possible. This is the first nanopowder alloy to load well containing no precious metal. All of Brian's previous nano-nickel alloys have not loaded well unless palladium was a component in the alloy. This is a fine point to the casual observer, but there will be a few here who will appreciate the implications. I do not think that ICF can be economically feasible if palladium is required, for instance. The curious thing about all of this is that the nano-nickel which did not load was still producing net heat gain, ala Rossi. And wouldn't you
Re: [Vo]:Re: Ad Hominem against Joshua Cude, or is that Ad Pseudonym against Joshua Cude ?
!!! Abd, I enjoyed the clarity, flow, eloquence, dignity, and reasonableness of your sharing. You cast a net that readily includes me and Joshua Cude. Again, I submit that the many setups that report transmutations and isotopic shifts are the easiest and swiftest routes to repeatable runs that generate samples that can be precisely examined in the micro to nano region by competent labs forever -- hopefully, many samples have been archived since 1989 and from previous anomaly reports. One barrier is cost. But in our world hundreds of thousands of people are showing interest this year in LENR -- couldn't a wiki group be evolved to sell stock as a reasonable profit public service corporation to specifically finance accurate testing of samples with complete open to the public real-time access to all aspects of daily operations, including a searchable archive of all public comments? I have a brilliant friend who already owns a scanning electron microscope and has his own supercomputer, made of 23 wirelessly networked computers. Probably, certain venture capitalists would be willing to help launch this. Within a month, samples from a few setups can be tested -- Rossi, Dash, SPAWAR, your DPd electrolysis runs, milk tree corrosion in high density polyethylene high voltage runs -- verified anomalies would generate specific data for theorizing, and galvanize science exponentially. Sell books, videos, and feature length films to expand financing. How can ownership and patent rights be protected for the world public good? I think his friends should explain to Rossi that he has to immediately verify dry steam output in one of his cells. Whether or not the excess heat claim fails, the possibility of transmutations can be quickly explored -- after all, what time and cost does it take to run a few expert micro and nano measures? I went to a few Landmark events with our wonderful friend in early 1995, and thought they were a typical cult group think process, like Mormon Church, early Christian Science, Arica Training, Da Free John, TM, Andrew Cohen, Scientology, blue green algae, Atkins Diet, Gary Renard, Endeavor Academy in Wisconsin, early Naropa Institute, Rajneesh, Muktananda, Babaji, Dahn Yoga -- as unpredictably dangerous and beneficial as anything else in actual life -- no way I would devote my limited funds -- my experience is that such groups always expel me fairly quickly -- so for decades I just visit and run -- EST evolved into The Forum evolved into Landmark -- exponential multilevel schemes are a fatal symptom -- if not democratic without secrets, I would never join -- I am keenly interested in how you apply it. In mutual service, Rich
RE: [Vo]:Deuterium vs. Hydrogen (wrt Rossi and Ahern)
-Original Message- From: mix...@bigpond.com I'm somewhat surprised that no one tries Lanthanum alloys, since these are used for Hydrogen storage, implying high loading. Hi Robin, Yes, a few of the lanthanides, particularly cerium, have potential for high loading and reasonable cost. All it takes to try them is adequate funding :) Here is something close (from an old article) - to what I had in mind for a new kind of ICF, using macroscopic particles of loaded deuterium, travelling on a magnetic wave - instead of particle beams or laser beams as the driver. This is the original Winterberg concept: http://iopscience.iop.org/0032-1028/10/1/306;jsessionid=5440FE3BA8F5056F9D8D 18FDF0B13A1C.c3 ... But to be updated by substituting the loaded Ahern powder for both the projectile and the target (or two intersecting 50 micron projectiles). BTW - the powder is magnetic. It would be interesting to estimate the revised parameters, under the assumption of high internal pressuriztion - in both the projectile and the target. Of course, overpotential is not 'real' pressurization, but does it operate the same way? Quien sabe? IOW - could one reduce a required 10 km magnetic wave accelerator to a few meters if the final impact started out with both participating particles having 'virtual' deuterium pressurization of say - 10 kilobar? Jones
Re: [Vo]:Krivit's Napoli visit? To all Italian-reading Vorts
At 11:28 AM 6/30/2011, Rich Murray wrote: This team was competent enough to dismiss their own excess energy claims. Transmutations and isotope shifts may well be the most convincing evidence for low levels of LENR -- widely reported in a variety of setups -- has this area been reviewed in detail? -- Joshua Cude, where are you, we need you... Returning to PdD, excess heat is widely reported and there is, in fact, transmutation reported. Often we think about transmutation in cold fusion experiments in terms of higher-Z isotopes, but the main transmutation, for which there is clear evidence, is deuterium to helium. Joshua hasn't been willing to acknowledge this, so far, based on what I see as mere technicalities, such as excluding any evidence, no matter how solid or convincing it might be in itself, which hasn't been published in a mainstream peer-reviewed journal. In fact, there is such publication, but it's old. My sense of this is that the field, in general, doesn't care enough about proving cold fusion any more, to be willing to shoulder the heavy costs involved, in money and time. And, indeed, why should they? What, exactly, is the problem with relying upon McKubre's reports prepared for, say, EPRI? But to each his own, eh?
Re: [Vo]:Re: Ad Hominem against Joshua Cude, or is that Ad Pseudonym against Joshua Cude ?
At 03:44 AM 6/30/2011, Joshua Cude wrote: On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 1:40 AM, Rich Murray mailto:rmfor...@gmail.comrmfor...@gmail.com wrote: Rich: So I couldn't manage to find any quotes by Abd that were Ad Psdudonym against Joshua, so I retract that claim and regret my error and remind myself how very easy it is to shift into criticizing and judging our fellows... I like his humorous, wry appreciation of how we all get tangled up in the Rossi web. Lomax hasn't called me anything worse than a liar and a pseudo-skeptic, and I think he'd argue those were supportable labels. Water off a duck... I've called him a CF advocate, and a pathological believer, and probably dishonest too, and I'd argue they are supportable too. No harm either way, as far as I can see. It adds a little color to some pretty dull gibberish. Thanks, Joshua. I agree completely, though dull is not an objective evaluation, whether it's true or false depends on the individuals involved. Your account is not complete, though. I recently said I'd be willing to drop pseudo from skeptic, based on some things you said, and liar was referring to old stuff, and I'm not interested in going back to check out the basis, so I'm *not* arguing that those labels were supportable. Maybe they were at the time, and maybe not, and so what? If you were upset, or someone else was upset, I'd be willing to look back. You don't sound very upset. You've here asserted, de novo, CF advocate, pathological believer, and probably dishonest to boot, but if you want to believe these stories, so what? Believing your own stories would be your problem, not mine. Good luck with it.
[Vo]:Rossi made a test with Indian scientists
From Rossi's blog. harry June 30th, 2011 at 4:56 PM Dear Manik Sahai: We made a test with a group of Indian scientists and we hope to put this technology at the service of India. In India I visited what I deem to be the most beautiful building Mankind ever made: the Taj Mahal. Hope to return there. Warm Regards, A.R.
Re: [Vo]:Deuterium vs. Hydrogen (wrt Rossi and Ahern)
Terry, I think there are at least 2 levels of activation and the imperfections in the lattice you mention are a priori. I was a long time convinced that the Casimir effect was limited to the Casimir geometry but have come to believe that these cavities can translate resident gases into fractional clusters that can then self maintain their fractional arrangement to migrate and store themselves in the same lattice vacancies normally occupied by a single hydrogen proton. Perhaps the differences Jones was alluding to regarding materials that produce heat like Ni-H vs materials that produce good loading ratios for ICF targets relates to the geometry of the undamaged lattice and the cluster formations. If Rossi has found a method to amplify the heat generation it may actually be by means of preventing the clusters in the lattice.. This is assuming some balance between the initial formation of these clusters in the cavities and the ability of the surrounding lattice to maintain the clusters. Regards Fran Terry Blanton Thu, 30 Jun 2011 11:56:34 -0700 On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 1:28 PM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: The curious thing about all of this is that the nano-nickel which did not load was still producing net heat gain, ala Rossi. And wouldn't you know it - this one, which loads well, has yet to produce net excess heat. Go figure. That is why LENR is so frustrating. The devil is in the details. From all of what I have read, it seems to me that the reactions are not occurring within the perfected cells of the metal lattice but at the discontinuities or imperfections. There's something happening at the crystal boundries which causes the nuclear reactions. T
[Vo]:Thane Heins explains and demonstrates his regenerative acceleration technology
June 21 2011- Thane Heins presents three versions of his regenerative acceleration devices to a small audience. He begins by explaining the principle theoretical difference between regenerative braking and regenerative acceleration, and goes on to show how each version can perform in regenerative braking and in regenerative acceleration mode. He wishes to license the technology. part 1 of 2 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z1weXYivARo captions from the video: Regenerative braking generator recharges batteries but will decelerate the vehicle down to a dead stop - can only be applied during braking...provides moderate 10 - 15% range increase. Regenerative acceleration generator recharges batteries and will accelerate the vehicle up to full speed - can be applied at all times...provides infinite range increase. Harry
Re: [Vo]:Deuterium vs. Hydrogen (wrt Rossi and Ahern)
Re metals tried successfully, Prof Piantelli wrote me, inter alia: all the metals from the four transition metal groups are able to work, more or less; Naturally some work better than the other due to a better electronic conformation in the most external shell and Zr is one of these. The W of Iwamura also works and also Th and some rare earths. These all are described in my newest patent filed in 2008 and in the publication in print at the Atti del Accademia dei Fisocritici. The mechanism for Zr and for the transition metals is always the same as with Ni. Obviously the transmutations of the active elements that take place are different for each metal used. Till now we have obtained very satisfactory with Ti, Cr, Mn and Fe- with very good results. The analysis of these elements by SEM- EDAX after extraction from the cell shows that the secondary reactions due to the expulsed protons (using the same materials for the cells as for Ni) are practically the same if we change the elements present in the active core the answers to the primary reaction of nuclear capture . As you see, it is a huge area for research. The trouble is that the most used palladium has a relatively unfavorable electronic structure. Peter On Fri, Jul 1, 2011 at 6:06 AM, francis froarty...@comcast.net wrote: Terry, I think there are at least 2 levels of activation and the imperfections in the lattice you mention are a priori. I was a long time convinced that the Casimir effect was limited to the Casimir geometry but have come to believe that these cavities can translate resident gases into fractional clusters that can then self maintain their fractional arrangement to migrate and store themselves in the same lattice vacancies normally occupied by a single hydrogen proton. Perhaps the differences Jones was alluding to regarding materials that produce heat like Ni-H vs materials that produce good loading ratios for ICF targets relates to the geometry of the undamaged lattice and the cluster formations. If Rossi has found a method to amplify the heat generation it may actually be by means of preventing the clusters in the lattice…. This is assuming some balance between the initial formation of these clusters in the cavities and the ability of the surrounding lattice to maintain the clusters. ** ** ** ** *Terry Blanton* Thu, 30 Jun 2011 11:56:34 -0700 On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 1:28 PM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:* *** ** ** The curious thing about all of this is that the nano-nickel which did not load was still producing net heat gain, ala Rossi. And wouldn't you know it - this one, which loads well, has yet to produce net excess heat. Go*** * figure. That is why LENR is so frustrating. The devil is in the details. ** ** ** ** From all of what I have read, it seems to me that the reactions are not occurring within the perfected cells of the metal lattice but at the discontinuities or imperfections. There's something happening at the crystal boundries which causes the nuclear reactions. ** ** T ** ** ** ** -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
