[Vo]:Rossi may be making a very bad move
The Russians and Chinese will engaged in aggressive economic and political espionage against the use of LENR outside of their own spheres of influence and control when they realize what a great competitive threat and a valuable commodity to control that LENR is. To avoid external compromise from hostile interests, the LENR marketplace should stay black for as long as possible until all possible development is completed and the first release of the product is bulletproof. Rossi may be making a very bad move for the long term future of LENR by permitting this 6 month test to be released. But it will be interesting to see what is going to happen. Let us hope that the reputation of LENR is so bad that the Rossi test release stays obscured and in ill-repute.
Re: [Vo]:Skeuomorphs ride again!
Jed wrote: The Prius starts to move the moment you take your foot off the brake, before you press the gas pedal. There is no need for that, but that is how conventional automatic transmissions work, and the car is designed to imitate them. Actually this is a useful function when you are starting on a hill, to prevent the car rolling back when you take your foot off the brake before you can put it on the accelerator
Re: [Vo]:Rossi may be making a very bad move
Axil, I don't agree. Rossi is apparently close to showing a 1 MW plant in operation and needs the paper to persuade the Patent Office, nay sayers in the government and proof that a charge lasts for 6 months.
Re: [Vo]:Skeuomorphs ride again!
a.ashfield a.ashfi...@verizon.net wrote: Actually this is a useful function when you are starting on a hill, to prevent the car rolling back when you take your foot off the brake before you can put it on the accelerator The transmission would prevent that. It locks it forward. You may be thinking of it as something like a standard shift with a clutch. Starting up a steep hill with a clutch can be challenging. I have done it a zillion times. Then again, I have worn out two clutches in 60,000 miles, driving very short distances in stop-and-go Atlanta traffic. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:RE: Hydrofill and LaNi5
Hi Jones, I'm still around. :) I put my electrolysis experimentation on pause after doing something like 200 experiments with nothing to convince me I had found anything. I had some hope for Brillouin Energy, but after all this time at SRI with no results reported, it gives me doubts about whether Godes had what he thought. I decided not to pursue replicating his method until something more is released from him. Anyway, I'm not very hopeful for nickel-based electrolysis being able to produce LENR--at least nothing I have tried has convinced me. There is a lot to convince me that false positives are easy to obtain when you are looking for lower levels of excess heating. It needs to be the last conclusion you come to after considering alternatives and designing experiments to test the alternatives. Time after time, the results of my follow up experiments supported the alternative explanation. I'm hoping the Rossi report comes out positive as the probability of a false positive at his previously-reported power levels would be nearly impossible to obtain. Just to summarize, I tried various materials (Nicrome, constantan, nitinol, thoriated tungsten, cuprothal, all of the above plated with nickel) and various types of triggering (AC, pulsed DC, alternating DC with pulsed AC, high frequency/high current AC alternating with DC, external heating, laser, permanent magnet, different electrolytes). I tried slow loading over several days to a week at low current followed by active runs and attempts to trigger. I tried prepping material in light acid followed by cleaning with acetone. Best regards, Jack On Wed, Jul 9, 2014 at 10:02 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: Special thanks should be accorded to Dennis Cravens for his openness and the great detail of information which he has provided on a most important experiment. He deserves a big award for this work, even if it turns out not to be nuclear fusion, per se - and especially if it does turn out to be LENR. Why hasn't a National Lab replicate this important work? (Rhetorical question and the answer is obvious). For the record - here is more background on LaNi5, which is looking more-and-more like the magic bullet for Ni-H thermal effects when combined with a magnetic field (this combination could be in order to reach a superparamagnetic state of self-resonance). http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/j100476a006 I should caution that all of the analysis in this thread wrt to LaNi5 is a personal and minority appraisal, and that Dennis Cravens along with almost everyone else who was involved or saw the experiment, considers it to be a version of the Les Case work, involving the fusion of deuterium. Why not? It is fully derivative of that line of experimental work and so on ... but ... that may not be sufficient. IMHO there are good reasons to suspect that there is no nuclear reaction and the thermal anomaly is related to magnetic interaction with the zero point field and with ground-state redundancy, which is different from the Mills model in several important ways (but also similar in one way). LaNi5 is like few other proton conductors (or hydrogen storage alloys) in its physical properties, especially combined with magnetic properties. With or without a Casimir boost, this route should be adequate for gain. Had Jovion of Moddel realized the properties of LaNi5, we would not be having this conversation. Superparamagnetism and fluorescence show up in nanoparticles of La alloys. This alloy absorbs significantly more hydrogen than palladium through pure chemisorption at an unbelievably rapid rate. Plus, and most notably, almost 100% of the element lanthanum is high-spin (7/2) with extreme NMR properties. Protons are absorbed directly into the alloy, instead of as atoms or molecules, and there is an huge variance (in magnetic properties) between protons and atoms. Hyperfine structure due to spin and Rydberg states interact in a mysterious way, and from the perspective of Rydberg values in Mills' theory, the La alloy when in a crystal unit at a ratio with nickel of 5:1, we have a persistent orbital vacancy or hole an seemingly without ionization, due only to an orbital vacancy - of enthalpy corresponding to 191.9 eV, as opposed to the optimum value of 190.4 eV. In short, that near-perfect fit makes LaNi5 look like the real-deal for thermal anomalies in a modified (alternative) Millsean understanding which can be called cold f/H since the redundant state follows chemisorption and is a relic of the expulsion of labile protons from the metal matrix, instead of the opposite modality. In fact, if there is UV emission, and there could be none - then it could be shed resonantly inside a Casimir pit or cavity as the proton emerges from the matrix and captures an electron at the 1/7th orbital. The downside of this short search has been trying to find an ethical supplier of LaNi5 for
RE: [Vo]:RE: Hydrofill and LaNi5
Jack, Sorry you got nothing to show from electrolysis - but it is sometimes helpful to report these negative results. Thanks for stepping forward with them now. There is value in null results when properly analyzed, and it can be of significant value when there is something positive to contrast them against. In the case of Ni-H, your results could actually narrow the possibilities and open up greater insight - when one considers Cravens results in contrast to yours. This assumes of course that both results are completely accurate for a particular parameter, and we look at the implications of the two types of experiments together. This seems to be the case here. For instance, if a modest magnetic field is required for gain (especially unpowered gain)– and a field intensity which is above a cutoff level is needed, such as Cravens provides, then electrolysis alone is not going to get us there unless the electrode is in the form of a coil of many turns - to increase the amp-turns and thereby the field intensity. Although there is a small field associated with the current flow of electrolysis, it is generally too low to meet any reasonable threshold. In contrast, samarium cobalt has substantial field, i.e. “maximum energy product” (BHmax) up to 32 megagauss-oersted (MGOe) with no current required - equivalent to nearly a Joule per mm^3. Note that Mizuno used thin nickel wire and many turns. He may not have realized the reason that it worked – but only that it did work. Secondly, a few of the many nickel alloys you tried are probably close to the proper combination of properties for gain, but perhaps do not meet another critical parameter – which is chemisorption. Chemisorption could be critical (almost certainly !) - and very small differences (such as 1-2% variance in the alloy ratio) could determine whether a particular nickel-copper alloy is active for chemisorption, or not. It is a feature of physical spacing. Even when the alloy absorbs protons instead of atoms, success could still depend on the alloy being active in a magnetic field of the proper intensity, and geometry. Note that pure Nickel is not chemisorbent at ambient but, Ni with 5% Pd is chemisorbent. Even pure Pd is not chemisorbent without some dopant. A new parameter which is showing up is “superparamagnetism”. Without it, there are no terabyte HDs – which is an interesting connection to another field. Superparamagnetism may open many doors of understanding in LENR. In short, if gain from Ni-H were simple to do – someone would have hit on the proper combination of parameters way back in the flurry of activity which happened between 1989 and 1993. Sadly, one problem for finding this holy grail may have been the tendency not to report negative results, which is exacerbated when one researcher is suspicious (or jealous) of positive results from another researcher in a similar experiment. In fact, prior to Cravens, most positive results were a bit more suspicious, since there were so many ways to err – most of which are eliminated in a side-by-side unpowered experiment. From: Jack Cole Hi Jones, I'm still around. :) I put my electrolysis experimentation on pause after doing something like 200 experiments with nothing to convince me I had found anything. I had some hope for Brillouin Energy, but after all this time at SRI with no results reported, it gives me doubts about whether Godes had what he thought. I decided not to pursue replicating his method until something more is released from him. Anyway, I'm not very hopeful for nickel-based electrolysis being able to produce LENR--at least nothing I have tried has convinced me. There is a lot to convince me that false positives are easy to obtain when you are looking for lower levels of excess heating. It needs to be the last conclusion you come to after considering alternatives and designing experiments to test the alternatives. Time after time, the results of my follow up experiments supported the alternative explanation. I'm hoping the Rossi report comes out positive as the probability of a false positive at his previously-reported power levels would be nearly impossible to obtain. Just to summarize, I tried various materials (Nicrome, constantan, nitinol, thoriated tungsten, cuprothal, all of the above plated with nickel) and various types of triggering (AC, pulsed DC, alternating DC with pulsed AC, high frequency/high current AC alternating with DC, external heating, laser, permanent magnet, different electrolytes). I tried slow loading over several days to a week at low current followed by active runs and attempts to trigger. I tried prepping material in light acid followed by cleaning with acetone. Best regards, Jack Jones Beene wrote: For the record - here is more background on LaNi5, which is looking more-and-more like the magic bullet for Ni-H thermal
Re: [Vo]:RE: Hydrofill and LaNi5
Jack: Did you try to roughen the surface of the lattice substrate metal with spark discharge as Mizuno has done in his experiments. A rough reaction surface is the key to nanoplasmonic activity and the production of Surface Plasmon Polaritons. All the successful LENR experiments that I know about have used roughened substrate surfaces in their methods. On Thu, Jul 10, 2014 at 11:25 AM, Jack Cole jcol...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Jones, I'm still around. :) I put my electrolysis experimentation on pause after doing something like 200 experiments with nothing to convince me I had found anything. I had some hope for Brillouin Energy, but after all this time at SRI with no results reported, it gives me doubts about whether Godes had what he thought. I decided not to pursue replicating his method until something more is released from him. Anyway, I'm not very hopeful for nickel-based electrolysis being able to produce LENR--at least nothing I have tried has convinced me. There is a lot to convince me that false positives are easy to obtain when you are looking for lower levels of excess heating. It needs to be the last conclusion you come to after considering alternatives and designing experiments to test the alternatives. Time after time, the results of my follow up experiments supported the alternative explanation. I'm hoping the Rossi report comes out positive as the probability of a false positive at his previously-reported power levels would be nearly impossible to obtain. Just to summarize, I tried various materials (Nicrome, constantan, nitinol, thoriated tungsten, cuprothal, all of the above plated with nickel) and various types of triggering (AC, pulsed DC, alternating DC with pulsed AC, high frequency/high current AC alternating with DC, external heating, laser, permanent magnet, different electrolytes). I tried slow loading over several days to a week at low current followed by active runs and attempts to trigger. I tried prepping material in light acid followed by cleaning with acetone. Best regards, Jack On Wed, Jul 9, 2014 at 10:02 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: Special thanks should be accorded to Dennis Cravens for his openness and the great detail of information which he has provided on a most important experiment. He deserves a big award for this work, even if it turns out not to be nuclear fusion, per se - and especially if it does turn out to be LENR. Why hasn't a National Lab replicate this important work? (Rhetorical question and the answer is obvious). For the record - here is more background on LaNi5, which is looking more-and-more like the magic bullet for Ni-H thermal effects when combined with a magnetic field (this combination could be in order to reach a superparamagnetic state of self-resonance). http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/j100476a006 I should caution that all of the analysis in this thread wrt to LaNi5 is a personal and minority appraisal, and that Dennis Cravens along with almost everyone else who was involved or saw the experiment, considers it to be a version of the Les Case work, involving the fusion of deuterium. Why not? It is fully derivative of that line of experimental work and so on ... but ... that may not be sufficient. IMHO there are good reasons to suspect that there is no nuclear reaction and the thermal anomaly is related to magnetic interaction with the zero point field and with ground-state redundancy, which is different from the Mills model in several important ways (but also similar in one way). LaNi5 is like few other proton conductors (or hydrogen storage alloys) in its physical properties, especially combined with magnetic properties. With or without a Casimir boost, this route should be adequate for gain. Had Jovion of Moddel realized the properties of LaNi5, we would not be having this conversation. Superparamagnetism and fluorescence show up in nanoparticles of La alloys. This alloy absorbs significantly more hydrogen than palladium through pure chemisorption at an unbelievably rapid rate. Plus, and most notably, almost 100% of the element lanthanum is high-spin (7/2) with extreme NMR properties. Protons are absorbed directly into the alloy, instead of as atoms or molecules, and there is an huge variance (in magnetic properties) between protons and atoms. Hyperfine structure due to spin and Rydberg states interact in a mysterious way, and from the perspective of Rydberg values in Mills' theory, the La alloy when in a crystal unit at a ratio with nickel of 5:1, we have a persistent orbital vacancy or hole an seemingly without ionization, due only to an orbital vacancy - of enthalpy corresponding to 191.9 eV, as opposed to the optimum value of 190.4 eV. In short, that near-perfect fit makes LaNi5 look like the real-deal for thermal anomalies in a modified (alternative) Millsean understanding which can be called cold f/H since the
[Vo]:Tesla's birthday is today
Born on July 10, 1856 in Smiljan Croatia Nikola Tesla is considered one of the most impactful inventors ever. It is Tesla’s birthday today, 158 years since his birth. Even after all these years, we mark Tesla as one of the most brilliant and productive technical minds that has ever existed. Will Rossi someday displace Tesla and take the number one position in the pantheon of impactful inventors? Where will the credit and accolades for the discovery and the eventual successful development of LENR finally fall through very close is yet to be determined. Will it be Stanley Pons and/or Martin Fleischmann, Rossi, Piantelli, or someone at DGT. Clearly, LENR is far more important to the long term viability of humanity than anything that Tesla and Edison has ever done. It is up to us early adopters of the LENR dream to get future historians pointed in the right direction. It’s ironic that a loss of a $1200 on a plane ticket to Greece will kill the chances of the DGT candidates their rightful place in the history of LENR. Tragically, such small trivialities of human nature are oftentimes the pivots upon which the judgment and fates of history balance.
Re: [Vo]:RE: Hydrofill and LaNi5
Jack Cole jcol...@gmail.com wrote: Axil, I tried fine grit sand paper and acid. I think that will contaminate the material. You better clean it repeatedly and carefully after that. I will grant, Mizuno and Ohmori used to scratch the surface of their glow-discharge cathodes with glass. The cathodes ended up looking like this: http://lenr-canr.org/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/Image09.jpg I would say that is contaminated. I would not use it for electrolysis. This is from: http://lenr-canr.org/?page_id=187#PhotosTMizuno Mizuno's recent experiments with glow discharge produce a rough surface in situ with very little contamination, as explained in the ICCF18 paper: http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/MizunoTmethodofco.pdf - Jed
Re: [Vo]:RE: Hydrofill and LaNi5
Dear Jack, Please indulge me some more suggestions. The Cravens and Rossi experience clearly shows the importance of sizing micro particles to be black body temperature resonant diameter. At 400C, a 5 micro particle size is ideal. Cravens uses a bigger particle size because he needs to operate at a lower (80C) temperature. It is important to produce a rough surface on these micro particles, ideally to form a nanowire coating. This surface treatment is the Key to success in hydrogen based LENR. This process is highly protected intellectual property item used by all who are pursuing commensal LENR. As a variation on the Mizuno process to distress the surface of these 5 micron micro particles, I wonder if a Mizuno like spark pre-treatment of these micro particles floating on a mercury electrode bath might be a way to produce the required distressed micro particle surface treatment? Nickel will float on liquid mercury. Nickel is the best material for hydrogen gas based LENR because it is an almost perfect reflector of infrared photons. On Thu, Jul 10, 2014 at 1:26 PM, Jack Cole jcol...@gmail.com wrote: Axil, I tried fine grit sand paper and acid. I think electrolysis is so much messier chemically than what Mizuno is doing, and it may not be possible to reach some of the parameters very easy (temperature, surface features and so forth). I think I would probably start up some experiments again if I could get a gas loaded chamber. I do like Mizuno's approach of essentially creating the nano particles through the use of electrical discharge (from a safety perspective). Best regards, Jack On Thu, Jul 10, 2014 at 11:59 AM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: Jack: Did you try to roughen the surface of the lattice substrate metal with spark discharge as Mizuno has done in his experiments. A rough reaction surface is the key to nanoplasmonic activity and the production of Surface Plasmon Polaritons. All the successful LENR experiments that I know about have used roughened substrate surfaces in their methods. On Thu, Jul 10, 2014 at 11:25 AM, Jack Cole jcol...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Jones, I'm still around. :) I put my electrolysis experimentation on pause after doing something like 200 experiments with nothing to convince me I had found anything. I had some hope for Brillouin Energy, but after all this time at SRI with no results reported, it gives me doubts about whether Godes had what he thought. I decided not to pursue replicating his method until something more is released from him. Anyway, I'm not very hopeful for nickel-based electrolysis being able to produce LENR--at least nothing I have tried has convinced me. There is a lot to convince me that false positives are easy to obtain when you are looking for lower levels of excess heating. It needs to be the last conclusion you come to after considering alternatives and designing experiments to test the alternatives. Time after time, the results of my follow up experiments supported the alternative explanation. I'm hoping the Rossi report comes out positive as the probability of a false positive at his previously-reported power levels would be nearly impossible to obtain. Just to summarize, I tried various materials (Nicrome, constantan, nitinol, thoriated tungsten, cuprothal, all of the above plated with nickel) and various types of triggering (AC, pulsed DC, alternating DC with pulsed AC, high frequency/high current AC alternating with DC, external heating, laser, permanent magnet, different electrolytes). I tried slow loading over several days to a week at low current followed by active runs and attempts to trigger. I tried prepping material in light acid followed by cleaning with acetone. Best regards, Jack On Wed, Jul 9, 2014 at 10:02 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: Special thanks should be accorded to Dennis Cravens for his openness and the great detail of information which he has provided on a most important experiment. He deserves a big award for this work, even if it turns out not to be nuclear fusion, per se - and especially if it does turn out to be LENR. Why hasn't a National Lab replicate this important work? (Rhetorical question and the answer is obvious). For the record - here is more background on LaNi5, which is looking more-and-more like the magic bullet for Ni-H thermal effects when combined with a magnetic field (this combination could be in order to reach a superparamagnetic state of self-resonance). http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/j100476a006 I should caution that all of the analysis in this thread wrt to LaNi5 is a personal and minority appraisal, and that Dennis Cravens along with almost everyone else who was involved or saw the experiment, considers it to be a version of the Les Case work, involving the fusion of deuterium. Why not? It is fully derivative of that line of experimental work and so on ... but ...
Re: [Vo]:RE: Hydrofill and LaNi5H
Jed, Jones and others-- I too read the Craven’s report and found it very interesting--particularly his discussion of the theory. He points out the importance of the magnetic field aligning the D nuclei in antiparallel spin orientations as well as the importance of vacancies in the Pd lattice caused by alloying with gold and allowing a place for the D to gather. The thing he does not explain is how the energy (24 Mev) from the collapse of 2 D to form He is distributed to the lattice. AS I have maintained from the beginning of my attendance on Vortex, the energy is distributed by spin coupling to other spin oriented particles under the influence of the magnetic field. Is there any reason why the D nuclei could not form excited states of high but opposite spin states which collapse quickly to the zero spin He with distribution of small spin quanta to other entities in the lattice including spin angular momentum associated with orbital electrons found in the lattice.? The presence of BEC or Cooper pairs of D may initiate and mediate the spin energy distribution of the loss of mass associated with forming the He. A similar pairing of H in Ni alloy lattice may allow the formation of D and hence He. The mechanism of the formation of H from D in the Mizuno experiment is another matter. Seems like the reverse of the D,He reaction may also happen. The Cravens experiment is nice as Jed and Jones have already said. HE DESERVES A PRIZE FOR BEING A OPEN, REAL EXPERIMENTAL SCIENTIST. Bob Sent from Windows Mail From: Jed Rothwell Sent: Wednesday, July 9, 2014 9:18 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: Special thanks should be accorded to Dennis Cravens for his openness and the great detail of information which he has provided on a most important experiment. He deserves a big award for this work . . . Yes! It is a fine paper. I copied it to LENR-CANR.org. Such an elegant demonstration! This is my favorite kind of experiment: one based on first principles without depending on instruments. Martin Fleischmann also liked this kind of thing, such as his boil-off tests. A experiment with lots of instruments yields more useful information, which I suppose is needed for a theory. You need both kinds, but this is sweet. I just read the paper again. . . . I noticed something on the first page that relates to the Defkalion fiasco. Maybe I should let bygones be bygones, but to keep the historical record clear, note that it says: Two weeks before NI Week, in conjunction with ICCF18, Defkalion did a live Internet demonstration where they claimed they produced 4 kW of heat out from 1 kW of electrical power. In other words, you get four times energy savings with their device, if true. However, there seems to be questions about some of their water flow and magnetic field measurements. I recall hearing about that from various sources. As you see from the tone here, Dennis thought this was an honest mistake of some sort. So did I. I figured it was nothing to get excited about. People make mistakes during demonstrations. The Gamberale report makes me think it was more sinister. - Jed
RE: [Vo]:RE: Hydrofill and LaNi5
Nickel is also magnetostrictive, I wonder if that might expand and contract entrained materials when excited with an AC magnetic field. From: Axil Axil [mailto:janap...@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, July 10, 2014 11:59 AM To: vortex-l Dear Jack, Please indulge me some more suggestions. The Cravens and Rossi experience clearly shows the importance of sizing micro particles to be black body temperature resonant diameter. ... --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com
RE: [Vo]:RE: Hydrofill and LaNi5H
From: Bob Cook Is there any reason why the D nuclei could not form excited states of high but opposite spin states which collapse quickly to the zero spin He with distribution of small spin quanta to other entities in the lattice including spin angular momentum associated with orbital electrons found in the lattice.? Hi Bob, In principle this could probably happen, or at least let’s assume that it could happen (realizing however, that in all of physics, it is not known to happen and there is no model to proceed on, for guidance). OK. Even if we accept it can happen, in principle, and I’m willing to concede that it can, my problem is that at best it would be an alternative to a known mechanism to release nuclear energy. As an alternative to a known mechanism, it is most unlikely to happen all the time to the complete exclusion of the known mechanism. There is no gamma radiation in the Cravens experiment. Even if 99.999% were excluded by the new and previously unknown mechanism, we should see some relic of the 24 MeV signature. Since none is seen, it is safe to conclude that the new mechanism is imaginary and not a physical reality. Thus nuclear fusion probably is not the source of excess energy in the Cravens experiment. At least that is the logical pathway which forms the basis of my belief that we need to look elsewhere than fusion for the source of the gain. Jones
Re: [Vo]:RE: Hydrofill and LaNi5H
http://www2.ju.edu.jo/sites/Academic/humamg/Lists/Published%20Research/Attachments/43/T-matrix_and_effective_scattering_in_spin-polarized_atomic_deuterium.pdf Since the spin of deuterium is non zero, I claim that Deuterium cannot support LENR unless it is in its cooper pair like dimer form. This form is cooper pair like with counter opposing spins which result in a combined molecular spin of zero. It is in this form where deuterium shows superfluidic behavior. On Thu, Jul 10, 2014 at 3:43 PM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: *From:* Bob Cook Is there any reason why the D nuclei could not form excited states of high but opposite spin states which collapse quickly to the zero spin He with distribution of small spin quanta to other entities in the lattice including spin angular momentum associated with orbital electrons found in the lattice.? Hi Bob, In principle this could probably happen, or at least let’s assume that it could happen (realizing however, that in all of physics, it is not known to happen and there is no model to proceed on, for guidance). OK. Even if we accept it can happen, in principle, and I’m willing to concede that it can, my problem is that at best it would be an alternative to a known mechanism to release nuclear energy. As an alternative to a known mechanism, it is most unlikely to happen all the time to the complete exclusion of the known mechanism. There is no gamma radiation in the Cravens experiment. Even if 99.999% were excluded by the new and previously unknown mechanism, we should see some relic of the 24 MeV signature. Since none is seen, it is safe to conclude that the new mechanism is imaginary and not a physical reality. Thus nuclear fusion probably is not the source of excess energy in the Cravens experiment. At least that is the logical pathway which forms the basis of my belief that we need to look elsewhere than fusion for the source of the gain. Jones
Re: [Vo]:RE: Hydrofill and LaNi5H
Jones-- Helium or something like He with Atomic Wt 4 is seen as a relic in the Pd,D reaction. The Dirac sea may be involved as we have discussed. It remains that gammas from “normal” nuclear transitions is missing. Cravens thinks the24 Mev transition happens . The Navy SPAWARS experience indicates He is formed and they see mostly 24Mev transitions. I tend to believe the Navy statements. The results of the Rossi Third Party test hopefully will resolve the issue with a sound theoretical explanation of the Ni,H reaction. I wonder if there is any testing coming out this year to further explain the Pd-D system? Bob Sent from Windows Mail From: Jones Beene Sent: Thursday, July 10, 2014 11:43 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Bob Cook Is there any reason why the D nuclei could not form excited states of high but opposite spin states which collapse quickly to the zero spin He with distribution of small spin quanta to other entities in the lattice including spin angular momentum associated with orbital electrons found in the lattice.? Hi Bob, In principle this could probably happen, or at least let’s assume that it could happen (realizing however, that in all of physics, it is not known to happen and there is no model to proceed on, for guidance). OK. Even if we accept it can happen, in principle, and I’m willing to concede that it can, my problem is that at best it would be an alternative to a known mechanism to release nuclear energy. As an alternative to a known mechanism, it is most unlikely to happen all the time to the complete exclusion of the known mechanism. There is no gamma radiation in the Cravens experiment. Even if 99.999% were excluded by the new and previously unknown mechanism, we should see some relic of the 24 MeV signature. Since none is seen, it is safe to conclude that the new mechanism is imaginary and not a physical reality. Thus nuclear fusion probably is not the source of excess energy in the Cravens experiment. At least that is the logical pathway which forms the basis of my belief that we need to look elsewhere than fusion for the source of the gain. Jones
[Vo]:Dynamic nuclear polarization
*http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynamic_nuclear_polarisation http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynamic_nuclear_polarisation* *Dynamic nuclear polarization results from transferring spin polarization from electrons to the nuclei, thereby aligning the nuclear spins to the extent that electron spins are aligned. * *Microwaves are used to adjust nuclear spin through electron orbital manipulation in a nuclear magnetic resonance process to enhance the RF emissions of weakly emitting nuclear resonate compounds.* *Whatever enhances RF emissions from nuclear spin adjustment will depress the LENR reaction. Rossi could use this phenomenon to depress runaway LENR overheating when imeltdown begins to set in. * *Furthermore, with this new reaction control procedure, Rossi could use dynamic nuclear polarization to run his reactor at a very high COP well into the dangerous meltdown zone if he came up with a quick response control process that depressed and dampened LENR activity via microwave activation at the proper resonant frequency and at an advanced critical temperature breakpoint.*
RE: [Vo]:RE: Hydrofill and LaNi5H
From: Bob Cook Helium or something like He with Atomic Wt 4 is seen as a relic in the Pd,D reaction. OK, we can buy that - but realize that the only way this works out in terms of what is seen and what is not seen is if “something like He” with AMU of ~4 (as is detected) is not really helium. This “something else” cannot be helium, but it can look like helium… which still means that this reaction is not nuclear fusion. The explanation demands that one be acquainted with Mills theory and the follow-on clarifications, which are better than the original. This is the DDDL, or deep deuterium Dirac layer (aka dense deuterium) of two deuterons and two electrons at minimal distance, bound tightly in redundant ground states… The mass-energy of the species is diminished, so that it cannot show the same mass-spectrograph signal as D2, and yet it is very stable as a bound molecule - so that does not dissociate into atoms. This situation is guaranteed to confuse many experts. However, the species does show up predictably and differently than does 4He, so that in essence, this species (which is neither D2 nor 4He) is often a relic of miss-calibration of the MS (which happens all the time) even at SPAWARS. Jones attachment: winmail.dat
Re: [Vo]:RE: Hydrofill and LaNi5
Hi Jed, Step 1 was sand paper. Step 2 and 3 were thorough cleaning with acetone, although I couldn't be certain of what was on there at a small scale. Best regards, Jack On Thu, Jul 10, 2014 at 1:46 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: Jack Cole jcol...@gmail.com wrote: Axil, I tried fine grit sand paper and acid. I think that will contaminate the material. You better clean it repeatedly and carefully after that. I will grant, Mizuno and Ohmori used to scratch the surface of their glow-discharge cathodes with glass. The cathodes ended up looking like this: http://lenr-canr.org/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/Image09.jpg I would say that is contaminated. I would not use it for electrolysis. This is from: http://lenr-canr.org/?page_id=187#PhotosTMizuno Mizuno's recent experiments with glow discharge produce a rough surface in situ with very little contamination, as explained in the ICCF18 paper: http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/MizunoTmethodofco.pdf - Jed
Re: [Vo]: Re: CMNS: water memory by Luc Montagnier
For those interested, we will be discussing the Kauai coral reef DISSOLVING problem on the radio Friday (tomorrow) @ 11 PM ET (5 PM rush hour in Honolulu). The radio station streams online at: http://hawaiistomorrow.com/ On Wed, Jul 9, 2014 at 9:42 AM, ChemE Stewart cheme...@gmail.com wrote: Related to water memory and water conditioning by pulsed electromagnetic radiation http://www.hawaiinewsnow.com/story/25969583/giant-corals-rapidly-dissolving-off-kauai http://darkmattersalot.com/2014/07/08/bad-more-bad/ Here is a very good research site on water properties: http://www1.lsbu.ac.uk/water/magnetic.html After two years of research, I believe we ALL have a very bad problem with high-powered, pulsed microwave radars (weather, military navigation) conditioning or softening rainwater and oceanwater and dissolving calcium carbonates and such. Nature likes hard water. Stewart On Wed, Jul 9, 2014 at 7:15 AM, 'Jean-Paul Biberian' via CMNS c...@googlegroups.com wrote: Dear all, You can watch until July 12th at: http://www.france5.fr/emission/retrouve-la-memoire-de-leau a documentary shown on a public TV channel, France 5 of the work of Luc Montagnier medicine Nobel winner for his discovery of the AIDS virus. After the death of Jacques Benveniste in 2004, Luc Montagnier has started working himself in his footsteps. He has made a great contribution to the field. Interestingly, even though the show was aired twice on TV, no main media showed any interest. If you understand French, you will enjoy the program. -- Jean-Paul Biberian Tel : + 33 660 14 04 85 www.jeanpaulbiberian.net www.cryofusion.org -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups CMNS group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to cmns+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to c...@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/cmns. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
RE: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:Dynamic nuclear polarization
Axil, nice citation, it might also assist the manufacture of powders of the appropriate geometry by stunting the effect when the geometries are most vulnerable at the instant of creation. Perhaps we should be activating our catalysts in a microwave? Fran From: Axil Axil [mailto:janap...@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, July 10, 2014 4:23 PM To: vortex-l Subject: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:Dynamic nuclear polarization http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynamic_nuclear_polarisation Dynamic nuclear polarization results from transferring spin polarization from electrons to the nuclei, thereby aligning the nuclear spins to the extent that electron spins are aligned. Microwaves are used to adjust nuclear spin through electron orbital manipulation in a nuclear magnetic resonance process to enhance the RF emissions of weakly emitting nuclear resonate compounds. Whatever enhances RF emissions from nuclear spin adjustment will depress the LENR reaction. Rossi could use this phenomenon to depress runaway LENR overheating when imeltdown begins to set in. Furthermore, with this new reaction control procedure, Rossi could use dynamic nuclear polarization to run his reactor at a very high COP well into the dangerous meltdown zone if he came up with a quick response control process that depressed and dampened LENR activity via microwave activation at the proper resonant frequency and at an advanced critical temperature breakpoint.
[Vo]:The Gene Mallove collection at infinite-energy.com
A lot of fine work by Christy Frazier. See: http://www.infinite-energy.com/genemallovecollection/index.html - Jed
Re: [Vo]:RE: Hydrofill and LaNi5
Thanks Jones. It's okay with me that I didn't find anything convincing. It was a rewarding challenge. I will resume if I discover something I think will work. And I think you are correct about the value of null results. Those are things that have been ruled out. I am happy to find null results so many times in one way. If I ever find anything convincing after ruling out alternative explanations, I will be able to trust it. I was also happy to develop many automated methods of doing the research. I did also use coils with many turns of cuprothal, nichrome, and constantan (wrapped around a glass stirring rod). Towards the end of my work, I used a complex automated design in which I regulated the power going into both cells through programming and switched the power supplies supplying power to the control vs. the experimental cells on a fixed schedule. Power regulation is difficult with electrolysis because the resistance changes throughout the experiment. The programming adjusted for this every 5 seconds. I thank you for all your helpful suggestions--particularly the mixed metal oxide anodes. On Thu, Jul 10, 2014 at 11:55 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: Jack, Sorry you got nothing to show from electrolysis - but it is sometimes helpful to report these negative results. Thanks for stepping forward with them now. There is value in null results when properly analyzed, and it can be of significant value when there is something positive to contrast them against. In the case of Ni-H, your results could actually narrow the possibilities and open up greater insight - when one considers Cravens results in contrast to yours. This assumes of course that both results are completely accurate for a particular parameter, and we look at the implications of the two types of experiments together. This seems to be the case here. For instance, if a modest magnetic field is required for gain (especially unpowered gain)– and a field intensity which is above a cutoff level is needed, such as Cravens provides, then electrolysis alone is not going to get us there unless the electrode is in the form of a coil of many turns - to increase the amp-turns and thereby the field intensity. Although there is a small field associated with the current flow of electrolysis, it is generally too low to meet any reasonable threshold. In contrast, samarium cobalt has substantial field, i.e. “maximum energy product” (BHmax) up to 32 megagauss-oersted (MGOe) with no current required - equivalent to nearly a Joule per mm^3. Note that Mizuno used thin nickel wire and many turns. He may not have realized the reason that it worked – but only that it did work. Secondly, a few of the many nickel alloys you tried are probably close to the proper combination of properties for gain, but perhaps do not meet another critical parameter – which is chemisorption. Chemisorption could be critical (almost certainly !) - and very small differences (such as 1-2% variance in the alloy ratio) could determine whether a particular nickel-copper alloy is active for chemisorption, or not. It is a feature of physical spacing. Even when the alloy absorbs protons instead of atoms, success could still depend on the alloy being active in a magnetic field of the proper intensity, and geometry. Note that pure Nickel is not chemisorbent at ambient but, Ni with 5% Pd is chemisorbent. Even pure Pd is not chemisorbent without some dopant. A new parameter which is showing up is “superparamagnetism”. Without it, there are no terabyte HDs – which is an interesting connection to another field. Superparamagnetism may open many doors of understanding in LENR. In short, if gain from Ni-H were simple to do – someone would have hit on the proper combination of parameters way back in the flurry of activity which happened between 1989 and 1993. Sadly, one problem for finding this holy grail may have been the tendency not to report negative results, which is exacerbated when one researcher is suspicious (or jealous) of positive results from another researcher in a similar experiment. In fact, prior to Cravens, most positive results were a bit more suspicious, since there were so many ways to err – most of which are eliminated in a side-by-side unpowered experiment. *From:* Jack Cole Hi Jones, I'm still around. :) I put my electrolysis experimentation on pause after doing something like 200 experiments with nothing to convince me I had found anything. I had some hope for Brillouin Energy, but after all this time at SRI with no results reported, it gives me doubts about whether Godes had what he thought. I decided not to pursue replicating his method until something more is released from him. Anyway, I'm not very hopeful for nickel-based electrolysis being able to produce LENR--at least nothing I have tried has convinced me. There is a lot to convince me that false
Re: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:Dynamic nuclear polarization
Axil-- I second Fran’s comment regarding a nice citation--the one regarding dynamic nuclear polarization. It provides a sought after coupling of the transfer of spin energy between nuclei and electrons. It does not involve large energy (Mev) changes in one reaction. I think it seems reasonable that nature likes small energy transitions at cool temperatures as opposed to large ones associated with high temperature/kinetic energy reactions. It is pretty clear that the known reactions of spin transfer occur in small quantum increments. The DNP phenomena are good examples. Bob The mode referred to as magic Sent from Windows Mail From: Roarty, Francis X Sent: Thursday, July 10, 2014 1:18 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Axil, nice citation, it might also assist the manufacture of powders of the appropriate geometry by stunting the effect when the geometries are most vulnerable at the instant of creation. Perhaps we should be activating our catalysts in a microwave? Fran From: Axil Axil [mailto:janap...@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, July 10, 2014 4:23 PM To: vortex-l Subject: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:Dynamic nuclear polarization http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynamic_nuclear_polarisation Dynamic nuclear polarization results from transferring spin polarization from electrons to the nuclei, thereby aligning the nuclear spins to the extent that electron spins are aligned. Microwaves are used to adjust nuclear spin through electron orbital manipulation in a nuclear magnetic resonance process to enhance the RF emissions of weakly emitting nuclear resonate compounds. Whatever enhances RF emissions from nuclear spin adjustment will depress the LENR reaction. Rossi could use this phenomenon to depress runaway LENR overheating when imeltdown begins to set in. Furthermore, with this new reaction control procedure, Rossi could use dynamic nuclear polarization to run his reactor at a very high COP well into the dangerous meltdown zone if he came up with a quick response control process that depressed and dampened LENR activity via microwave activation at the proper resonant frequency and at an advanced critical temperature breakpoint.
RE: [Vo]:Dynamic nuclear polarization
From: Bob Cook I think it seems reasonable that nature likes small energy transitions at cool temperatures as opposed to large ones associated with high temperature/kinetic energy reactions. It is pretty clear that the known reactions of spin transfer occur in small quantum increments. The DNP phenomena are good examples. Aren’t you completely misinterpreting what this article states in trying to shoehorn it in LENR? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynamic_nuclear_polarisation First, It says nothing about transfer of spin energy from nucleus to electrons – only transfer from electrons to nucleus. Huge difference. Secondly, this transfer results in lower temperature of electrons – not higher. I see no conceivably way this can be used to justify slow energy release from an excited nucleus. Jones attachment: winmail.dat
Re: [Vo]:RE: Hydrofill and LaNi5
I have moved west, and Dennis Cravens is just a couple miles away. I visited him recently. In his lab he still has long term tests operating with his spheres (of course, along with other experiments in progress). He said that he charged a HydroStik and then froze it at dry ice temperature. At this temp, the hydride is not releasing any hydrogen and he cut the hydrostik open and added its contents to the sphere. Dennis produces his own hydrogen using a PEM generator and frequently works with an H2/D2 mix that he produces by filling his PEM generator with the desired mix of light and heavy water.
RE: [Vo]:RE: Hydrofill and LaNi5
Thanks, Bob – Do you know if he gets excess heat from H as well as D? You seem to be suggesting that the most heat (most desirable mix) comes from a mix of H and D, is that correct? From: Bob Higgins I have moved west, and Dennis Cravens is just a couple miles away. I visited him recently. In his lab he still has long term tests operating with his spheres (of course, along with other experiments in progress). He said that he charged a HydroStik and then froze it at dry ice temperature. At this temp, the hydride is not releasing any hydrogen and he cut the hydrostik open and added its contents to the sphere. Dennis produces his own hydrogen using a PEM generator and frequently works with an H2/D2 mix that he produces by filling his PEM generator with the desired mix of light and heavy water.
RE: [Vo]:RE: Hydrofill and LaNi5
For those who have not followed this closely – here is the HydroStik at Amazon http://www.amazon.com/s/?ie=UTF8 http://www.amazon.com/s/?ie=UTF8keywords=hydrostiktag=googhydr-20index=apshvadid=31836180062hvpos=1t1hvexid=hvnetw=ghvrand=911050133634104149hvpone=hvptwo=hvqmt=ehvdev=cref=pd_sl_8lx5y0uvt7_e keywords=hydrostiktag=googhydr-20index=apshvadid=31836180062hvpos=1t1hvexid=hvnetw=ghvrand=911050133634104149hvpone=hvptwo=hvqmt=ehvdev=cref=pd_sl_8lx5y0uvt7_e Which is loaded with LaNi5 – a good alloy for absorbing hydrogen. It looks like it costs Dennis 25 bucks per sphere refill, since the cartridge is sacrificed. Thanks, Bob – Do you know if he gets excess heat from H as well as D? You seem to be suggesting that the most heat (most desirable mix) comes from a mix of H and D, is that correct? From: Bob Higgins I have moved west, and Dennis Cravens is just a couple miles away. I visited him recently. In his lab he still has long term tests operating with his spheres (of course, along with other experiments in progress). He said that he charged a HydroStik and then froze it at dry ice temperature. At this temp, the hydride is not releasing any hydrogen and he cut the hydrostik open and added its contents to the sphere. Dennis produces his own hydrogen using a PEM generator and frequently works with an H2/D2 mix that he produces by filling his PEM generator with the desired mix of light and heavy water.
Re: [Vo]:RE: Hydrofill and LaNi5
Dennis did not explicitly say that an H D mix was required, but I believe that his theory and his own experiments have led him to mostly use a 50:50 mix in his present experiments. He showed me a Ni based experiment that he had setup, which he turned on while I was visiting. Before I left, his instrumentation was saying that the experiment had a COP of 2. The H-D mix is not my suggestion or assertion - it is what Dennis is using. Dennis has far more experience than I and he is consistently getting positive results from Ni which he treats with his own special recipe (undisclosed). He also showed me his antique car modified with an electric motor, which he hopes to drive into town and back one day under LENR derived charge. On Thu, Jul 10, 2014 at 9:20 PM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: Thanks, Bob – Do you know if he gets excess heat from H as well as D? You seem to be suggesting that the most heat (most desirable mix) comes from a mix of H and D, is that correct?
RE: [Vo]:RE: Hydrofill and LaNi5
From: Bob Higgins Dennis did not explicitly say that an H D mix was required, but I believe that his theory and his own experiments have led him to mostly use a 50:50 mix in his present experiments. This could be a new wrinkle. At NI-Week, he was apparently using only D, and was quoted as saying that he thought the gain was coming from D+D fusion to Helium (as in the Les Case line of experiments). A move to a HD mix would indicate something else… but I’m not sure what it indicates. IIRC Mitchell Swartz uses a 50:50 mix, but that experiment is electrolytic.
Re: [Vo]:Dynamic nuclear polarization
On Thu, Jul 10, 2014 at 7:10 PM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: Aren’t you completely misinterpreting what this article states in trying to shoehorn it in LENR? The article does indeed talk about an effect of one or two electrons on the spin of a nucleus (or nucleon), rather than the other way around. I'm also going to guess that the amount of torque that can pass through this system is weak, if an electron (or system of electrons) can affect the nucleus. There were two or three places where it sounded like the effect might be somewhat bidirectional, e.g.: The optimization is related to an embedded three-spin (electron-electron-nucleus) process that mutually flips the coupled three spins under the energy conservation (mainly) of the Zeeman interactions. The word mutual makes it sound like the spin of the nucleus can have an effect on the spins of the two electrons. Eric
