Re: [Vo]:electron integration does not cause LENR
Nice set of links - thanks. > From: Axil Axil > Reference: http://www.symmetrymagazine.org/breaking/2010/04/27/protons-not-as-strange-as-expected http://www.kph.uni-mainz.de/eng/index.php http://www.jlab.org/highlights/phys.html
Re: [Vo]:Consequence of various nuclear reactions
The graphs in that paper are certainly consistent with the broad spread of products I saw back in the 90s. At the time I had been using a notional working hypothesis of resonant protons using quantum tunneling to fuse with heavier nuclei - pushing then into the unstable positron emitter / electron captutre isotope region of the next element. But then I saw that the products of the hot gas erosion tests were all over the damned place - a wide variety of both heavier and lighter elements (as compated to the host metals) - and I realised that something far more complex was happening - Leo > From: Axil Axil > Transmutation has been observed as follows: > >http://64.142.106.183/v2/conferences/2012/ICCF17/papers/Dash-Effect%20of%20Recrystallization-Slides-ICCF-17.pdf
Re: [Vo]:Hot Stuff...
> BTW, your return address is set to your personal address, not Vortex-l. You > might want to adjust that. > > Steven Vincent Johnson Huh? My reply-to address is set to nothing. The list server at eskimo.com appears not be set up to over-ride list-member source addresses, and force the list address as the default reply-to. A member of any list should never have to change their reply-to - or (a) personal replies would go to the list, and (b) they could never be a member of more than one list. Have I misinterpreted what you are saying? - Leo
[Vo]:Hot Stuff...
A little tale In 1982 I attended a long job interview at the JET (Joint European Torus) nuclear fusion project at Culham in Oxfordshire (UK). As part of the interview, I was given a tour around the facility, acompanied by one of the engineers who could explain the equipment and (hopefully) answer my queries. It was interesting stuff – and the massive machine itself was very impressive. At the time, they were part way through building the vacuum chamber and were installing some of the huge magnet clusters. Everything smelled of Big Money – the whole project looked like some Hollywood SciFi movie view of “the future”. I was told about the difficulty in pulling a hard enough vacuum for the proposed experiments – about the levels of purity, and freedom from contamination, needed in the plasma – about the possible instability of the plasma ring, and the physical “limiters” that were meant to hold its writhing in check – about how the slightest touch of the snaking plasma against the walls of the chamber would vaporise metal and poison the mix (requiring even higher temperatures to achieve fusion) . Then I asked why, if contact was forbidden between wall and plasma, the limiters were designed to touch? And surely that would mean that the plasma could never achieve the desired purity. He thought for a while, and couldn't really answer – but agreed that it seemed illogical. I was also told about the enormous neutron flux expected as the plasma apprroached (and hopefully achieved) fusion. And how this flux was so large that it would seriously degrade all the wiring insulation – including the insulation in the electromagnets – resulting in a finite number of pulses before the magnets would be totally trashed. I asked whether this was a rather fundamental flaw in the design, since a device that ruined its own magnets could never be used to generate power – even if it was able to achieve a positive energy balance. His only answer was that they would just have to cross that bridge once they had reached it (maybe by somehow sheilding the magnets!) I came away with the unseasy feeling that the whole JET project was some sort of elaborate fraud – a way for governments to delay decisions on energy policy by allowing them to point at the huge budget and say “look – the future is sorted!”, whilst continuing to allow themselves to be schmoozed by the vast fossil fuel lobby. One very real effect was to starve fission reactor research of development funding. After all, why fund an unpopular, messy, and downright dangerous technology (albeit one that actually works) when in a couple of decades (or maybe 3 or 4) we could have all the clean safe energy we want – and everyone would live happily ever after. All we had to do was get through “the energy gap” - the (now obsolete) phrase that referred to the time between fossil fuels running out and hot fusion coming on line. What ever happened to that? - Leo ps. Actually, they did offer me a job – but I turned it down, and instead went off to further my studies (although later returning to work at their sister site, the infamous Harwell – but that will be another tale ;-)
Re: [Vo]:Evidence is all around us
MarkI-ZeroPoint wrote: > Can you provide some details of the HAD event??? Sorry, but as I said – I can’t talk about it in any detail (unfortunately). All I will say is that it involved a couple of tonnes of hot alloy steel, equivalent forms of which (mass, shape & grade) would normally cool to ambient from over 80 celsius in a few hours, but in this particular case it took more than a couple of days. Some surfaces had been exposed to a mixture of hot gases, under pressure/shock, and so there will have been some absorption (albeit an unknown quantity). I'm afraid I can't give you details of the gases – I don't have them, and even if I did, I wouldn't pass them to anyone. Nor do I have the detailed alloy steel spec. (although likely to contain something like 18%Ni & 8%Co) All the usual candidates sources of exothermic reaction were thought about at the time - eg. Phase changes in the steel, interstitial gas migration and molecular recombination (particularly hydrogen) - but if those mechanisms were responsible, this would have been a fairly common occurance – which it certainly wasn't. Heat rate generation for most of that time must have been of the order of 5kw (in order to compensate for losses of, say, 3.5kw radiative & 1.5kw convective at a bulk temperature of over 80 degrees C). But of course we weren't using any sensitive calorimetry – it wasn't that sort of test ;-) I'm only using this as an anecdotal example – since as far as I can see, LENR (whatever it may be) is not something that will only take place inside a laboratory. Its everyday effects are probably being misattributed to various notional, and mundane, mechanisms all the time – hence it continues to be ignored. - Leo
[Vo]:Evidence is all around us
Widespread evidence for LENR already lies buried in the filing cabinets and computer archives of universities, commercial companies, and research organisations, across the world. I'm not talking about results from specific CF or LENR experiments, but of all the oddball or slightly puzzling results, from ostensibly unrelated fields, that are either explained away in some cavalier fashion, or simply ignored. For instance, back in the 90s I was shown data confirming accidental transmutation, and physically induced radiation, resulting from experiments in hot gas erosion of steel. Researchers had dismissed the results, at the time, because they made no sense to them - and so the trials were abandoned. I was later shown the results by an engineering lecturer from the university that had conducted the tests – because I had tentatively mentioned the possibility of LENR effects in some other R&D work we were both involved with (this was after we had experienced a bizarre “heat-after-death” incident). It seems he had always been puzzled by the data (hence holding on to it), but other researchers had classed the results as “outliers”, putting them down to unknown errors in procedure – so everybody else was happy to simply throw them in the waste paper basket. The results were what Charles Fort referred to as “Damned Data” – i.e. the data that falls outside the “established” models of how the world is supposed to work. All scientists claim that they would always sieze on anomalies, and pledge to investigate them further – but in practice many will just ignore anything that doesn't fit neatly inside their preconceived notions of reality. Of course, the lecturer in question was coming up to retirement, and understandably didn’t want to jeopardise his position – so wished to keep a low profile. He had said nothing to anyone about the results, until our meeting, and did not intend to pursue the subject afterwards. So what did I do, following this peculiar HAD event? Unfortunately, the tests in question could not be talked about publicly (and still can't) – due to all sorts of confidentiality restrictions. Nevertheless, after some soul searching, I did actually bring up the subject of LENR with my supervisor of the time. The whole idea freaked him out – so he told me, in no uncertain terms, to shut up about it. And so I did – since, like everybody else, I had to eat and keep a roof over my head. How much more aberrent, anomalous (but highly pertinent) field data is out there, languishing in files marked “False Results. Ignore” ? And how many more people are sitting on data that they dare not speak about publicly, since they don't relish the idea of making “career limiting” statements ? - Leo
Re: [Vo]:Heat pipes
Yes, apparently safe (although using UZrH not UH3). What I was questioning is whether the hydrogen desorbtion at high temperature really does control the reaction by changing the neutron moderation rate, or whether something else is happening (which equally controls reaction rate). It is not that uncommon for devices to operate succesfully, even though they were originally designed using a completly bogus theory, since the hands-on "fine tuning" often compensates for the initial mistake. Hence a wrong theory can be perpetuated for a long time. Note that the "Ruth" bomb had a very low yeild, which was not consistent with Teller's working theory. Hence the theory should be open to question (as all theories should be, every now and then). - Leo From: Axil Axil The triga reactor uses this hydrogen moderation method and it is very safe. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TRIGA
Re: [Vo]:Netherlands food exports
It includes bulbs and cut flowers - but agriculture only employs 4% of the population! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Netherlands#Agriculture I must admit I find a lot ot admire about the Dutch way of doing things. - Leo From: Harry Veeder > That is hard to believe. Perhaps they mean second largest food exporter per > capita?
Re: [Vo]:Heat pipes
Pumping hydrogen through hot granulated uranium metal? No wonder there is a reaction. And the negative feedback UH3 moderator theory sounds a bit vague. If this was developed in the 1950s as an enhanced trigger in the Upshot-Knothole tests - then LLNL may have stumbled upon LENR without realising it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Upshot-Knothole From: Axil Axil > I liked the design of the tub reactor shown as follows: > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrogen_Moderated_Self-regulating_Nuclear_Power_Module
Re: [Vo]:I confess
I often describe the high energy physics approach to be akin to someone trying to determine how a car works by smashing two cars into each other at increasingly higher speeds and watching the trajectory of the bits that fly off. From: Roger B If, as I suppose, and I could be wrong, all of the particles "shot" into the atom are traveling close to the speed of light, then could not there be some unknown characteristic at this speed,perhaps as yet unknown to us, that causes things inside the atom to behave differently than from how they would behave if the probing particle were going much slower.
[Vo]:What if Neutrinos don't really exist?
What if Neutrinos don't really exist? I've always felt uncomforatble about the "discovery" of the Neutrino (or rather the 3 neutrino siblings - as they currently are). The particles seem to fulfil most (if not all) of the criteria for being products of "pathological science". On one hand they are barely detectable, and yet on the other hand their effects are claimed to be measurable with great accuracy. The earth is meant to be swamped by a sea of interstellar neutrinos, and yet a detector in an underground chamber can supposedly pick up neutrino signals from an accelerator 450 miles away - all with split second timing. It all sounds a little bit like N Rays. So - what if they have never really existed? What if the original postulation - Pauli's "invented particle" to make an equation balance - was a mistake? Maybe with all the various particles discovered (and strongly observed) since the middle of last century, it could be possible to make the equations balance in some other way. After all, we do need a way to "uninvent" particles - especially those at the limit of detection - when subsequent discoveries show that past measurements were in error (i.e. originally encouraged by the effect of "seeing what we expect to see"). However, has any particle ever been dispensed with? Thoughts?
[Vo]:Nostalgia time - Zeta 1958
I know this email list is for discussing "alternative" and "unconventional" power sources, but sometimes it can be useful to look back at some "conventional" projects (which went nowhere), and see how the press handled the news. 55 years ago Britain was going to save the world: http://www.britishpathe.com/video/taming-the-h-bomb It was all going to be so easy. These "boffins" knew everything there was to know about atoms and stuff. After all, "atomic scientists" had created megaton bombs - which was proof that they must have known what they were doing... - Leo
Re: [Vo]:GE hits milestone with laser enrichment of uranium
Yes - not a new idea. I remember some of my former colleagues working on this in the 1980s in Harwell (UK). It was supposed to be a "hush-hush" project - but then one day in '88 (I think) they turned up on TV talking all about it! (on BBC's "Tomorrow's World"). Hmm. So 25 years later it might actually work. ;-) From: David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com > I read an article about this possibility a number of years ago. I have been > wondering when it would rear its head again and hoping that it might not > happen.
Re: [Vo]:Excess heat from underwater hydrogen cutting torches???
Jim Phelps posted a similar comment here: http://climate.nasa.gov/news/864?goback=.gmp_4132340.gde_4132340_member_214671553 Yes, a decent reference would be very useful - Leo From: MarkI-ZeroPoint In reading the comment section here: http://cassandralegacy.blogspot.com/2013/05/ethics-of-e-cat.html?showComment=1369733204626#c7691737630487135094 I came across a posting by a Jim Phelps (May28, 5:04pm), in which he states: “Experimenters have been tripping over the excess energy from hydrogen / metal reactions since the invention of the underwater hydrogen cutting torch findings of excess heat.”
Re: [Vo]:Back to the Papp Engine
> From: Alan Fletcher > At this point I wouldn't trust EITHER of the feuding Rohners. I'm sure this link will have been posted before: http://pesn.com/2012/08/21/9602163_Part_I--My_Concerns_About_Inteligentry/ Yes. Another sorry tale - Leo
Re: [Vo]:Back to the Papp Engine
An interesting project - but it doesn't seem to be apparent as to why this new engine, replicating Papp's device, is called a "gyrokinetic engine". Was this a word that Papp used? If it were simply called a "pulsed plasma reciprocating engine", then it would be far more descriptive. Unfortunately, "gyrokinetic" sounds like some 1950s B-Movie SciFi gobledygook (a gift to any detractors). Maybe there is a sensible reason for choosing this word - but I have't found it anywhere yet. - Leo Ruby wrote: > Alan, Please look at Bob Rohner's project that in part wants to re-build the original Papp engine. > He is in need of funding, and an electronics engineer to complete the work his brother was doing before he passed away. > http://coldfusionnow.org/plasma-engine-reproduced-now-optimizing-for-efficiency/
