Re: [Vo]:Krivit's Napoli visit? To all Italian-reading Vorts
The project described in this post supports and extends my understanding of what is going on in the Rossi reactor. First off, the use of potassium as an alkaline catalyst supports my belief that Rossi is using some alkaline based catalyst like potassium as his “secret catalyst”. Potassium produces Rydberg hydrogen matter as a cold plasma which eventually arrive at the surface of the cathode where nuclear reactions supported by the quantum mechanical actions of coherent and entangled atoms occur. The next implication to be drawn from this tungsten based experiment is that the Rossi reaction is exclusively a surface reaction which occurs right on top of the surface of the cathode. Tungsten does not allow hydrogen to penetrate its surface. A significant percentage of the nuclear reactions must be occurring right at the very top of the tungsten surface when the reaction first begins. As the reaction erodes the surface, the surface area of the tungsten increases an so does the reaction in like proportion. This supports my view that the great productivity of the Rossi reaction over his contemporary competitors is in the surface preparation of his reaction vessel. He uses nickel nano powder coated on the surface of the reaction vessel to optimize the surface as prolific sites for to maximize the number of nuclear active areas. His competitors do not do this, and until they do, they will see reduced nuclear activity in their experiments. For example, if the tungsten experimenters would have coated their cathode with nano-powder (nickel or otherwise), the productivity of their experiment would be greatly enhanced. The same surface improvement could be applied to the current efforts of Brian Ahern. The chaotic chemical activity replete with oxygen in the Neapolitan tungsten based cell would tend to destroy Rydberg matter and therefore suppress the effectiveness of the reaction. On the other hand, Rossi provides a benign chemical environment that allows Rydberg matter to exist indefinitely. This too greatly increases the great productivity of the Rossi reaction. The tungsten experimenters would do well to use a high pressure hydrogen envelope like Rossi. This would increase the activity of their reaction greatly. On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 9:36 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.comwrote: 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]:renamed Axil's Tungsten
into the reactor vessel. If you find any information indicating Rossi in some way coats the powder to the reactor walls please share!* * * *Regards* *Fran * * * * * * * *Re: [Vo]:Krivit's Napoli visit? To all Italian-reading Vorts* *Axil Axil* Fri, 01 Jul 2011 09:02:49 -0700 ** ** The project described in this post supports and extends my understanding of what is going on in the Rossi reactor. ** ** First off, the use of potassium as an alkaline catalyst supports my belief that Rossi is using some alkaline based catalyst like potassium as his “secret catalyst”. Potassium produces Rydberg hydrogen matter as a cold plasma which eventually arrive at the surface of the cathode where nuclear reactions supported by the quantum mechanical actions of coherent and entangled atoms occur. ** ** The next implication to be drawn from this tungsten based experiment is that the Rossi reaction is exclusively a surface reaction which occurs right on top of the surface of the cathode. Tungsten does not allow hydrogen to penetrate its surface. A significant percentage of the nuclear reactions must be occurring right at the very top of the tungsten surface when the reaction first begins. ** ** As the reaction erodes the surface, the surface area of the tungsten increases an so does the reaction in like proportion. ** ** This supports my view that the great productivity of the Rossi reaction over his contemporary competitors is in the surface preparation of his reaction vessel. He uses nickel nano powder coated on the surface of the reaction vessel to optimize the surface as prolific sites for to maximize the number of nuclear active areas. His competitors do not do this, and until they do, they will see reduced nuclear activity in their experiments. ** ** For example, if the tungsten experimenters would have coated their cathode with nano-powder (nickel or otherwise), the productivity of their experiment would be greatly enhanced. The same surface improvement could be applied to the current efforts of Brian Ahern. ** ** The chaotic chemical activity replete with oxygen in the Neapolitan tungsten based cell would tend to destroy Rydberg matter and therefore suppress the effectiveness of the reaction. ** ** On the other hand, Rossi provides a benign chemical environment that allows Rydberg matter to exist indefinitely. This too greatly increases the great productivity of the Rossi reaction. ** ** ** ** The tungsten experimenters would do well to use a high pressure hydrogen envelope like Rossi. This would increase the activity of their reaction greatly. ** ** ** ** - *Re: [Vo]:Deuterium vs. Hydrogen (wrt Rossi and Ahern)* *francis * Thu, 30 Jun 2011 23:42:17 -0700 Hi Peter, ** ** I would like to see Ahern use Iwamura's tungsten as one of his powders because of it's high melting point it would be less susceptible to self*** * destruction, of course milling tungsten to nano geometry probably isn't*** * easy. I remain of the opinion that the most active Casimir geometry immediately self destructs via pyrophoric action and stiction at ambient STP and that tungsten would be the most resistant. If someday powders are milled and preserved in vacuum I predict activity will occur at very low pressures of hydrogen released into the vacuum preserved powder. ** ** Regards ** ** Fran ** ** ** **
[Vo]:The Dipole Blockaid error resend
I think that heavy Rydberg matter dipole shielding of the nickel nuclei allow protons to penetrate the nuclear coulomb barrier of nickel atoms. In Rydberg matter, this dipole shielding goes as the 7th power of the number of atoms in the Rydberg matter assemblages. This polarization of Rydberg matter is clearly huge and can easily overcome the coulomb potential in the nickel atoms. In Rydberg matter, all the dipole moments of all the constituent atoms are coordinated and identical. Furthermore, the coherent nature of Rydberg matter range from just a single atom to large numbers in excess of 100 based upon the temperature and pressure of the hydrogen envelope; the higher the pressure and temperature, the greater on the average is the number of member atoms in the Rydberg matter assemblages. In other words, the higher the temperature of this hydrogen envelope, the greater is the number of coherent atoms that join the Rydberg matter assemblages. You may have not considered how nuclear reactions affect atoms in a large assemblage of coherent and entangled atoms. In such a collection, what happens to one member of such a coherent collection happens to them all. It may well be that an averaging effect takes place where the nuclear energy output of one atom is averaged over a hundred or more atoms in the coherent collection. Nuclear reactions inside a quantum condensate have yet to be studied. Look at this reference: http://cold-atoms.physics.lsa.umich.edu/projects/dipoleblockade/blockade.html From this reference, the dipole blockade of the 80 atom Rydberg matter assemblages is .3 microns. Any nickel atom within this blockade distance is subject to intense dipole masking in addition to being forced into coherence with the Rydberg assemblages. Rydberg matter sits on top of the nano-powder and completely negates coulomb repulsion of the nuclei of these nickel atoms that they cover. However, when Rydberg coherence is not yet fully established or is breaking down, gamma radiation production will occur, not being completely negated by atomic coherence. This happens when the temperature and/or the pressure of the hydrogen envelope is lowering or low. This is where the gamma radiation bursts from the Rossi reactor sometimes come from.
Re: [Vo]:Purdue paper Bose-Einstein Condensation Nuclear Fusion
From Kim’s paper “additives used (not disclosed in the patent application) form Ni alloy and/or Ni metal/alloy oxide in the surface regions of nickel nano-scale particles, so that Ni atoms/nuclei become mobile with a sufficiently large diffusion coefficient” I can’t see how nickel atoms become detached from the lattice and float around in the hydrogen envelope then combine with an assemblage of zero spin cooper pair positive hydrogen ions. Fusion would occur in the hydrogen envelope and not in the lattice. If this were possible, the byproducts of the resulting fusions would not be imbedded in the lattice of the ash. Ergo, Bose Einstein condensation is not a factor in the Rossi process,IMHO. On Fri, Jul 8, 2011 at 9:48 PM, OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson svj.orionwo...@gmail.com wrote: FWIW, I sometimes get the sense that Fran’s theory might come the closest to explaining what my unorthodox source the “Witch Doctor” files would seem to suggest might be going on with Rossi's eCats. However, I hasten to add that this is just speculation on my part. One thing for sure, I wish I understood Fran’s theory better. :-( Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com http://www.orionworks.com/ www.zazzle.com/orionworks
[Vo]:Axil's alternative to Kim
As an alternative to professor Kims offering, I humbly offer this alternative explanation to the origin and possible functionality characterized by the atomic coherence that is required if radiation from the nuclear reactions that makeup the Rossi process are to be suppressed. First off, the formation of Rydberg matter begins with the production of highly excited alkaline atoms (HEAA) when hydrogen, lithium and/or potassium are heated to high temperatures and pressures enclosed within a gaseous envelope composed primarily of hydrogen gas. Yes, lithium or potassium is the most probable secret element additives that catalyze the formation of Rydberg matter. In all methods currently known to successfully form Rydberg matter; an adjacent surface removes the excess energy released by the condensation of these HEAA. The most efficient process to form this condensate of Rydberg matter clusters so far has been desorption (evaporation) from a solid surface as they seek to minimize their energy, which means that the excess bond energy is deposited in the surface. In more detail, like bosons that can be condensed to form Bose-Einstein condensates, Rydberg matter can be condensed, but not in the same way as bosons. The reason for this is that Rydberg matter behaves like a gas where it cannot be condensed without removing the condensation energy. If this heat removal is not done, ionization of the component atoms occurs. All solutions to this problem so far involve using an adjacent surface in some way, the best being evaporating the atoms of which the Rydberg matter is to be formed from and leaving the condensation energy on the surface. However in the Rossi reactor, the absorption of energy from HEAA is done onto the cold walls of the reaction vessel. This formation of Rydberg condensate matter is a change of state process that will cause Rydberg matter to first form and then to hover very near to the surface of the reaction vessel walls through an electrostatic attraction at the point on the electrostatically grounded reaction vessel wall where it was formed. This condensate then acts to catalyze the Rossi process. Highly excited atoms of lithium or potassium form a condensation template or seed that excited hydrogen atoms use to condense around at the surface of the reaction vessel. Oftentimes, these lithium or potassium atoms might combine and intermix with hydrogen to form a multi- alkaline -element complex variety of Rydberg matter condensate. In the final step of the Rossi process, the coherent wave forms of these many Rydberg atoms that comprise the Rydberg condensate will work in concert through a quantum mechanical summation process to form a combined, entangled and coherent de-Broglie wave form whose wavelengths become sufficiently large to overlap with those of the neighboring nickel quantum wave forms composing the rugged nano-powder coated surface walls of the reaction vessel. The condensate then participates in nuclear fusion reactions at or very near the surface of the reaction vessel of the Rossi reactor. Because of its very large coherent de-Broglie wave form, the effective quantum mechanical range at which this condensate operates may be anywhere up to a few hundred nano-meters centered upon the location of its formation.
Re: [Vo]:More from Rossi -- Heat transfer,Self-sustaining eCAT
Rossi said: Andrea Rossi July 12th, 2011 at 6:24 AMhttp://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=501cpage=1#comment-52306 Dear Malcom, Yes, also. Warm Regards, A.R. Yes also means that both the reaction vessel and the lead shield both generated heat, IMHO. the proportions are as follows: reaction vessel = a lot Lead shied = a little. On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 12:37 PM, Alan J Fletcher a...@well.com wrote: Malcolm July 12th, 2011 at 5:02 AMhttp://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=501cpage=1#comment-52288 Thank you for your detailed reply to Dr. Mario Voltaggio. You mention that the heating effect is due to gamma absorption by the lead. I assume from this that the lead shielding is in fact in direct contact with the copper water jacket and so the water is heated from the outside. Is this correct? AR === YES Luke Mortensen July 11th, 2011 at 8:17 PMhttp://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=501cpage=1#comment-52193 Three new topics of research have been mentioned in the last few weeks: A) Developing 30KW ecat modules. AR A- Working on this. B) Increasing efficiency of steam electricity production AR B- in progress: within one year we should be ready C) Perfecting designs for self sustaining ecats with no input electricity AR C- Remarkable progress
Re: [Vo]:Ecatreport part 2
Rossi is using tubercles to increase the cross-section of his reaction well over what can be produced in a well ordered nickel lattice. A tubercle is a mound created on the metal’s surface. Rossi is using these tubercles to disrupt the regularity of the nickel lattice to increase the strength of the atomic bonds of the nickel atoms. When there is a lattice defect on the surface of a lattice, the coordination number (CN) of the atoms that form the defect decreases. As a result, the remaining atomic bonds shorten and deform; this increases the strength of the remaining bonds of the nickel atoms on the walls in and around the tubercles. These atomic CN imperfections induce bond contraction and the associated bond-strength gain deepens the potential well of the trapping in the surface skin. This CN reduction also produces an increase of charge density, energy, and mass of the enclosed hydrogen contained in the relaxed surface skin imperfection. This increased density is far higher than it normally would be at other sites inside the solid. Because of this energy densification, surface stress and tension that is in the dimension of energy density will increase in the relaxed region of the disruption lattice bonds. For example, when a phonon wave breaks upon the surface imperfection, it is amplified by the abrupt discontinuity in the lattice and is concentrated by the increased bond-order-length-strength (BOLS) of the nickel atoms that form the walls of the cavity. This tight coupling allows the thermodynamic feedback mechanism to control and mediate the reaction. It also amplifies and focuses the compressive effects that phonons have on the hydrogen contained in the lattice defects. These defects increase the intensity of the electron screening because of the increased bond tension inside the defects. Nano-defects are very tough. This toughness and associated resistance to melting and stress is conducive to the production of high pressure inside the defect. Rossi has stated that his temperature of his nano-powder can reach 1600C before it melts. Nano-powder usually melts well below the 1350c melting point of bulk nickel in a regular lattice. This revelation informs us how much Rossi has increased the strength and available atomic bond tension in his nano-powder. The smaller the dimensions of the lattice surface defect, the greater is the multiplier on the hardness and the resistance to stress compared to the bulk material. These multiplier factors can range from 3 to 10 based on the properties of the bulk material. Multilayer sites that penetrate down through many lattice layers are more resilient than surface defects. There toughness is proportional to the detailed topology and therefore not generally determined. There is a certain minimum size which one reached reduces the hardness of the nano-defect site. This size is on the order of less than 10 nanometers. On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 10:33 AM, Mark Iverson zeropo...@charter.netwrote: ** Smaller is not necessarily better... here's an interesting tidbit from the ecatreport. ** *Andrea Rossi stresses that, although one might first think “the finer the better” because the finer the powder the more surface area per volume you get, this is not the case. Because in order to reach useful reaction rates with hydrogen, the powder needs to processed in a way that leads to amplified tubercles on the surface.* *The tubercles are essential in order for the reaction rate to reach levels high enough for the implied total power output per volume or mass to reach orders of magnitude kW/kg – this level of power density is required for any useful application of the process.* *Rossi tells that he worked every waking hour for six months straight, trying dozens of combinations to find the optimal powder size for the Energy Catalyzer, or E-Cat. He further stresses that specific data about the final optimal grain size cannot be revealed, but can tell us that the most efficient grain size is more in the micrometer range rather than the nanometer range.* -Mark** -- *From:* Alan J Fletcher [mailto:a...@well.com] *Sent:* Tuesday, July 12, 2011 5:31 PM *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com *Subject:* [Vo]:Ecatreport part 2 http://ecatreport.com/e-cat/andrea-rossi-on-the-e-cat-part-22 *Defkalion GT has hired a separate team of people in order to get this in place because of the complexity of the issue. The biggest problem has been to find an auto-destruct mechanism that is not harmful while still fulfilling its purpose. I am still not sure if the mechanism is fully developed as of yet, but Defkalion GT who is responsible for its development has told me that all details have been solved and that the E-Cat now has 12 levels of security. The management team of both Defkalion and AmpEnergo will meet on the 14th July (2011) together with NASA for an important discussion regarding the
Re: [Vo]:Huge Solar Explosion
It's a mystery that presented itself unexpectedly: The radioactive decay of some elements sitting quietly in laboratories on Earth seemed to be influenced by activities inside the sun, 93 million miles away. Is this possible? Researchers from Stanford and Purdue University believe it is. But their explanation of how it happens opens the door to yet another mystery. There is even an outside chance that this unexpected effect is brought about by a previously unknown particle emitted by the sun. That would be truly remarkable, said Peter Sturrock, Stanford professor emeritus of applied physics and an expert on the inner workings of the sun. The story begins, in a sense, in classrooms around the world, where students are taught that the rate of decay of a specific radioactive material is a constant. This concept is relied upon, for example, when anthropologists use carbon-14 to date ancient artifacts and when doctors determine the proper dose of radioactivity to treat a cancer patient. Read more: http://www.physorg.com/news201795438.html PS: This struck me as funny What we're suggesting is that something that doesn't really interact with anything is changing something that can't be changed. On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 3:51 PM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote: http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/sunearth/news/dark-fireworks.html On June 7, 2011, Earth-orbiting satellites detected a flash of X-rays coming from the western edge of the solar disk. Registering only M (for medium) on the Richter scale of solar flares, the blast at first appeared to be a run-of-the-mill eruption--that is, until researchers looked at the movies. We'd never seen anything like it, says Alex Young, a solar physicist at the Goddard Space Flight Center. Half of the sun appeared to be blowing itself to bits. more Impressive vids! T
Re: [Vo]:E-Cat open source replication
I will attempt to address this question from ecat builder: “Does the catalyst convert hydrogen to H+? Is there something else to try? What would you like to see tried for a catalyst?” First some background quoted from ecatrepor: “although one might first think “the finer the better” because the finer the powder the more surface area per volume you get, this is not the case. Because in order to reach useful reaction rates with hydrogen, the powder needs to processed in a way that leads to amplified tubercles on the surface of his nano-powder. The tubercles are essential in order for the reaction rate to reach levels high enough for the implied total power output per volume or mass to reach orders of magnitude kW/kg – this level of power density is required for any useful application of the process. Rossi tells that he worked every waking hour for six months straight, trying dozens of combinations to find the optimal powder size for the Energy Catalyzer, or E-Cat. He further stresses that specific data about the final optimal grain size cannot be revealed, but can tell us that the most efficient grain size is more in the micrometer range rather than the nanometer range.” I remember seeing a picture of the Rossi stippled catalyst surface in pictures of his catalyst shown in his patent. This surface was bumpy and lumpy; and in my opinion, it was the surface wall of the reaction vessel and not an image of a pile of nano-powder. From the patens of interest listed in the Rossi patent, I believe that Rossi produces such a mottled nickel surface by using a technique commonly found in the fabrication of artificial joints by medical device manufacturers. This technique produces the rough bone facing surface of metal knee or hip joints. The process involves “Inorganic Nanoparticles as Protein Mimics”. There has been a recently developed biomedical technology that produces metal surfaces that bond well with bone; a metal surface scaffold that optimizes bone growth onto and into the surface of these artificial joints. But there are many ways to skin a cat. There may be an easier way to get to the same result. An easier way to produce that pimpled nickel surface might be to first powder coat the inside surface of the stainless steel reaction vessel with 10 nm nickel oxide nano-powder, next to heat the stainless steel reaction vessel to just under melting temperature to imbed the powder onto the surface of the stainless steel. Nickel oxide nano-powder will not melt or deform during this heating process because it has a much higher melting temperature than stainless steel. The nano-powder will retain its randomized and ruggedize shape throughout the powder plating process. Then when all is cooled in a hydrogen packing process to remove oxygen, expose the newly dimpled and roughened surface to hydrogen to plate out a newly roughened pure nickel surface to expose these pure nickel bumps. Now for some theory; a bumpy surface of the lattice wall is required to activate the Rossi process because such a surface will ionize the exotic hydrogen molecules that the pressurized hydrogen envelope will produce. The bumpy surface of a nickel lattice will “field-ionized” the Rydberg atoms in a highly excited hydrogen envelope that hug the surface of the reaction vessel. This phenomenon may be visualized as arising from the interaction of the Rydberg atom with the electric fields due to its electrostatic “image.” Compared to a hydrogen atom in the ground state, a Rydberg atom has an enhanced susceptibility to these fields. This is because the Rydberg electron experiences a greatly reduced electric field from the ion core due to their larger average separation. Polycrystalline metal surfaces of the nickel lattice will generate inhomogeneous “patch” electric fields outside its surface. These electrostatic fields also influence Rydberg atoms, potentially causing both level shifts and ionization and competing with the more intrinsic image charge effects. In general, patch fields arise from the individual nano-grains of a polycrystalline lattice surface exposing different crystal faces of the individual nano-crystals. Each of these faces has a different work function due to differing surface dipole layers. For example, Singh-Miller and Marzari have recently calculated the work functions of the (111), (100), and (110) surfaces of gold and found 5.15, 5.10, and 5.04 eV, respectively. These differing work functions correspond to potential differences just outside the surface beyond the dipole layer. Consequently, charge density must be redistributed on the surface to satisfy the electrostatic boundary conditions, producing macroscopic electric fields. While patch fields were first discussed extensively in the context of thermionic emission they are present near polycrystalline metal structures of any type, including electrodes and electrostatic
Re: [Vo]:E-Cat open source replication
The evidence for nano-powder welding as one of Rossi’s secrets is strong but circumstantial in the 10kw unit whose reaction vessel volume is 1 liter. First, the 100 gram pure nickel nano-powder fills only 1% of the volume of this one liter reaction vessel. This small amount of powder cannot be “packed” in such a large volume. A 100 gram pile of nano-powder would form a small clump at the bottom of the reaction vessel. If all the heat came from this small 100 gram pile of powder, the pile would burn a hole in the reaction vessel through the formation of a very hot spot. Second, Rossi said that the powder can reach a temperature of 1600C. Nickel Nano-powder will melt and/or degrade well below this melting point (1000C?) of the bulk material at 1350C. Third, the ash of the Rossi reactor he gave to the Swedes contains 10% iron that Rossi said was not produced through the action of transmutation from the reaction,,, but was produced by “scrubbing”; a Rossi quote. Forth, the nuclear heat that will have been produced by a pile of nano-powder throughout the entire though minuscule volume of this powder will be poorly conducted through that volume. This is caused by the randomized surface structures and associated protuberances and irregularities of each nano-powder particle. This porcupine like tubules will keep the surfaces of each nano-particle from mating flush with its neighbors to make efficient transfer of heat impossible to all the surrounding walls of the reaction vessel; in sum, any heat conduction through the volume of such a powder will be very poor. By contrast in support of the powder coating case, Rossi is using tubercles to increase the cross-section of his reaction well over what can be produced in a well ordered smooth nickel lattice. A tubercle is atomic mound of randomized topology created on the metal’s surface. Rossi is using these tubercles to disrupt the regularity of the nickel lattice to increase the strength of the atomic bonds of the nickel atoms. When there is a lattice defect on the surface of a lattice, the coordination number (CN) of the atoms that form the defect decreases. As a result, the remaining atomic bonds shorten and deform; this increases the strength of the remaining bonds of the nickel atoms on the walls in and around the tubercles. These atomic CN imperfections induce bond contraction and the associated bond-strength gain deepens the potential well of the trapping in the surface skin. This CN reduction also produces an increase of charge density, energy, and mass of the enclosed hydrogen contained in the relaxed surface skin imperfection. This increased density is far higher than it normally would be at other sites inside the solid. Because of this energy densification, surface stress and tension that is in the dimension of energy density will increase in the relaxed region of the disruption lattice bonds. For example, when a nickel wall lattice phonon wave breaks upon the surface imperfection, it is amplified by the abrupt discontinuity in the lattice and is concentrated by the increased bond-order-length-strength (BOLS) of the nickel atoms that form the walls of the cavity. His phonon behavior is highly improbable is a simple pile of nano-powder. This tight coupling allows the thermodynamic feedback mechanism to control and mediate the reaction. It also amplifies and focuses the compressive effects that phonons have on the hydrogen (Rydberg atoms) contained in the lattice defects. These defects increase the intensity of the electron screening because of the increased bond tension inside the defects. Nano-defects are very tough. This toughness and associated resistance to melting and stress is conducive to the production of high pressure inside the defect. Rossi has stated that his temperature of his nano-powder can reach 1600C before it melts. Nano-powder usually melts well below the 1350c melting point of bulk nickel in a regular lattice. This revelation informs us how much Rossi has increased the strength and available atomic bond tension in his nano-powder. The smaller the dimensions of the lattice surface defect, the greater is the multiplier on the hardness and the resistance to stress compared to the smooth bulk material. These multiplier factors can range from 3 to 10 based on the properties of the bulk material. Multilayer sites that penetrate down through many lattice layers are more resilient than surface defects. There toughness is proportional to their detailed topology and therefore not generally determined. There is a certain minimum size which one reached reduces the hardness of the nano-defect site. This size is on the order of less than 10 nanometers. If you are interested in this subject read this paper for more theoretical background: http://www.ntu.edu.sg/home/ecqsun/rtf/PSSC-size.pdf In steadfast service to our community; Axil On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 5:04 PM, ecat
Re: [Vo]:Seebeck effect in the E-Cat?
There are two counterarguments to the proposition that an electric or electronic based mechanism contributes to the establishment or the control of the Rossi effect. First, for much of the long history of the Cat-e development, a single heater was used to activate and control the Cold fusion reaction in the Cat-e. Such a design was documented in the patent Rossi originally made public. The second heater option was added in one particular deign configuration when the ultra-small Cat-e was developed to counter the downsizing of the primary internal heater at start up. A critical reaction mechanism must be reflected in every design option to be considered as causative to the reaction, IMHO. Second, there is a cat-e design option currently in development that does not use any input energy to control the Rossi reaction. This type of design will absolutely speak against any non-thermal control agent affecting the Cat-e reaction. Best regards Axil On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 10:30 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: Terry, Stray current between two resistance heaters would be counter-intuitive, since the heaters are supposed to be well insulated electrically, and therefore not thermionic - so we must ask: what kind of current flow is even possible between two resistance heaters should you desire to maximize that feature? Could the heaters have been altered to assist in thermionics? I believe they could. Of course, everything about the Rossi device is a bit counterintuitive (assuming it is producing anomalous heat above the trigger temperature but I'm surprised no one has considered a thermionic possibility more than superficially. Current flow could be vitally important. A few catalysts work ONLY when charged. To restate the obvious, the external band heater, operating through the water flow CANNOT heat the reactor more than superficially to begin with - presenting the case that it almost has to have *some other function.* What is that function? We know the power supply is PWM from the type of controller used - but we do not know the details, and PWM covers a wide range of possibilities. There appears to be no dedicated ground (earth). The internal heater will naturally be hotter, due to its location, and would naturally function as a thermionic cathode to some degree, to the extent that it can do so - since electron flow will follow thermal flow. The voltage difference between the two heaters would be minimal but current could be stronger than anyone realizes. Matter of fact, even when the heaters are off, there could be current flow if the lead shielding is in fact there for the main purpose of creating a Seebeck effect. Bianchini proved that there was zero radioactivity during a long period of operation (not low, but zero above background) so the lead must serve some other purpose. All of this is based on supposition more than fact, but why not consider the possibility that current flow through the device is necessary, and the Seebeck effect provides it when the resistence heaters are turned off ? -Original Message- From: Terry Blanton Early on, I speculated that the band heater serves as an anode with the internal heater as a cathode allowing a current to flow through the reactor core providing an excess of electrons (in addition to heating the core). After all, the theory is one of electron capture, eh? T
Re: [Vo]:E-Cat open source replication
RE: The evidence for nano-powder welding as one of Rossi’s secrets is strong but circumstantial in the 10kw unit whose reaction vessel volume is 1 liter. In one recent demo of the 10-kw Cat-e, a short output power excursion occurred where the input output ratio went over 1600 during the 130 kW burst. This extreme intensity of this output power excursion is conclusive proof that the nano-powder must be coated evenly over the entire surface area of the reaction vessel walls. If this extreme burst of power was concentrated in a 100 gram pile of nickel nano-powder that pile would have surely liquefied and burnt a hole in the reaction vessel wall upon which it sat. Unless the 100 grans of nickel nano-powder was evenly distributed over the entire surface of the reaction vessel, the burn-through of the reaction vessel is certain. On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 6:46 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: The evidence for nano-powder welding as one of Rossi’s secrets is strong but circumstantial in the 10kw unit whose reaction vessel volume is 1 liter. First, the 100 gram pure nickel nano-powder fills only 1% of the volume of this one liter reaction vessel. This small amount of powder cannot be “packed” in such a large volume. A 100 gram pile of nano-powder would form a small clump at the bottom of the reaction vessel. If all the heat came from this small 100 gram pile of powder, the pile would burn a hole in the reaction vessel through the formation of a very hot spot. Second, Rossi said that the powder can reach a temperature of 1600C. Nickel Nano-powder will melt and/or degrade well below this melting point (1000C?) of the bulk material at 1350C. Third, the ash of the Rossi reactor he gave to the Swedes contains 10% iron that Rossi said was not produced through the action of transmutation from the reaction,,, but was produced by “scrubbing”; a Rossi quote. Forth, the nuclear heat that will have been produced by a pile of nano-powder throughout the entire though minuscule volume of this powder will be poorly conducted through that volume. This is caused by the randomized surface structures and associated protuberances and irregularities of each nano-powder particle. This porcupine like tubules will keep the surfaces of each nano-particle from mating flush with its neighbors to make efficient transfer of heat impossible to all the surrounding walls of the reaction vessel; in sum, any heat conduction through the volume of such a powder will be very poor. By contrast in support of the powder coating case, Rossi is using tubercles to increase the cross-section of his reaction well over what can be produced in a well ordered smooth nickel lattice. A tubercle is atomic mound of randomized topology created on the metal’s surface. Rossi is using these tubercles to disrupt the regularity of the nickel lattice to increase the strength of the atomic bonds of the nickel atoms. When there is a lattice defect on the surface of a lattice, the coordination number (CN) of the atoms that form the defect decreases. As a result, the remaining atomic bonds shorten and deform; this increases the strength of the remaining bonds of the nickel atoms on the walls in and around the tubercles. These atomic CN imperfections induce bond contraction and the associated bond-strength gain deepens the potential well of the trapping in the surface skin. This CN reduction also produces an increase of charge density, energy, and mass of the enclosed hydrogen contained in the relaxed surface skin imperfection. This increased density is far higher than it normally would be at other sites inside the solid. Because of this energy densification, surface stress and tension that is in the dimension of energy density will increase in the relaxed region of the disruption lattice bonds. For example, when a nickel wall lattice phonon wave breaks upon the surface imperfection, it is amplified by the abrupt discontinuity in the lattice and is concentrated by the increased bond-order-length-strength (BOLS) of the nickel atoms that form the walls of the cavity. His phonon behavior is highly improbable is a simple pile of nano-powder. This tight coupling allows the thermodynamic feedback mechanism to control and mediate the reaction. It also amplifies and focuses the compressive effects that phonons have on the hydrogen (Rydberg atoms) contained in the lattice defects. These defects increase the intensity of the electron screening because of the increased bond tension inside the defects. Nano-defects are very tough. This toughness and associated resistance to melting and stress is conducive to the production of high pressure inside the defect. Rossi has stated that his temperature of his nano-powder can reach 1600C before it melts. Nano-powder usually melts well below the 1350c melting point of bulk nickel in a regular lattice. This revelation
Re: [Vo]: Gyroscope's unexplained acceleration may be due to modified inertia...
According to the standard model, a Higgs field (named after a Scottish physicist Peter Higgs) is a cosmological field that permeates the entire universe. This field is supposed to be responsible for the genesis of inertial mass (and, because of Einstein's equivalence principle, gravitational mass). Like the microwave background radiation, the Higgs field is a remnant of the big bang. After the big bag, once the universe cooled down enough to a level below a certain critical temperature, the Higgs field popped into existence and assumed a certain non-zero value which is absolutely uniform throughout the entire volume of the universe. If an elemental particle changes its velocity of movement, that is, if it accelerates, then the Higgs field is supposed to exert a certain amount of resistance or drag, and that is the origin of inertial mass. In a slightly more precise terminology, inertial mass is generated by interactions between a particle and this (nonzero) Higgs field. In a nutshell, this is the origin of inertial mass. Every force is supposed to be carried by an associated particle; The Higgs field is no different. A Higgs Boson is supposed to carry the Higgs field and CERN has spent ten billion dollars to find this elusive guy. What if such a Higgs field does not exist, then something must be giving mass to matter? If this Hubble-scale Casmir effect is responsible in some way for inertial mass, according to long establish wave- particle duality theory, it must be carried by an associated particle just like all the other forces. All one needs to do is put this spinning super cold ring in a particle detector and look for some unusual and as yet undetected particle (Casimatter?) to appear. On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 3:20 PM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: The two could be part of the same phenomenon in a local geometry (thus permitting so-called Casimatter, which implies an antigravity effect). IOW this does not have to be related to some kind of Hubble scale effect, based on Universal expansion as the accelerating force. That is - if there is truly a Scharnhorst effect, you should have Unruh radiation as a side effect on the nanoscale. An interesting paper to build on is: Hawking-Unruh Radiation and Radiation of a Uniformly Accelerated Charge by Kirk T. McDonald http://www.hep.princeton.edu/~mcdonald/accel/unruhrad.pdf Although this radiation has a very low mass-energy (fractional eV equivalent to a Delta-T of only 1 K) this should quickly add up inside Casimir Cavities, in a cumulative fashion - which is where you might find an accelerated charge (proton). This would be an alternative to the Lamb shift hypothesis. -Original Message- From: Alan J Fletcher Mark Iverson wrote: Fran and Jones... This also may involve Casimir effects, but on a Hubble scale... Haven't heard of that before! http://www.physorg.com/news/2011-07-gyroscope-unexplained-due-inertia.html McCulloch proposes that the gyroscope's inertial mass is determined by surrounding Unruh radiation that is modified by a Hubble-scale Casimir effect. I don't know... Sounds too big to swallow! Hey, once we've got Cold Fusion reinstated as respectable science maybe we can work on Podkletnov.
Re: [Vo]:Wet Steam: Energy required disperse and suspend small droplets in the vapor state
The viability of a system cannot be determined from an examination of just
one of its components.
Rossi plans to string a number of cat-e's together in series to convert
water to dry steam.
The steam exiting the first cat-e in series may well be wet. The function of
the second... n-th stages may well be to increase the temperature of the wet
steam to the required level called for in the reactor system performance
specification.
Speculating about the details of what happens to the steam in the hose has
no bearing on the future performance of the 1 megawatt {thermal} Rossi
reactor, IMHO. The hose is just a development tool to keep the room
temperature and humidity in the space that houses the cat-e during the unit
test to a bearable level.
On Sat, Jul 30, 2011 at 5:07 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
Harry Veeder hlvee...@yahoo.com wrote:
Newtonian physics is generally not a part of everyday life experiences.
It is an abstract generalisation deduced from some idealised situations.
Good point. That's why these physics were not discovered until Newton, and
why it took a genius like Newton to discover them.
An interesting example is Newton's first law. The classic demonstration was
a pool table (billiards). I do not know how widespread pool tables were in
the 17th century, but I do not think that ordinary people had much
opportunity to experience one. Smooth roads and other low friction surfaces
are more widespread in modern life. We even have some sense of what is like
in zero gravity and how spacecraft work, from video games and NASA footage.
Such things were unimaginable to people in ancient times.
- Jed
Re: [Vo]:Passerini's Prediction
“Ps. However, I will condemn Mills crack pot theory as false, because he is explaining cold fusion effect by dark matter. This is very feeble argument, because there is no such thing as dark matter or at least, we do not have any evidence that supports that hypothesis! http://pubs.rsc.org/en/Content/ArticleLanding/2004/CP/b400402g Leif Holmlid : snipRydberg Matter has recently been proposed to be part of the dark matter in the Universe, to be the source of the so called UIR emission bands from interstellar space and to give rise to the Faraday rotation in intergalactic space.snip Mills crack pot theory may be correct. On Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 2:18 PM, Jouni Valkonen jounivalko...@gmail.comwrote: 2011/8/3 OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson svj.orionwo...@gmail.com: Considering Jouni's recent challenge: ...I will challenge you for 40 euros that Rossi does not do a fraud. If E-Cat is true, you pay 40 euros to charity, and if not I pay 40 euros for charity. Perhaps Charles and Hope should set a realistic time-table or deadline for when fraud should be officially declared. End of the year 2011 is reasonable deadline for scientific validation of Rossi's Cold Fusion technology. I think that Rossi is reasonable enough person that even if he fails with commercialization with his own efforts, he does not keep partially working technology only by himself in order to perfect it in unforeseeable future. This is why Randell Mills is a ethical criminal, because he has had so long time working cold fusion device and he has refused to bring it to public even though his commercialization efforts has not borne any fruits for several years. Of course there is that possible explanation that Mills does not have any new and ground breaking scientific evidence, but we should not condemn people as fraudsters without proper evidence. - Jouni Ps. However, I will condemn Mills crack pot theory as false, because he is explaining cold fusion effect by dark matter. This is very feeble argument, because there is no such thing as dark matter or at least, we do not have any evidence that supports that hypothesis!
Re: [Vo]:18-hour test is no less detailed than a boiler test report
Re: “DESCRIBE PERSONALLY PERCEIVED FAULTS IN OTHERS” This predisposition of many mainstream critics of out-of-the-box thinkers as abnormal and aberrant is deeply rooted in human nature as an evolutionary adaptation fostered by natural selection to enhance the survival of the race. The human race in the only organism that uses the acquisition and application of knowledge about the environment, in which they live to adapt to that environment and/or change it to enhance their prospects for survival. These critics of aberrant thinking feel a deep subconscious threat rooted in this thinking to both their personal survival and the continuation of humanity as a species. Most people will follow the example and lead of authority figures to determine truth and validity. This starts at an early age when children draw example from their parents to acquire knowledge and the appropriateness of behavior. This “normal” behavior to mimic authority figures extends throughout the schooling of the child where the child looks toward their teachers and mentors for queues in the acquisition of knowledge and the suitability and correctness of behavior. After school, the queues of culture come from their supervisors, mentors and peers. The subconscious urge to conform is deeply rooted in the essence of our humanity and is always accompanied by the need to avoid bullying, or deflect criticism from peers, and disapproval as a social sigma though it can also reflect suppression of personality. Conformity is especially strong in the young and is often associated with adolescence and the youth culture, but strongly affects humans of all ages. The recent analysis of the human genome indicates that mankind experienced an evolutionary choke point where the number of humans fell to a mere few thousand. I thing at this crucial time in the history of man, this hallmark trait of human nature was deeply ingrained in us some 70,000 years ago in the formulating crucible of modern humanity, when the harsh and forbidding South African desert environment for human survival was most cruel. There, small bands of hunter gatherer bushmen endured and adapted to the extreme conditions by teaching their children all the hard earned survival lessens the elders gained over their short lifetimes. These ways and means of the desert were the only things that kept the nomadic troop alive. The children that did not learn these survival techniques from their elders did not live to pass on this precious life sustaining knowledge. Only the most precocious, attentive, and conformant young students learned their lessons of the desert well enough to pass on their genes in the ever present natural selection extreme weeding out process. These very few and highly selected individuals became the seeds from which contemporary humanity has sprung. However, there is always a genetic mutation process that flows from the impact of the environment on the genome that introduces individuals into society that literally do not see the world as most others. As it so happens in the normal course of events there comes into our existence intelligent individuals in the extreme that from the earliest age try to adapt to the formulated mechanisms of culture but most often fail to thrive. These individuals suffer from perceptual problems that cause them to see the world differently from the mainstream of humanity. These perceptual and behavioral afflictions force unusual coping mechanisms to develop in them. These coping strategies are the place where most out-of-the-box thinking comes from. These learning disabled do poorly in school when young and suffer from visual, auditory, and physical disability, dyslexia, autism, behavior compulsions, and attention disorders. As their personalities form, their behavior is most often described as eccentric or kooky by the mainstream. But their unusual perception of the world and behavior in it every so often make unbelievable and momentous breakthroughs in science, technology, art, and engineering possible that are way beyond the abilities of “normal” people. These people oftentimes provide the accent of man with a quantum leap in perception, beauty and understanding that ordinary people cannot. Some examples that illustrate this caliber of man is listed as follows: Alexander Graham Bell Thomas Alva Edison Albert Einstein Henry Ford Dr Temple Grandin Stephen Hawking Isaac Newton Leonardo Da Vinci Michelangelo Nikola Tesla Ludwig Von Beethoven Mozart Tomas Jefferson Galileo, Louis Pasteur As more is becoming known about Rossi; the way he sees the world; the way he interacts with others; the more his mainstream critics holds his unusual and eccentric nature against him. He is an out-of-the-box thinker; obsessive in behavior; steadfast in his opinions and beliefs with a great distain for the path most traveled and conformance to
[Vo]:The clockwork
The very large scope of cold fusion reactions that have so far been discovered lead me to conclude that there are many separate and distinct mechanisms involved in the Cold Fusion phenomena; any of these mechanisms taken on their own may result in only a very small and barely detectable production of energy. For example, cavitation of salts of transition metals has resulted in the production of neutrons. The Cold Fusion mechanisms at work in this case are different than those involved in the transmutation of elements by living systems. I would guess that there are about a dozen Cold fusion causations at play throughout the entire range of the Cold Fusion field. In my opinion, what Rossi has done is put a large number of these disparate mechanisms together to produce an exponentially reinforcing set of causations which produce in their totality useful levels of energy. When these separate cogs of this clockwork composed of many cogs are examined separately, no one cog will be found to impress. But when properly assembled, the Cold fusion clockwork will form an impressive energy production machine. Rossi is confident that the workings of his clockwork are too complex for the world to discover in its entirety. Even Rossi himself does not know how the whole thing fits together. He, like most people, will concentrate on only one or at most a few of these cogs and not see the whole picture of this conundrum, this Gordian knot of multiple causations that is the Cat-e. Explicitly stated, Mills has found some of these cogs, Jones Beene together with his many associates explain others, Roarty, Dr Kim and Piantelli, found still more. All these workers are right to some extent; but their conjectures when incorporated into associated systems will produce only limited energy. None of these workers are totally right; so far only Rossi is totally right. He put his clockwork together over a very long time, through blind luck, shrewd trial and error observation, and dogged determination. The intellectual property rights that underlie the Cat-e will be impossible to untangle. No doubt, Rossi will spend the remainder of his life in court. He needs to be very careful to get something for his efforts before the big boys step in to wet their beaks in the carnage to come.
Re: [Vo]:who is the secret big partner of Rossi in USA?
Another Rossi puzzle…more fun! A clue, Rossi says that if he told us in which city the 1 MW reactor demo is to be held in, we would immediately know what company his American partner is. Company towns like that are very rare anymore with most manufacturing going overseas. The company must be big, American, long established and global. Ford fits. Ford’s World Headquarters is Dearborn, Michigan. On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 4:58 AM, Michael Ivanov ivanov...@gmail.com wrote: Any ideas? I heard about Ford, but could it be GE or GM?
Re: [Vo]:Another Defkalion statement on PESN
Ever since one of our number “noone noone” posted this http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg49026.html I have been concerned that I have let Rossi’s secret out of the bag to his detriment and that secret has been used by Defkalion Green Technologies to reverse engineer Rossi’s reactor core. Rossi just can’t keep his mouth shut and his loose lips has had many opportunities to let hints about his technology out during working conversations with highly knowledgeable and competent Defkalion engineering personnel to a point where reverse engineering his system is possible. I know his many disclosures have comforted me greatly in my curiosity about the most intimate inner workings of his system Rossi’s intellectual property rights are also weak at best and there is a strong possibility that someone else might well claim payment from Defkalion for intellectual property associated with Rossi’s system. For a company in Defkalions position, it is good due diligence business practice to attempt to reverse engineer Rossi’s system in lieu of paying a large royalty for his secret. Defkalion may have gotten their own homegrown version of Rossi’s core working well enough to encourage them into a delaying strategy to string out the payment of Rossi’s royalty disbursement as long as progress in their reverse engineering efforts showed promise. This payment delay reached a point where eventually Rossi through in the towel in frustration over doing business with Defkalion. With the passage of time and concerted effort to understand Rossi’s technology, Defkalion may come up with a competitive alternative to Rossi’s system; only time will tell. Best regards, Axil On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 2:05 PM, Alan J Fletcher a...@well.com wrote: http://pesn.com/2011/08/10/9501891_Defkalion_Responds_in_Support_of_Rossi/ Sorry if it's already here ... I looked for it. Hard to well if it's actually conflicting with what Rossi as said (technically). They say it's built AROUND the core (not that they have one), AND that they have (are?) set up a production line to make the cores if and when Rossi reveals the secret ingredient.
Re: [Vo]:On a Quixotic mission
In this new Mills patent, you can see where some of the investment capital went in the blacklight power venture: http://www.faqs.org/patents/app/20110114075 It looks to me like Mills and associates must have gone through all possible hydride reactions with every possible transition metal. Mills must have spent a ton of money and a huge amount of time to experimentally verify the contents of this patent. The Rossi secret sauce hydride reaction must be somewhere included in this encyclopedic list of hydride reactions. It also looks to me that Mills has secured the intellectual property rights to the catalyst used in the Rossi reactor just by patenting every possible exothermic hydride catalyst combination. On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 10:24 AM, Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.comwrote: Do you really think the scarcity of experimental results justifies the investment of 60mil$? It is easier to think that they just bribed a few other researchers just to fake results. This amount of money is enough to come with a proff of concept for any form of fusion, even tokamak.
Re: [Vo]:On a Quixotic mission
I am going from memory here, but Rossi said early on that the secret additive is absolutely required to get useful energy out of his core. Using the nickel powder alone does not produce heat. The Rossi process is the amalgamation of multiple mechanisms each of which when taken separately fail to produce meaningful results. Only when properly combined and taken together does the set of mechanisms produce results. On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 1:59 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: Daniel Rocha wrote: That's the Rossi's secret sauce! The SEM alone cannot do the whole job. Even if you know how the lattice is shaped and what elements and compounds it includes, you still may not know how to fabricate a similar arrangement. Right! If he has a secret sauce (a viable trade secret) it would be how he fabricates the material, not the content of the material. He might not have a viable trade secret. Perhaps expert in materials will look at the powder and quickly determine how it is made. They might even improve on it easily. In the past, when new discoveries were revealed to the public, they were often rendered obsolete quickly because experts not only saw how to replicate, they saw how to improve on the original. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Speaking of finely divided nickel
I find Jones’ post on finely divided nickel exceedingly interesting, informative, and valuable. For what it is worth, the content and logic of this post fits in well with my thinking on the Rossi question. To further the discussion, I believe that the nano-structures that actively mediate the Ni-H reaction must sit on top of or be welded to a metal lattice. This rough and rigid surface configuration will ionize the Rydburg atoms due to the differing and randomized crystal structures of these nickel nano-protuberances. This double tiered topology would act in a similar fashion or preform the same function as a spill over catalyst would. That is, these random crystal outcrops use sharp changes in surface work function caused by cryptologic variability to electrostatically disrupt and ionize the hydrogen Rydberg atoms. There have been reports that Rossi uses big micro grain sized particles as a lattice support structure to buttress small nano-dimensioned tubule structures of nickel. This more complex topology would cut down some on the maximum surface area that would be provided by a single tiered uniform nano particle topology. In addition as time goes by through the continuing action of heat, I speculate that the double tiered nano/micro particles would tend to weld themselves together at their contact points to form a kind of micro dimensioned porous metal-foam further reducing the total available surface area. On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 4:05 PM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: “Nano” is the key to many anomalies, and the follow numbers tend to support a surprising conclusion, to wit: Rossi’s “industrial secret” catalyst is NOT nearly as good as the original … ** ** In 1994 in a series of experiments lasting over a year, but before nickel nanopowder was available, Thermacore was able to get ~50 watts of continuous excess energy – output over the input - from what works out to 143 cm^2 surface area of nickel. ** ** This is based on the surface area of polished capillary tubing, which was in contact with a catalyst (one of several alkali metals, as specified in CQM theory based on Rydberg’s constant). If the surface area had been etched and pitted, as would be expected, then the true surface area could be a multiple of that, but probably not over 400 cm^2. ** ** BTW Rydberg was a Swede, and his constant was found experimentally – since it predated the development of quantum theory. But nowadays, it can be derived from quantum mechanics, which gives it extra credence. Perhaps this is a detail which has attracted the Swedes to the recent incarnation of this early experiment. http://free-energy.xf.cz/H2/papers/Anomalous-Heat-from-Atomic-Hydrogen.pdf ** ** Now fast-forward 17 years. The spec sheets from nano-nickel suppliers say that 400,000 cm^2/gm of surface area is available from this geometry as opposed to the ~400 cm^2/gm of the older tubing. ** ** Therefore, only one gram of nano nickel should give an increase of (400,000/400) or about 3 orders of magnitude more surface area. If surface area correlates well to excess energy, and this is almost a given – then this incredible increase should easily push the 50 watts seen in 1994 above the heat level now claimed by AR. ** ** Is there a surprising conclusion that one draw from this set of circumstances ? ** ** Guess what, sports fans: this could indicates that Rossi’s catalyst may NOT be as good as the potassium carbonate used initially ! ** ** But even if it is exactly the same catalyst (or one the other alkali metals mentioned in the CQM theory) – then this fact, plus the old experiment, may also indicate why the present inventor has been reluctant to disclose its true identity. ** ** Jones
Re: [Vo]:DGT Continues Playing Dodge Ball
Even if DGT can build a Rossi knockoff, their own testing has shown the knockoff to be potentially dangerous and hard to control. If such a product was sold to the public in general, DGT would be legally exposed if the knockoff cause harm to life or property. It is in the business interest of DGT to improve the Rossi design to make that design or some homegrown derivative safe to sell in the marketplace. On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 1:54 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: Terry Blanton wrote: After AR said he did not give them the sauce, it looks like: 1) DGT has no working Hyperions. 2) DGT has working Hyperions and stole the sauce. 3) DGT has their own receipe. You are saying these are the only three likely scenarios, right? They seem to cover all eventualities. I do not know what the situation is, but my guess is that if they have working reactors in a development laboratory, with instrumentation, and if they have developed equipment to fabricate reactors, then even if they do not have the recipe for the powder it would not be difficult to reverse engineer it. As I said before, my reading of the first statement from Defkalion is that Rossi showed them how to fabricate the powder, and they are prepared to fabricate it in industrial quantities. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:DGT Continues Playing Dodge Ball
On August 8th, 2011 at 1:38 PM Rossi said in part on his blog as follows: “ “I have already perfectly in schedule my 1 MW plant, while the production in big series of the E-Cats was not my duty ( by the way, I always said them that this policy was completely wrong, for the first 2 years, but they were free to do what they want in reece and Balkans);” Rossi redesigned the BIG(10KW – 1000CC core) eCat to solve the well know control problem(remember the 130KW runaway). His current design uses a 50CC core in and effort to develop a more stable system. I draw from Rossi'e quote listed above that DGT did not redesign the 1000cc core by downsizing it to the 50CC core in their in house unit. This DGT homegrown unit may still be unstable and Rossi feels he is not responsible to fix the 1000C core for DGT. Rossi is still changing(improving?) his design almost on a daily basis and I doubt that DGT keeps their reactor designs current with Rossi's latest revisions. As a commercial reactor designer, Rossi may not be capable or willing to handle the riggers of quality and revision control for a major product release. On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 4:20 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: Axil Axil wrote: Even if DGT can build a Rossi knockoff, their own testing has shown the knockoff to be potentially dangerous and hard to control. I do not know where you got that information. The Defkalion reactors appear to be better controlled and safer than Rossi's own prototypes. If such a product was sold to the public in general, DGT would be legally exposed if the knockoff cause harm to life or property. They would be exposed to liability to the same extent no matter where the design originated. If Ford licenses Toyota's hybrid technology, and something goes wrong, they are just as liable as they would be if they invented it themselves. It is in the business interest of DGT to improve the Rossi design to make that design or some homegrown derivative safe to sell in the marketplace. They say they have done this. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:U.S. Researcher Preparing Prototype Cars Powered by Heavy-Metal Thorium
For some technical background, this is a small excerpt from the description of the Phoenix 2000 MaxFelaser system found on the Website. Thorium as a laser fuel is a natural Alpha beta emitter and lases very easily. What makes the Phoenix 2000 MaxFelaser systems differs from “reactors” or other lasers is that it is an “EMC” Accelerator driven non-critical reaction stimulating thorium as a Alfa-beta emitter. In nuclear physics, an energy amplifier is a novel type of nuclear power reactor, a subcritical reactor, in which an EMC energetic field is used to stimulate a reaction, which in turn releases enough HEAT energy to flash a working fluid to high temp and presser driving a high speed turbine-generator set. This is the basic working principles of the MaxFelasers. The EMC particle accelerator in the MaxFelaser is an electro magnetic induction coil operating at high frequency to propel the Thorium fuel Matrix to high energy levels and to contain them. The MaxFelaser uses this quantum mechanical properties of an external magnetic field to excite the electrons, the electrons (particles) collide with other particles and are diffracted as light. While an electron is undergoing acceleration, it can absorb or radiate energy in the form of HEAT and photons. It can be annihilated by a collision with a positron, the electron's antiparticle, or an electron–positron pair can be produced from gamma ray photons with a combined energy at least equal to the energy at rest of the particles. (An ordinary CRT television set is a simple form of accelerator.) The EMC is a hybrid combination linear and circular accelerator, leaving an energy profit for power generation. The concept has more recently been referred to as an accelerator-driven system ADS-EMC MaxFelaser based on Thorium presents a solution to the global energy crisis and could help ease political tension globally. Laser power generators are being developed and the US Air Forse is testing this generator. At this time, the 2.5 MW High speed generators have been built and are being tested by the United States Air Force USAF. The 2.5 MW unit is 1/10th the size of conventional generators at only 28 x 21 inches and 360 lbs.; a number of other sizes, 5Kw, 30Kw. 90Kw, 200Kw, 1.2 MW, have also been built and tested under a number of development programs; and larger units are being designed to meet the demands of the commercial power industry. Look at the hardware at: http://terralab.tripod.com/id14.html I am interested in how various alternative energy initiatives might hoodwink inverters. Opinions: Can a non profit consortium supported by the United States Department of the Interior front a SCAM? Also, the turbogenerator pictured here might be a fit for the Ni-H power systems. On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 2:24 AM, mix...@bigpond.com wrote: In reply to Harry Veeder's message of Mon, 15 Aug 2011 12:08:02 -0700 (PDT): Hi, [snip] I found this link on the Cold Fusion Times website. What powers the laser that heats the thorium? Is this a parody? Harry http://wardsauto.com/ar/thorium_power_car_110811/A U.S. company says it is getting closer to putting prototype electric cars on the road that will be powered by the heavy-metal thorium. Thorium is a naturally occurring, slightly radioactive rare-earth element discovered in 1828 by the Swedish chemist Jons Jakob Berzelius, who named it after Thor, the Norse god of thunder. It is found in small amounts in most rocks and soils, where it is about three times more abundant than uranium. In order to get that much energy out of thorium, you have to fission it. Now you could do that with fast particles directly or by first converting it to U233 then fissioning it with slow neutrons. Since a laser is employed, and we know that lasers can be used as particle accelerators, my guess would be that they intend to accelerate protons with the laser and use them to fission the Thorium directly. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
[Vo]:a 5 kW module
*« Older Comments*http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=501cpage=12#comments *1* http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=501cpage=1#comments ... *11* http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=501cpage=11#comments * 12* http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=501cpage=12#comments 13 - Andrea Rossi August 18th, 2011 at 8:29 AMhttp://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=501cpage=13#comment-62922 Net of all the shielding, a 5 kW module has a volume of about 1/4 of liter Warm regards, A.R. - Catscanner August 18th, 2011 at 7:58 AMhttp://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=501cpage=13#comment-62919 Dear Mr Rossi, Interessting that you have decided for 5kW modules. Can you say anything about the size of one module?
Re: [Vo]:Speaking of finely divided nickel
Rossi said that he spent every waking hour for six months tweaking the size and shape of the tubules to provide maximum performance. Maybe he found the miniature wave guide frequency that matches the energy hole by trial and error. On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 5:58 PM, mix...@bigpond.com wrote: In reply to Jones Beene's message of Fri, 12 Aug 2011 11:57:38 -0700: Hi, [snip] It doesn't seem likely that the tubules themselves are actually composed of nickel, although it is possible. But whatever they are composed of - they would serve the purpose of 'ventilation' of a lattice-like structure, as you indicate. Someone (maybe it was you) had speculated before that the tubules could be carbon nanotubes, or titania nanotubes - both of which are commercially available. [snip] If they exist, and have a diameter that is some multiple of 13.65 nm, then they may well act as Mills catalysts. This is particularly so if they are electrically conducting, in which case they act as miniature wave guides for short wavelength radiation that matches the energy hole frequency. Carbon or Nickel nano-tubes would probably excel in this role. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
Re: [Vo]:ANTICIPATING THE 1 MW DEMO
RE: “I don't see how doing a 1 MW demonstration would fit into a good strategy, but since I know nothing about his plans I cannot judge.” Rossi is terrified and perplexed by occasional runaways and subsequent burnouts of his reactors that he does not understand, prevent from beginning or can control in an orderly way once begun. This control problem has forced Rossi to downsize the capacity of his basic reactor to a very small energy production capability and use many of these small units ganged together to form a large capacity unit. There are a number of ways to cover up or mitigate this intractable and little understood reactor control problem which can occur from time to time in the Rossi reactor design. Reactor run away conditions can be easily handled if this fault can be segregated to a single and easily isolate-able low powered component of a very large capacity system. For example, a 2.5 kw reactor unit may runaway with power output of 25 Kws. This runaway condition can be hidden from any user visibility in a megawatt reactor because the anomalous spiking power output maxes out at a very small fraction of the total large composite reactor output. The runaway component will burn itself out is short order after it has temporally increased the output of steam by about 1% of total capacity. Once the runaway burns itself out being one of 1,000 small subunits, it can be easily replaced in an inexpensive way through an on-the-fly procedure without markedly affecting the total composite output of the other 1000 subunits that comprise the large reactor. On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 6:09 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: Jouni Valkonen jounivalko...@gmail.com wrote: Was this approach right or wrong, it can be debated. I think that it was just wrong approach. I agree. Plus I think a test of a 1 MW reactor is fraught with difficulties. It is much easier to test 1 to 10 kW. In my opinnion Rossi should have opensourced this technology back in 2009 when he filed patent application. I think what you mean here is that he should have revealed the technology in anticipation of getting a patent. Not that he should have given it away. Some people have suggested he should give it away because it is so important, and it will save so many lives. That would make him the most generous philanthropist in history. I think it is asking too much that he should be both a brilliant inventor and also a philanthropist. The problem with your plan may be that his patent is weak. He and Defkalion have both said they will rely on trade secrets to protect their intellectual property. That tells me his patent is weak. I do not know much about patents but his other patent seems weak. Very weak. Like trying to stop an automobile with a spider's web. I do know about trade secrets. I predict that a few months after corporations worldwide realize the Rossi reactors are real, this trade secret will be broken in dozens of corporations in the U.S., Europe, Japan and China. You can protect a trade secret for a product with a niche market that calls for inside knowledge, skill, and lots of art. Conventional catalysts are a good example. You cannot protect a trade secret for a rather simple device that is vital to every industry on earth, and that is worth hundreds of trillions of dollars over the next 100 years. I am only guessing here, but my impression is that Rossi is stuck. He seems to have no good method of protecting his intellectual property. That's awful. Assuming it works, it is the most valuable discovery in history and he deserves a trillion dollars in royalties. I fear he may get nothing. If he gets nothing in the end, this will be partly his own fault. His personality may be causing problems. But it seems to me his main problem is that this particular intellectual property is very tough to protect. I cannot think of a good marketing strategy. I wouldn't know how to do this. If he asked my advice, I would suggest he talk to experts in patent law and intellectual property. Perhaps he has talked to them. Maybe he has a good strategy. I don't see how doing a 1 MW demonstration would fit into a good strategy, but since I know nothing about his plans I cannot judge. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:People such as Edison, Jobs, Whitman and Rossi are not always lying when they say things that are obviously false
None of us live in the honesty of the objective universe; a cold and uncaring domain where brutal science holds sway. Such a frigid and unfeeling place is far to large and painful for us to bear in the lives we live. We each of us are artists who paint our world as in a dream born darkly in fading memories, prejudices, and reeling from the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune that color our lives. And in the illusion of our dream we seek solace and the strength to keep going. Axil On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 2:44 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: I wrote: If Jobs seriously believes that without him there would be no proportional fonts in modern computers, he is delusional. . . . to call it a lie is an overstatement, because even Jobs knows this isn't true, and he must know he is not fooling anyone. I mean he is not fooling anyone who knows the history of computers. Jobs got the idea for the Mac when he saw a Xerox Parc computer. The Parc had proportional fonts, and many other innovations that Jobs later took credit for. Modesty is not his strong suit. On the other hand, Xerox never even tried to sell the Parc, whereas Jobs went through hell getting the Lisa and then the Mac to market. That's genius enough. I don't begrudge him his fame or money. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Where's Rossi and other simple questions...
Cyber sabotage is now very sophisticated and effective. Even secret US government projects have been penetrated to the point where the penitrated projects are rendered useless; they require redesign or sometimes even cancellation. The type of information that has been asked for in this post is the stating point for a cyber- treat called Spear Phishing. In general, Spear Phishing is an e-mail spoofing fraud attempt that targets a specific organization, seeking unauthorized access to confidential data. Spear phishing attempts are not typically initiated by random hackers but are more likely to be conducted by perpetrators out for financial gain, trade secrets or military information. As with the e-mail messages used in regular phishing expeditions, spear phishing messages appear to come from a trusted source. Thus the need for this info as follows from the referenced post: “*How many people are working in the factory/lab?* *Who is doing the hiring, engineering, plumbing, safety checks,* *security, office admin, etc?* *Has anyone seen help wanted ads from Rossi and/or Defkalion?* *(Clicking Job Positions on http://www.defkalion-energy.com/ leads* *to a 404 error.)* *What are some names and backgrounds of newly hired people working on* *the E-Cats?* *Nobody has a friend of a friend who is working this? No leaks by* *employees? Does this suggest military level secrecy?* *Seems like Rossi would be getting lots of offers to help work on his* *invention -- Do we know of anyone who is actually working along side* *Rossi?”* In the case of spear phishing, the apparent source of the e-mail is likely to be an individual within the recipient's own company and generally someone in a position of authority. For example, a visiting West Point teacher and National Security Agency expert Aaron Ferguson calls it the colonel effect. To illustrate his point, Ferguson sent out a message to 500 cadets asking them to click a link to verify grades. Ferguson's message appeared to come from a Colonel Robert Melville of West Point. Over 80% of recipients clicked the link in the message. In response, they received a notification that they'd been duped and warning that their behavior could have resulted in downloads of spyware, Trojan horse s and/or other malware. Most people have learned to be suspicious of unexpected requests for confidential information and will not divulge personal data in response to e-mail messages or click on links in messages unless they are positive about the source. The success of spear phishing depends upon three things: The apparent source must appear to be a known and trusted individual, there is information within the message that supports its validity, and the request the individual makes seems to have a logical basis. Here's one version of a spear phishing attack: The perpetrator finds a web page for their target organization that supplies contact information for the company. Thus the need for this info as specified by the referenced post as follows: “*Wouldn't it be easy for someone to follow him from his apartment to* *the factory? Give an address, count cars in the parking lot, etc?* *How many people are working in the factory/lab?* *Who is doing the hiring, engineering, plumbing, safety checks,* *security, office admin, etc?”* Using available details to make the message seem authentic, the perpetrator drafts an e-mail to an employee on the contact page that appears to come from an individual who might reasonably request confidential information, such as a network administrator. The email asks the employee to log into a bogus page that requests the employee's user name and password or click on a link that will download spyware or other malicious programming. If a single employee falls for the spear phisher's ploy, the attacker can masquerade as that individual and use social engineering techniques to gain further access to sensitive data. Rossi should go totally black, drop out of sight, and not use e-mail or computers in his interface to his secret sponsors. If the US military is routinely compromised, Rossi is dead meat. See “Breaching Defense Contractor Data” for more background http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story.jsp?channel=defenseid=news/dti/2011/09/01/DT_09_01_2011_p52-356943.xmlheadline=Breaching%20Defense%20Contractor%20Datanext=0 On Mon, Aug 29, 2011 at 4:47 PM, ecat builder ecatbuil...@gmail.com wrote: With October fast approaching, I have some easy questions: Where is Rossi right now? Where is his lab/factory that is producing E-cats for the 1MW test? Wouldn't it be easy for someone to follow him from his apartment to the factory? Give an address, count cars in the parking lot, etc? How many people are working in the factory/lab? Who is doing the hiring, engineering, plumbing, safety checks, security, office admin, etc? Has anyone seen help wanted ads from Rossi and/or Defkalion? (Clicking Job Positions on
Re: [Vo]:I love Obama, great speach on jobs, patents too
The large mufti-national companies are not where new jobs come from. These companies will usually spread any increase in their work forces throughout the world with only a small fraction allocated to the US. So government incentives that are targeted to advantage this corporate category is not productive or cost effective. The engine that truly drives the growth of jobs in the US economy is innovation and its handmaiden, new small company establishment and growth. The underfunding of the US patent system during the last decade has nearly crippled commercialization of new ideas in the US which in tern has led to a increasing erosion of the US jobs base. This last Thursday, the House of representatives voted to rewrite the 60-year-old patent law to give inventors a better shot of obtaining patents in a timely manner and bringing the U.S. patent system in line with those of other industrialized nations. The legislation also takes steps to help the underfunded U.S. Patent and Trademark Office deal with a backlog that forces inventors to wait three years to get a decision on patent applications and has swamped the agency with some 1.2 million pending applications. Another drag on innovation and associated American prosperity is the restrictions placed on immigration that have been set in place since the 9/11 attack. The worlds best and brightest have been largely excluded from setting up new companies that would exploit their innovative ideas. During the Clinton administration, new small company formation mostly in the high tech and internet areas was instrumental in the production of 20,000,000 jobs. The anti-innovation policies set in place by government during the 2000's was one cause in a great reduction in the formation of small companies and the jobs that spring from them. Easing the patent process is one big step that will help the jobs problem in the US. On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 8:14 PM, fznidar...@aol.com wrote: He is going to streamline the patent process. I hope he takes personal charge and helps Rossi get his patent in the USA. I cant help myself, I love the man. Great speech, he is a war time president, at war with the collapse of America. I wish I could counsel him on cold fusion with Jed. That would be a dream. Obama, we in the new energy field are trying to make your dreams come true. Frank Znidarsic
Re: [Vo]:Rossi quotes
If the theory that Rossi uses one of the Mills catalysts as his secret sauce: i.e. lithium and/or potassium, air contamination would form a nitride. This catalyst would act as a getter of nitrogen, the primary constituent of air being around 80% of its volume. More generally, I believe that the Rossi reaction is really a reworked and reformatted Mills reaction. In point of fact, it is caused by Rydberg matter formation in contradiction to Mills thinking. Nitrogen is one of the elements that can produce Rydberg matter and would not therefore degrade the Rossi reaction. Since the Piantelli reaction does not use a Mills catalyst, nitrogen would degrade that reaction. On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 12:18 AM, Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com wrote: I have found this as interesting too, because Rossi has repeatedly suggested that his system can tolerate air in contact with the core material: - Andrea Rossi September 4th, 2011 at 3:17 PMhttp://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=510cpage=6#comment-68499 Dear Alan De Angelis: We have to purge also. Warm Regards, A.R. - Alan DeAngelis September 4th, 2011 at 1:33 PMhttp://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=510cpage=6#comment-68481 Dear Ing. Rossi: I’m just curious. When organic chemists do catalytic hydrogenations (with palladium, nickel, et cetera) in a pressurized shaker http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrogenation they first purge air out of the system by cycling back and forth between vacuum (with a vacuum pump) and hydrogen several times before they finally pressurize with hydrogen. Do you do this with the E-Cat or do you just blow the air out with some hydrogen and go straight to the pressurization? (Don’t feel obliged to answer this if it would reveal too much about the process.) All the best, Alan DeAngelis According to Piantelli (see WO 2010/058288 for example) deep degassing is a sine qua non condition of success/reproducibility because gas molecules adsorbed on the active clusters compete with hydrogen. Peter On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 3:44 AM, OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson orionwo...@charter.net wrote: Jed sez: Alan: Thanks again for monitoring Rossi's blog. It's a dirty job and Alan is the right man to do it. I ditto Jed's sentiments. Thanks, Alan. Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com http://www.orionworks.com/ www.zazzle.com/orionworks -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
Re: [Vo]:BBC - 'fusion will work' interview....
http://www.icenes2011docs.org/sites/default/files/2.0-2.6_Tuesday_May_17/2.3_Fusion_Fission_Hybrids/2.3.3_Kramer_ICENES_2011.pdf details,,,details. This very recent description of the LIFE reactor shows that Dr Ed Moses, director of the National Ignition Facility in California is dishonest in this interview in saying that LIFE does not involve fission or nuclear waste products. LIFE is a thorium based fusion fission sub-critical hybrid reactor similar to the accelerator based reactors or accelerator driven systems (ADS) proposed and designd by the people at CERN. There are far move cost effective and less technically risky fusion hybrid solutions available than LIFE. Dr Ed Moses is big on propaganda, but fails to deliver results. On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 2:38 PM, Tom Barnett thjbarn...@googlemail.comwrote: Interview with Dr Ed Moses, director of the National Ignition Facility in California and Sir Peter Knight, president of the Institute of Physics. http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today/newsid_9585000/9585189.stm Thought this might be of interest in a general sense - a mainstream media outlet putting it out that in the next 18 months the proof of principle of technology for fusion energy will be complete. By the way thanks for all the Posts on this forum - it is hugely fascinating to follow. Kind regards, Tom Barnett
Re: [Vo]:Rossi e-cat catalyzer, Gamma rays
So we need something that ionizises or atomizes the hydrogen molecules, and something that is very unusual for hydride systems. If the Rossi reaction turns out to be centered on highly excited hydrogen atoms... The bumpy surface of a nickel lattice will “field-ionized” the Rydberg atoms in a highly excited hydrogen envelope that hug the surface of the nano-particle. This phenomenon may be visualized as arising from the interaction of the Rydberg atom with the electric fields due to its electrostatic “image.” Compared to a hydrogen atom in the ground state, a Rydberg atom has an enhanced susceptibility to these fields. This is because the Rydberg electron experiences a greatly reduced electric field from the ion core due to their larger average separation. Polycrystalline metal surfaces of the nickel lattice of large micro particles will generate inhomogeneous “patch” electric fields outside its surface. These electrostatic fields also influence Rydberg atoms, potentially causing both level shifts and ionization and competing with the more intrinsic image charge effects. In general, patch fields arise from the individual nano-grains of a polycrystalline lattice surface exposing different crystal faces of the individual nano-crystals. Each of these faces has a different work function due to differing surface dipole layers. For example, Singh-Miller and Marzari have recently calculated the work functions of the (111), (100), and (110) surfaces of gold and found 5.15, 5.10, and 5.04 eV, respectively. These differing work functions correspond to potential differences just outside the surface beyond the dipole layer. Consequently, charge density must be redistributed on the surface to satisfy the electrostatic boundary conditions, producing macroscopic electric fields. While patch fields were first discussed extensively in the context of thermionic emission they are present near polycrystalline metal structures of any type, including electrodes and electrostatic shields. A bumpy nickel lattice surface provides Rydberg atoms with the same spill over ionization function that palladium does for ground state H2 atoms and it keeps the ionization localized on the surface of the nickel lattice. If you are interested in this subject read this paper for more theoretical background: *http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/1008/1008.1533v3.pdf* To amplify the production of Rydberg atoms, I would use potassium or lithium catalysts as a dopant in the hydrogen envelope. Rossi has put together many different mechanisms that all work together to amplify the cold fusion process. The secret catalyst is only one of his tricks. It will not function on its own hook unless optimally combined with all the other mechanisms; the nano surface of the micro particle catalyst surface preparation being just one. By the way, Rossi has said many times that no radioactive materials are used in his reactor. Best regards, Axil On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 3:50 PM, Peter Heckert peter.heck...@arcor.dewrote: Horace, thank you very much. I dont have the knowledge to calculate this. Only know the very basics. Found this via google: http://itcanbeshown.com/**NERS425/Lab5/Shielding%20-%** 20Final%20Version.pdfhttp://itcanbeshown.com/NERS425/Lab5/Shielding%20-%20Final%20Version.pdf There is data about screening. My idea was, it could be a very small and weak source, such as used in schools for physics lectures. These are not too dangerous if shielded. If the gamma source is very small the intensity should also decrase by square of distance. The source could be very close to - or inside the nickel powder core . Then the lead and the distance together could shield it close to natural baseline level. Its just an idea. I dont know if this is possible. It also was an idea of me, that metal hydrides are very well researched. Metal hydride hydrogen storage systems are in use worldwide and they use specially developed alloys also such that use nickel as a component. These sytems are belived to be the most secure devices, melting or explosion or abnormal heating is not reported. Some of these are used with very high pressure and temperature. So there are already thousands if not millions man-years of experience, RD and scientific research done for metal hydride systems. systems. But only the LENR researchers find LENR reactions. Why? If LENR reactions where easily to achieve, then this should have been discovered. The developers try to reduce the thermal hysteresis in the load/unload cycle to get best efficiency. So they search for zero hysteresis. When there is LENR energy production then we should have negative hysteresis and if this is possible by common chemical or physical methods, the countless researchers and scientists should have discovered this method or catalyzer. Now, so the Rossis catalyzer must be something very unusual that nobody would ever try to use for a metal
Re: [Vo]: science news of interest...
I believe that Rydberg blockade is what makes the Rossi reaction go and I think that heavy Rydberg matter dipole shielding of the nickel nuclei allow protons to penetrate the nuclear coulomb barrier of nickel atoms. In Rydberg matter, this dipole shielding goes as the 7th power of the number of atoms in the Rydberg matter assemblages. This polarization of Rydberg matter is clearly huge and can easily overcome the coulomb potential in the nickel atoms. In Rydberg matter, all the dipole moments of all the constituent atoms are coordinated and identical. Furthermore, the coherent nature of Rydberg matter range from just a single atom to large numbers in excess of 100 based upon the temperature and pressure of the hydrogen envelope; the higher the pressure and temperature, the greater on the average is the number of member atoms in the Rydberg matter assemblages. In other words, the higher the temperature of this hydrogen envelope, the greater is the number of coherent atoms that join the Rydberg matter assemblages. Now speculate how nuclear reactions affect atoms in a large assemblage of coherent and entangled atoms. In such a collection, what happens to one member of such a coherent collection happens to them all. It may well be that an averaging effect takes place where the nuclear energy output of one atom is averaged over a hundred or more atoms in the coherent collection. Nuclear reactions inside a quantum condensate have yet to be studied. http://cold-atoms.physics.lsa.umich.edu/projects/dipoleblockade/blockade.html From this reference, the dipole blockade of the 80 atom Rydberg matter assemblages is .3 microns. Any nickel atom within this blockade distance is subject to intense dipole masking in addition to being forced into coherence with the Rydberg assemblages. In the Rossi reaction I speculate that the Rydberg matter sits on top of the nano-powder and completely negates coulomb repulsion of the nuclei of these nickel atoms that they cover. However, when Rydberg coherence is not yet fully established or is breaking down, gamma radiation production will occur, not being completely negated by atomic coherence. This happens when the temperature and/or the pressure of the hydrogen envelope is lowering or low. This is where the gamma radiation bursts from the Rossi reactor sometimes come from. On Thu, Sep 22, 2011 at 6:04 PM, Mark Iverson-ZeroPoint zeropo...@charter.net wrote: Some other science news of interest... Slow neutrons are dense http://physics.aps.org/synopsis-for/10.1103/PhysRevLett.107.134801 And this one involving Rydberg states... Excited atoms spin out of equilibrium http://physics.aps.org/pdf/10.1103/PhysRevA.84.031402.pdf What makes the setting different from traditional experiments with cold atoms, and therefore particularly interesting, is the use of atoms in highly excited states—so-called Rydberg states [4]. An alkali-metal atom, with its single active electron, shares many properties with the hydrogen atom. Excited states form a Rydberg series whose states can be labeled, just like in hydrogen, by the principal quantum number n. Interesting physics emerges in the presence of more than one Rydberg atom, as the large distance between the nucleus and the valence electron renders these atoms into electric dipoles. Depending on the particular Rydberg state, the interaction between two such atoms is then either determined by a van der Waals or a dipole-dipole potential. The authors consider the former potential, which is, in principle, also present between ground-state atoms. The striking difference, however, is that the interaction between atoms in Rydberg states is enhanced by a factor of up to n^11. For values of the principal quantum number typically used in experiments, n=40…80, this means an increase of 10 orders of magnitude, i.e., the interaction affects even atoms that are separated by several micrometers. This is in contrast to the contact potential usually present between ground-state atoms. In the most extreme case, interaction-induced level shifts are so huge that a simultaneous excitation of two nearby atoms to Rydberg states is virtually impossible [for an illustration see Fig. 1(a)]. This so-called Rydberg blockade mechanism [5] lies behind a number of exciting phenomena that make Rydberg atoms useful for applications ranging from quantum information processing and quantum simulation to nonlinear quantum optics and ultracold chemistry.
Re: [Vo]:Hypothesis explaining FTL neutrinos
rom the experiment done back in 2008 as discussed in this article, quantum information can travel at speeds that exceed 100,000 times C (the speed of light in a vacuum). http://www.nature.com/news/2008/080813/full/news.2008.1038.html The concept of time may not necessary apply to quantum particles. Einstein called such behavior “spooky action at a distance”, because he found it deeply unsettling. He and other physicists clung to the idea that there might be some other way for the particles to communicate with each other at or near the speed of light. The experiment shows that in quantum mechanics at least, some things transcend space-time, says Terence Rudolph, a theorist at Imperial College London. It also shows that humans have attached undue importance to the three dimensions of space and one of time we live in, he argues. “We think space and time are important because that’s the kind of monkeys we are.” Some theorists believe that particles connected by quantum entanglement communicate in a higher dimension other that the four that we know from our everyday life. “Hints of universal behavior seen in exotic three-atom states” at http://www.physorg.com/news/2011-09-hints-universal-behavior-exotic-three-atom.html anounce a new field of quantum chemistry where multiple atoms entangel themselves at low energy in “Trimers”. The trimers were first predicted almost 40 years ago by theoretical physicist Vitaly Efimov. The most striking feature of Efimov's prediction was that the effect was both universal and repeating. That meant that the trimers could form from anything, be it as large as an atom or as small as a quark. And it also meant that Efimov's trimers would form repeatedly, up and down the energy scale in a stepwise fashion. Efimov, now at the University of Washington, even predicted the spacing in energy of the trimers; he said they would appear every time the binding energy increased by a factor of 22.7. “Efimov's 1970 work met with much skepticism, especially since his prediction specified that three particles could form stable partnerships even though none of the two-particle matchups were stable. That is, 3 particles could accomplish what 2 particles could not. This novel arrangement has been compared to the Borromean Rings, a set of three rings used on heraldic symbol for the Borromeo family during the Italian Renaissance. The three rings hold together unless any one of the rings is removed.” Creating and braking the Borromean Rings, require a higher topological dimension than our classical Einsteinian world can support. “These trimers are quantum objects; they have no classical counterpart. The weak binding of the super-cold Cs atoms is described in terms of a parameter, a, called the scattering length. If a is positive and large (much larger than the nominal range of the force between the atoms), weak binding of atoms can happen. If a is negative, a slight attraction of two atoms can occur but not binding. If, however, a is large, negative, and three atoms are present, then the Efimov state can appear. Indeed an infinite number of such states can occur. The Efimov state has an energy spectrum, as if it were a chemical element all by itself, with each binding energy level scaling with the value of a. This kind of universal behavior was expected.” By the way, I speculate that Mills chemistry might possible be explained by entangled high energy trimer quantum objects as opposed to hydrino theory. On Sat, Sep 24, 2011 at 10:04 AM, Horace Heffner hheff...@mtaonline.netwrote: The New Scientist article, Dimension-hop may allow neutrinos to cheat light speed, here: http://www.newscientist.com/**article/dn20957-dimensionhop-** may-allow-neutrinos-to-cheat-**light-speed.htmlhttp://www.newscientist.com/article/dn20957-dimensionhop-may-allow-neutrinos-to-cheat-light-speed.html suggest dimension hops as the means for neutrinos traveling faster than light, as measured in the CERN OPERA experiment, described by Adam et al., Measurement of the neutrino velocity with the OPERA detector in the CNGS beam here: http://arxiv.org/abs/1109.4897 The arrival time of the neutrinos across a 730 km distance was 60.7 ns early, representing 2.48x10^-5 relative difference vs light travel time. This measurement conflicts with early arrival time data for neutrinos from supernova. The New Scientist article quotes Marc Sher of the College of William and Mary in Williamsburg, Virginia, It's not reasonable. ... If neutrinos were that much faster than light, they would have arrived [from the supernova] five years sooner, which is crazy, says Sher. They didn't. This implies a difference in travel speed in matter vs vacuum for the neutrinos. A possible hypothesis to explain this difference is that dense matter presents numerous tunneling barriers to the neutrinos in their flight through such matter. The neutrinos spend 2.48x10^-5 of their travel time tunneling
Re: [Vo]:Hypothesis explaining FTL neutrinos
The Mikheyev–Smirnov–Wolfenstein effect (often referred to as the matter effect) is a particle physics process which can act to modify neutrino oscillations in matter. The work by American physicist Lincoln Wolfenstein in 1978 and the work by Soviet physicists Stanislav Mikheyev and Alexei Smirnov in 1986 led to an understanding of this effect. Later in 1986, Stephen Parke of Fermilab provided the first full analytic treatment of this effect. In a nutshell, high energy neutrinos change flavors at a higher rate when traveling through a dense medium then low energy neutrinos do. Also, the rate of flavor change is low for a neutrino of any energy level in a vacuum. The flavor change is analogous to the electromagnetic process leading to the refractive index of light in a medium. This means that neutrinos in matter have a different effective mass than neutrinos in vacuum, and since neutrino oscillations depend upon the squared mass difference of the neutrinos being transformed, neutrino oscillations may be different in matter than they are in vacuum. When these quntum particles transit dense media, whereas light slows down, neutrinos may speed up. The Mikheyev–Smirnov–Wolfenstein effect will lead to different flavor change rates detected in neutrinos from a super-nova traveling through a vacuum verses neutrino flavor change rates seen when neutrinos penetrate dense media. For high-energy solar neutrinos the MSW effect is important. This was dramatically confirmed in the Sudbury Neutrino Observatory, where the solar neutrino problem was finally solved. There it was shown that only ~34% of the electron neutrinos (measured with one charged current reaction of the electron neutrinos) reach the detector, whereas the sum of rates for all three neutrinos (measured with one neutral current reaction) agrees well with the expectations. If neutrinos undergoing flavor change are entangled via coherent forward scattering which I strongly suspect, then the speed that these entangled virtual particle pairs cover distance during the flavor change (quantum information exchange) could be far faster than C ( light speed). See my post above. That is to say, neutrinos changing their flavor will go very fast (at warp speed) for a very short period of time during flavor change then once flavor change is complete, continue to move along indefinably at light speed. On Sat, Sep 24, 2011 at 8:57 PM, Mauro Lacy ma...@lacy.com.ar wrote: On 09/24/2011 11:04 AM, Horace Heffner wrote: The New Scientist article, Dimension-hop may allow neutrinos to cheat light speed, here: http://www.newscientist.com/**article/dn20957-dimensionhop-**may-allow-http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn20957-dimensionhop-may-allow- neutrinos-to-cheat-light-**speed.html suggest dimension hops as the means for neutrinos traveling faster than light, as measured in the CERN OPERA experiment, described by Adam et al., Measurement of the neutrino velocity with the OPERA detector in the CNGS beam here: http://arxiv.org/abs/1109.4897 The arrival time of the neutrinos across a 730 km distance was 60.7 ns early, representing 2.48x10^-5 relative difference vs light travel time. This measurement conflicts with early arrival time data for neutrinos from supernova. The New Scientist article quotes Marc Sher of the College of William and Mary in Williamsburg, Virginia, It's not reasonable. ... If neutrinos were that much faster than light, they would have arrived [from the supernova] five years sooner, which is crazy, says Sher. They didn't. This implies a difference in travel speed in matter vs vacuum for the neutrinos. That's a possibility. Another is that this implies an extra difference in travel speed in air vs. vacuum for light. The electromagnetic signals sent by the gps systems are delayed a little bit more than expected according to current theory. And that becomes apparent only when compared with neutrino speeds, which are unaffected. This is consistent with the Cahill and Kitto paper about the non-null results of Michelson Morley type experiments and the relation with the refractive index of the medium: http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/**0205065http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0205065 Interestingly, the 7.5 km/s reported difference in neutrino speed is in good agreement with the 8 km/s result estimated for Michelson Morley type experiments in air. And a third possibility: the underground distance estimation between laboratories is wrong according to current theory. This can be the case, by example, if unaccounted for length contraction is happening due to gravitational effects. I would search for the difference in height between both laboratories, the way to estimate length contraction due to gravitational effects, and the estimated intensity of the gravitational field at the neutrino beam mean travel depth. Regards, Mauro
Re: [Vo]:Neutrinos, FTL, and scientific textus receptus
but the big thing at the moment is, it seems to me, can it transfer information faster than light in free space. No, only in dense matter, not free space... Best regards, Axil On Sun, Sep 25, 2011 at 1:30 AM, Kyle Mcallister kyle_mcallis...@yahoo.comwrote: --- On Sat, 9/24/11, Horace Heffner hheff...@mtaonline.net wrote: In the CERN OPERA results, neutrinos arrived about 2.48x10^-5 the travel time sooner than expected. For a 168,000 ly trip the expected photon arrival delay time Dt should be Dt = (2.48x10^-5)*(168,000 yr) = 1521 days = 4.17 years Right. But either way, Sher's claim that (it's) crazy doesn't really hold up. Kamiokande wouldn't have seen anything anyways if they had arrived that much sooner. The facilities weren't up and running, or just barely. It would be interesting if they DID have some preliminary data to see if there was a spike around that timeframe. The CERN result did not show any dependence on neutrino energy in the range checked. If neutrino energy is not a factor then the size of the burst only has to do with the number of neutrinos arriving, not the difference in time from neutrino arrival to light arrival due to distance. I don't know if neutrino energy by itself has anything to do with their speed. I don't see any reason why they couldn't have different speeds due to different initial conditions. That is to say, technically, the oscilloscope sitting across the room from me has more energy (on a per mass basis) than an individual alpha particle being emitted from the Am-241 source in my smoke detector. But the alpha is moving far, far faster. Put another way, how much of the neutrino's energy is expressed as kinetic energy? How/what is required/done to make the neutrino move at a given speed? I do recall reading, years ago, in Cramer's Alternative View column about an experiment purporting to measure the rest mass of the electron neutrino as being the square root of a negative number. I.E., tachyonic. I don't know what came of it. At the very least, it's something to think about. Another variation of the hypothesis exists if sound can travel on strings at superluminal speeds. The interaction then involves a neutrino-virtual-photon string merging on the arrival side and similar string separation on the departure side. If the string vibration propagation speed is not instant, but significantly larger than c, the same result occurs - an early arrival of the neutrino. In the case of the OPERA experiment this merely means the 18.1 meter cumulative tunneling distance I calculated would be replaced by a longer cumulative distance during which neutrinos effectively travel at the speed of sound in the strings. The neutrinos then are momentarily converted from a separate string into a vibration, a pulse, traveling on a momentarily merged string. Regardless of the mechanism, does it still provide the same result, arrival of information at the destination at t D / c? If so, it is still FTL, and could conceivably be used for the transfer of data. Don't get me wrong, figuring out HOW it works is bloody interesting, but the big thing at the moment is, it seems to me, can it transfer information faster than light in free space. If so, it is nothing short of wonderful. --Kyle
Re: [Vo]:Hypothesis explaining FTL neutrinos
From the CERN paper, all the neutrinos stated out as muon neutrinos and where received as muon neutrinos without flavor change to tau neutrinos. So no flavor changing occurred. The speed of the muon neutrinos was not a function of their energy either. These results rule out the MSW effect as a possible cause. Also there was no opportunity for quantum data transfer to occur via entanglement after muon neutrino creation. These result shoots my aforementioned speculations down and makes the CERN results far more deliciously curious. On Sun, Sep 25, 2011 at 12:31 AM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: The Mikheyev–Smirnov–Wolfenstein effect (often referred to as the matter effect) is a particle physics process which can act to modify neutrino oscillations in matter. The work by American physicist Lincoln Wolfenstein in 1978 and the work by Soviet physicists Stanislav Mikheyev and Alexei Smirnov in 1986 led to an understanding of this effect. Later in 1986, Stephen Parke of Fermilab provided the first full analytic treatment of this effect. In a nutshell, high energy neutrinos change flavors at a higher rate when traveling through a dense medium then low energy neutrinos do. Also, the rate of flavor change is low for a neutrino of any energy level in a vacuum. The flavor change is analogous to the electromagnetic process leading to the refractive index of light in a medium. This means that neutrinos in matter have a different effective mass than neutrinos in vacuum, and since neutrino oscillations depend upon the squared mass difference of the neutrinos being transformed, neutrino oscillations may be different in matter than they are in vacuum. When these quntum particles transit dense media, whereas light slows down, neutrinos may speed up. The Mikheyev–Smirnov–Wolfenstein effect will lead to different flavor change rates detected in neutrinos from a super-nova traveling through a vacuum verses neutrino flavor change rates seen when neutrinos penetrate dense media. For high-energy solar neutrinos the MSW effect is important. This was dramatically confirmed in the Sudbury Neutrino Observatory, where the solar neutrino problem was finally solved. There it was shown that only ~34% of the electron neutrinos (measured with one charged current reaction of the electron neutrinos) reach the detector, whereas the sum of rates for all three neutrinos (measured with one neutral current reaction) agrees well with the expectations. If neutrinos undergoing flavor change are entangled via coherent forward scattering which I strongly suspect, then the speed that these entangled virtual particle pairs cover distance during the flavor change (quantum information exchange) could be far faster than C ( light speed). See my post above. That is to say, neutrinos changing their flavor will go very fast (at warp speed) for a very short period of time during flavor change then once flavor change is complete, continue to move along indefinably at light speed. On Sat, Sep 24, 2011 at 8:57 PM, Mauro Lacy ma...@lacy.com.ar wrote: On 09/24/2011 11:04 AM, Horace Heffner wrote: The New Scientist article, Dimension-hop may allow neutrinos to cheat light speed, here: http://www.newscientist.com/**article/dn20957-dimensionhop-**may-allow-http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn20957-dimensionhop-may-allow- neutrinos-to-cheat-light-**speed.html suggest dimension hops as the means for neutrinos traveling faster than light, as measured in the CERN OPERA experiment, described by Adam et al., Measurement of the neutrino velocity with the OPERA detector in the CNGS beam here: http://arxiv.org/abs/1109.4897 The arrival time of the neutrinos across a 730 km distance was 60.7 ns early, representing 2.48x10^-5 relative difference vs light travel time. This measurement conflicts with early arrival time data for neutrinos from supernova. The New Scientist article quotes Marc Sher of the College of William and Mary in Williamsburg, Virginia, It's not reasonable. ... If neutrinos were that much faster than light, they would have arrived [from the supernova] five years sooner, which is crazy, says Sher. They didn't. This implies a difference in travel speed in matter vs vacuum for the neutrinos. That's a possibility. Another is that this implies an extra difference in travel speed in air vs. vacuum for light. The electromagnetic signals sent by the gps systems are delayed a little bit more than expected according to current theory. And that becomes apparent only when compared with neutrino speeds, which are unaffected. This is consistent with the Cahill and Kitto paper about the non-null results of Michelson Morley type experiments and the relation with the refractive index of the medium: http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/**0205065http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0205065 Interestingly, the 7.5 km/s reported difference in neutrino speed is in good agreement
Re: [Vo]:Re: Regarding Rossi and NASA (+ some Piantelli news)
The failure of one module of the Rossi 1 MW reactor will not cause the entire 1 MW reactor to fail. Its performance will only degrade gracefully. When the core of the module overheats or melts, the surface of the nickel nanopowder will fail before the nanopowder enclosure will fail since the enclosure will be cooled by low temperature steam or water which would remove heat, effectively cool the enclosure, and support its structural strength. The failure of the nanopowder will cause the individual module to cool and be ineffective at generating thermal power. It would be analogous to a failure of one pixel of your computer screen; if one such pixel grows dark, your screen will not fail but its performance would degrade. You would still be able to use the screen, just the picture would not be as sharp. So too with the Rossi reactor; it would still generate heat, but not so much as before. Its capacity would be reduced until its performance would eventually degrade below a certain predefined lower threshold. When this low bound threshold is reached, the entire reactor is considered to have failed. On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 3:34 PM, Horace Heffner hheff...@mtaonline.netwrote: On Sep 29, 2011, at 4:02 AM, Man on Bridges wrote: Hi, On 29-9-2011 8:27, Horace Heffner wrote: Looking at the other side of the coin, the probability of catastrophic failure, suppose there is a 0.1% chance per hour one of the E-cats can blow up spreading steam throughout the container. There is thus a 0.999 probability of success, i.e. no explosion for one E-cat, operating for one hour.The probability that all 52 E-cats perform successfully for a 24 hour test period is then 0.999^(52*24) = .287. That means there is a 71.3% chance of an explosion during a 24 hour test. Me thinks you are wrong. Your statistical probability calculation is based upon the fact that the chance of a single Ecat exploding is influenced by it's behaviour earlier, This is false. The probability in each time increment is assumed to be independent. For there to be success there must be no failures for any time increment. If there are T time increments, and the probability of failure in any time increment is p, the probability of success q=1-p in each time increment is independent of the other time increments, and the probability of success in all time increments is q^T (only possible if what happens in each time increment is independent event), and the probability of any failure having occurred is thus 1-(q^T). which of course is not true. Statistically each Ecat has it's own independent chance of explosion at any given moment which does not change over time. The instantaneous probability of failure is zero. Zero time results in zero probability because lim t-0 q^t = 1 for for all 0=q=1 and positive t. Therefore lim t-0 1-(q^t) = 0. Note that I provided an assumption of 0.001 percent probability of failure *per hour*. With your probability of 0,1% chance per hour this would result for the whole of 52 Ecats then in a chance of explosion at any given moment of 1 - (0.999^52) = .05 or 5%. No. The probability of at least one E-cat failure in the 52 E-cat system, based on the assumption of 0.001 probability of failure of an individual E-cat in an hour is 1-(0.999)^52 = 0.506958 = 5%. Your number 5% is right, but your interpretation of it representing an instantaneous moment is wrong. Looking even a bit more closer again this would mean that if the chance of explosion is 0.1% per hour then the chance of explosion is 2,77e-7 per second at any given moment for a single Ecat, which would result for 52 Ecats into 1-((2,77e-7)^52) = 0,134 or 0,00144% at any time. The phrase at any time makes the above statement nonsensical. An hour represents 3600 seconds, which are 3600 independent events of 1 second duration. Let a be the probability of failure in 1 second, and b=(1-a) be the probability of success in 1 second. We have the given probability p of failure for 3600 seconds being 0.001, and the probability of success of one E-cat for one hour being q = 0.999. The probability of success (no failures) for the 3600 1 second independent time increments is q = 0.999 = b^3600 b = q^(1/3600) = 0.999^(1/3600) a = 1 - 0.999^(1/3600) = 2.779x10^-7 Note that a is the probability of failure in one second, not at any time. This is totally consistent with the probability of failure in one E-cat in one hour being 5%. In other words, going backwards: p = 1-(1-a)^3600 = 1-(1-2.779x10^-7)^3600 = 1-0.999 = 0.001 My calculations are therefore self consistent. The time intervals are all treated as independent events. Your interpretation of moment is perhaps a conceptual problem. Kind regards, MoB Best regards, Horace Heffner http://www.mtaonline.net/~**hheffner/http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
Re: [Vo]:Oct 6 Test
There is no indication that this is the best Rossi can do. I think that want limits the COP of the E-Cat is controllablility. Rossi has been trading off contollability against power density for a long while now over many design iterations. This demo is the “weakest yet” per reactor core power density. I doubt that Rossi will ever figure out how his E-Cat really works. That theory of operation is central to controlling the E-Cat effectively. It will be up to others to form a theory of operations that will allow for a E-Cat core with good power density together with absolute controllability. IMHO, the E-Cat will improve going forward once the commercial possibilities of the E-Cat are generally accepted as realistic and supported widely by business through product development. On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 4:49 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: vorl bek vorl@antichef.com wrote: This was 1/50 of the 1MW assembly, so it should be putting out 20kw. 3.5kw is a disappointment. In what universe is that a disappointment? If any other cold fusion test have produced 50.4 MJ in four hours with no input the researchers would think they had died and gone to heaven. If you showed that test to Robert Park I guarantee he would think he had died and gone to hell. Rossi announced previously that he would run the cell below the level it will be at in the 1 MW reactor. I was hoping it would be somewhat higher but 3.5 kW, measured in the secondary loop, is plenty high. And so is the fact that it ran for only 4 hours, which may not rule out a chemical reaction. Only 4 hours? It does rule out a chemical reaction. That is more energy than you get from 1 kg of gasoline (45 MJ), which also requires oxygen, which is not present in the cell. After they open up the machine they will find that the cell is small. The best possible chemical fuel is hydrogen and oxygen and you could not begin to produce 50 MJ with a small cell. You could not store it or ignite it. (Note that 1 kg of gasoline is considerably more than 1 L. I don't recall how much, but gasoline is lighter than water.) If that is the best Rossi can do I guess we will have to stick with Big Oil. There is no indication that this is the best Rossi can do. - Jed
[Vo]:frequency generator
Does anybody know if the frequency generator(I am assuming a 50 watt microwave source) was powered and functioning all throughout the self-sustaining phase of the Rossi demo. This seems to be something new in the Rossi design and may be how the self-sustaining mode was engineered.
Re: [Vo]:Look at the BIG PICTURE and you will see this is irrefutable proof
The hyperlink to graph 3 is mistakenly pointing to graph 2 I think. On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 2:44 AM, Horace Heffner hheff...@mtaonline.netwrote: On Oct 10, 2011, at 4:57 PM, OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson wrote: Ed Storms said it was ok for me to post the following analysis he made: * * * * * * A careful examination of the attached graph reveals an interesting conclusion. The Pout (power out) and the Eout (Energy out) appear to describe the net excess, not the total as everyone seems to assume. Power is applied to the internal heater, showed by the red dots, until extra power starts to increase starting at 140 min. The power to the heater is turned off for a short time at 160 min because the excess power starts to rise. This interruption of applied power and the resulting reduced temperature of the Ni caused the excess to decrease and excess power production is again brought under control. Applied power is interrupted several more times to test the stability of the power-producing reaction. Finally, applied power was turned off at 280 min whereupon the extra power increased and reached a relatively stable value. The variations in excess power production after 280 min are expected as the nuclear reaction responds to variations in local temperature in the Ni. The nuclear reaction slowly decayed away and the test was terminated before it stopped all together. I make two conclusions from this behavior. 1. The amount of energy produced was far in excess of any possible chemical source. 2. The energy-producing reaction is unstable and difficult to control. It also slowly becomes less productive unless the temperature is increased by an external source of power that can increase the temperature of the Ni, thereby causing a greater output of energy. This means the energy-producing reaction has a limited life-time, which is what Rossi has indicated. If the Pout and E out are interpreted as net excess, the graph makes perfect sense and is consistent with how such a device must behave. Ed I provided two spreadsheets from which the graphs were produced: http://www.mtaonline.net/~**hheffner/Rossi6Oct2011.pdfhttp://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/Rossi6Oct2011.pdf http://www.mtaonline.net/~**hheffner/Rossi6Oct2011noBias.**pdfhttp://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/Rossi6Oct2011noBias.pdf The latter one uses the raw data, the former has an 0.8°C bias applied to Delta T to compensate for probable thermocouple error, as noted in the DISCUSSION OF GRAPH 4 section of the review: http://www.mtaonline.net/~**hheffner/Rossi6Oct2011Review.**pdfhttp://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/Rossi6Oct2011Review.pdf The graphs were taken from the spread sheet with the bias. The above seems to refer to Graph 1, which is in the review, but also in higher resolution here: http://www.mtaonline.net/~**hheffner/RossiGraph.pnghttp://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/RossiGraph.png Graph 2 in high resolution is here: http://www.mtaonline.net/~**hheffner/RossiT2Pout.pnghttp://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/RossiT2Pout.png Graph 3 in high resolution is here: http://www.mtaonline.net/~**hheffner/RossiT2Pout.pnghttp://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/RossiT2Pout.png I do not see how Pout and Eout can be interpreted as net excess. I am possibly missing the intended meaning of this phrase. Delta Eout is the thermal energy detected by the heat exchanger for the time period of a given row. Pout and Eout are created from this number. Pout is determined by a ratio of Delta Eout to the time period. Eout is just a sum of all the Delta Eout values to the end of the individual time periods each row represents. These numbers represent the thermal output. The net output, i.e. output energy - input energy, is not in the graph. It is in the spread sheet column Net E. One way to interpret Ed's phrase net excess is to consider the thermal energy still stored in the E-cat as part of the total thermal energy generated. That which has escaped and been measured by the heat exchanger is the net of total thermal energy generated minus the still stored energy. However, this interpretation does not seem to add anything to understanding discussion. When cold water is run through the E-cat sufficiently long that it cools, and if there is no nuclear energy generated, and the calorimetry works well, then Net E should be zero at the end of the run, and COP should be 1. No energy is then left stored in the E-cat at the end. This is how a control run should be evaluated, and a live test done. The power Pin applied to the heater in Graph 1 is indeed the red line. In Graph 2 it is the brown line. I think Graphs 2 and 3 have much to say about how well controlled the reaction is, if there indeed is one. In Graph 2 we can see the E-cat temperature is very well controlled. In the time 220 - 280 the red line T2 is fairly flat. There is no sign of any runaway reaction - even though the power was applied
Re: [Vo]:Look at the BIG PICTURE and you will see this is irrefutable proof
“As already speculated by a few here, Rossi continues to give me the impression that he operates very much on intuition. Recording scientific data is almost incidental to him, a characteristic I suspect probably drives a few of his colleagues to distraction. “ After watching Rossi for some months now, it looks to me like he is the quintessential edistonian trial and error development type of guy. He learns by doing. It might be that he is learning how to do demos by trial and error. After about a dozen more demos he may get his act together and come up with a demo that is generally acceptable to the majority. He doesn’t take the time required to plan things because he is working mostly in the dark of a largely unknown technology. He operates in a “mouse in a maze” methodology; what the software people case a rapid prototyping mode. It must drive the thoughtful planers amongst his colleagues and many of us here amongst our number right up a wall. On Sun, Oct 9, 2011 at 7:12 PM, OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson orionwo...@charter.net wrote: Thanks for the analysis, Jed. Will be interesting to read what others have to say. ** ** BTW, what did Rossi have to say? ** ** * * * * * ** ** When I look at the graph I continue to be drawn to the curious fact that the input power is cycled on and off a total of three or four times starting from around 13:59 to finally ending at 15:50 when it is permanently turned off. Looks to me as if Rossi's team may have been trying to get their eCat airborne way before the time stamp of 15:50. ** ** My apologies if the following has already been discussed or speculated since there has been so much discussion in the past three days – I can't keep track of it all. The characteristics of the input data gives me the impression that Rossi's team is trying to capitalize on what I would describe as the Sweet Spot, where Rossi feels that the core reaction is finally beginning to take off without further need for an input power source to sustain the output reaction. It's analogous to the Wright Brothers hand cranking the propeller of their first air craft where the first couple of spins don't necessarily catch on with the engine. ** ** As already speculated by a few here, Rossi continues to give me the impression that he operates very much on intuition. Recording scientific data is almost incidental to him, a characteristic I suspect probably drives a few of his colleagues to distraction. Rossi has probably acquired a reasonable amount of instinctual horse sense as to when he thinks his mysterious eCats are likely to take off in self-sustain mode. ** ** The following is what I speculate is happening between 13:59 to 15:50: ** ** Rossi initially tries at 13:59... *It's catching It's catching... Ah, shoot! It petered out. Ok guys! Crank her up again.* Input Power turned back on 14:11. ** ** Rossi tries again at around 14:24... *Well, Shoot. Still didn't catch! Maybe I need to prime the pistons. Where's my canister of Ether. Ok guys. Crank her up again.* Input power turned back on at 14:36 ** ** Looks like Rossi tries for the third time at around 14:48, but I suspect the there are data anomalies here (human error?) and Rossi actually turns off the input power at around 15:00. It's turning... It's turning... *Come on! Come on You can do it Shoot it's going down again. We're close guys! I can feel it in my ancient Italian bones! Ok, let's crank'er up again.* Input Power turned back on at 15:25. ** ** For the fourth time, Rossi turns off the input power around 15:50. Meanwhile the output signal has been strong and rapidly rising starting at around 15:40 or so. Rossi’s Italian bones sense that this is probably the Big One. …*TURN THE INPUT POWER OFF Got it! Hand me my goggles, guys! It's Steam Punk Rock'N'Role time!* ** ** Here are some final personal interpretations: ** ** It looks to me as if in every case input power is turned off several minutes after the Rossi senses that the output power is on a steady rise (in self-sustain mode) towards the 3000 mark and above. ** ** I wonder if Rossi may have initially been trying to hit that sweet spot early in the data recordings starting at 13:59. Perhaps he initially turned input power off back then in order to help minimize the potential of introducing skeptical arguments such as those presented over at Krivit's blog having to do with the total accumulation of input power from the start of the experiment and how the entire collection of data appears to be greater than the total accumulation of recorded output power. In any case, it looks to me as if Rossi had three false starts before he finally hit pay dirt on the fourth crank. ** ** Comments? ** ** Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com http://www.orionworks.com/
Re: [Vo]:Thermocouple extends beyond steel nut?
The amount of thinking and detailed engineering detective work that some of our most esteemed members have put forward to makeup for Rossi's ill defined test plan is truly awe inspiring. But my eyes glaze over when I try to get to the heart of the proof of principle that the demo was suppose to convey. I have spent a good chunk of my life designing these types of tests to prove operational capability. The ordinary man on the street will not understand the reasoning needed to prove that the Ni-H reaction is real much less that the Rossi system can do the job. So simplification of the demo might have been in order. Looking back, what might have worked best is a simplified test. The simplest test possible. Such a test continually presents and records the input power and the resultant output power until a predefined maximum output power level is reached sufficient to be achieved over a very long time period. Such a simple demo would be enough to convince most people. Like some 10 year old boy, I get the felling that Rossi just wanted to show the world a new gimmick that he just came up with; self sustaining mode. Rossi does not realize that each demo is self contained and it stands on it own merits indivisible in its entirety without holes or mistakes or assumptions. From initialization to lights out, a demo must be perfect in order to show proof of function; the simpler and elegant that the demo is designed to be the easier it is to be believed. A demo must be rehearsed and gone over and over again until it is completely debugged and perfect. Rossi does not yet get this simple principle because he uses these demos as on-the-fly design and unit testing tools. He has no respect for his audience. He must think to himself “if you can't overlook my bugs, then the hell with you because I have shown you this before”. Such a demo takes lots of time to design and perform; all meticulously done with loving care. Loving care and attention to detail is not in the Rossi game plan. The world doesn’t care what the last five Rossi demos have shown ...more or less... because his reactors never stay the same from one demo to the next. As a long time Rossi watcher with intense interest in cold fusion, a Rossi demo is an exercise in agony not the ecstasy of the angles. On Fri, Oct 14, 2011 at 1:53 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: Robert Leguillon robert.leguil...@hotmail.com wrote: Please provide a specific example of the heat increase during Heat-After-Death. You have been asked multiple times for this . . . I have pointed it out multiple times. The temperature continues rising after the power is cut off at 15:50. It rises again peaking at 16:51. It rises a third time at 19:18. The analysis of the T2 temperatures by Robert Lynn confirm this pattern. The assertion that this increase may be caused by stored heat is a violation of the Second Law of Thermodynamics. *If you are really going to trust the secondary measurements . . .* As I said, Robert Lynn shows that this is in both the primary and secondary measurements. *, and think that there is no stored heat . . .* I NEVER SAID there is no stored heat! Where did you get that from? If there were no stored heat the reactor would be a room temperature, obviously. Many observers say the reactor surface was hot and one person touched accidentally jumped back because it was hot, so there was stored heat. Stored heat = an elevated temperature Releasing stored heat MUST lower the temperature *If there's no stored heat, then why did the secondary show an increase from 3.943 kW at 19:03 to 6.101 kW at 19:22?* That cannot be caused by stored heat. Stored heat cannot increase the temperature. It can never maintain the same temperature. It can only slow down the decrease. *At 23:10, the pump is stopped, hydrogen is purged, all electrical power is pulled, and the water is drained. Why does the temperature begin climbing again after 23:20?* That is a change in calorimetric conditions. That does not count. Also cold fusion will often produces a burst of heat when you change loading conditions, so there could be anomalous heat their. It is not possible to purge all of the hydrogen at one time. It takes hours or days, and you can never remove all of the hydrogen. There are many skeptical observers, that have serious questions. Don't use Krivit as a straw man for Vortex critics. No skeptic has addressed the fact that the temperature rises. I believe one person mentioned in passing that these thermocouples may be wrong. In other words, this may be an instrument artifact. There is no chance of that. They registered a 5°C Delta T most of the time and up to 10°C at other times. They are never that wrong. they do not fluctuate rapidly. The one advantage of putting the thermocouple on the pipe is that it blurs out rapid changes and you can be sure the temperature
Re: [Vo]:Forcardi in a Bologna TED event
Forcardi wanted his time in the sun before he passed forever from the seen. He is starting to get some of the attention he thinks he richly deserves. This need for notoriety about developing the technology of the millennium is what motivated Forcardi to bug Rossi to stage the first e-cat demo. On Fri, Oct 14, 2011 at 8:59 PM, Harry Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote: Forcardi in a Bologna TED event. http://www.tedxbologna.com/en/15-ottobre-2011-incontro-al-futuro/sergio-focardi/ Harry
Re: [Vo]:Steam engines
In terms of micro turbines, a good fit for the Rossi reactor would be the supercritical carbon dioxide (S-CO2) Brayton-cycle micro turbines. The supercritical CO2 Brayton cycle provides the same efficiency as helium Brayton systems but at a considerably lower temperature (250-300 C). The S-CO2 equipment is also more compact than that of the helium cycle, which in turn is more compact than the conventional steam cycle. The size of such a micro turbine operating at 65% efficiency might be comparable to that that of an auto water pump matching the power production of a Rossi reactor in the megawatt range. On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 2:47 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: Robert Lynn robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com wrote: -Micro-turbines (capstone et al) have low efficiency compressor and turbines and under 100kW probably won't work at all until the temperatures are 600°C, and then only with very low efficiency (15%). I have heard that a Rossi reactor can go to 600°C. It works well at that temperature. Most cold fusion reactions work better at higher temperatures. Proton conductor-types do not work at all at lower temperatures. They do not conduct protons (load). Anyway, efficiency does not matter much with cold fusion because the heat costs nothing. The only reason you need a modicum of efficiency is to keep the waste heat down to a reasonable level. You would not want a 30 kW home generator that produces 300 kW of waste heat. It would make the air around the house too hot. If it was compact, it would be dangerously hot, and might burn someone or start a fire, and if it was not compact it would take up a lot of space. -Micro steam turbines are very inefficient, (steam's high specific heat requires multi-stage due to blade speed limits) and with small sizes are far more prone to water erosion damage. As I said, efficiency does not matter, but longevity and the lifetime cost of the equipment does matter. See chapter 14 of my book. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Dr. George Miley Replicates Patterson, Names Rossi
The key to all this theory is quantum mechanical coherence and entanglement. The people who are developing quantum computers require entangled subatomic particles for their computing elements. They have found that Rydberg matter can do the job at high temperatures. I believe Rydberg matter is what makes the cold fusion reaction go because it can generate quantum mechanical coherence and entanglement at high temperatures. It is a topic that few in science think are important but it will be at the center of the new cold fusion theory. Mainstream science today think that Rydberg matter is an exotic lab curiosity and will not be available for many years, if at all. But form http://www.maik.ru/full/lasphys/02/2/lasphys2_02p435full.pdf ** *The experimental results have been obtained using*** *new techniques to create large densities of highly*** *excited Rydberg species. Alkaline atom Rydberg species*** *are generally simplest to form because of the low*** *ionization energy of alkaline atoms. The new techniques **employ diffusion of alkaline ions from the bulk **of nonmetallic materials.* ** *For example, in the case of*** *graphite surfaces, it was shown that the emission of Cs**+ **ions gives rise to a nearly resonant process that forms **Rydberg species from the emitted ions and thermal **electrons. By increasing the pressure of Cs vapor in **contact with such surfaces and by ensuring that diffusion **takes place in the material, high densities of Cs and **K Rydberg species have been achieved. Small particles **(clusters) and macroscopic amounts of RM can be produced **by using Cs vapor. *** * * *The behavior observed for RM produced by such*** *methods qualitatively agrees with theoretical predictions: **RM is, for example, transparent to the visible **light and emits much less light than an ordinary plasma **would when high currents are carried. The observed **matter is very energetic, which is easy to observe **through explosions of the matter under simultaneous **emission of the visible light or charged particles for **both small particles of RM and large layers of RM on ** surfaces.*** In other words, Rossi uses an Alkaline-doped metal-oxide or carbon surfaces (e.g., promoted catalyst surfaces) to provide high densities of Rydberg species including Alkaline Rydberg matter. These clusters *quantum blockade* hydrogen atoms to form clusters of hydrogen Rydberg matter. Dr. George Miley has not done this in his experiments yet and he has not gotten the large power output that Rossi gets. These clusters last a long time and provide coherent hunks of metallic hydrogen to interact with the nickel surface. From the reference: *Rydberg matter, i.e., a condensed phase of excited atoms and molecules, was predicted more than 20 years ago. Comprehensive quantum-mechanical calculations have been performed to predict different properties and the lifetime of RM. These calculations have shown that RM is a long-lived excited state of matter. According to theoretical predictions, **the RM lifetime may be as long as 10 min or even several hours and days**. These predictions are consistent with long radiative lifetimes of even isolated circular Rydberg atoms. (The lifetime averaged over the angular momentum quantum number is 0.18 s for n = 40 and 17 s for n = 100*** On Sun, Oct 23, 2011 at 12:56 AM, Jouni Valkonen jounivalko...@gmail.comwrote: Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: In one early test in Bologna, a tank of deuterium was seen, which -LOL- Rossi claimed was use to quench the reaction! In retrospect, this could be part as an outrageous deception - and D2 is in fact Rossi's only big secret, not the catalyst. So the secret additive to nickel powder is copper, and perhaps little iron! This is indeed interesting development. If true, then it means that there is no fuel costs in any sort! Deuterium is dirt cheap and abundant (main cost of producing deuterium is the high energy cost!) —Jouni
Re: [Vo]:How to SAFELY make Nickel Nano Powder.
Here again, you are forgetting the third element in the Ni-H reaction: that is, the secret catalyst. Rossi has said that Ni and H2 will not react to produce much energy to speak of. The secret catalyst is required. Remember that Rossi started all this when he was experimenting with the Ni reactions with hydrocarbons. That is what gave Rossi his clue because he detected a slight amount of anomalous heat generated by the reaction. His background in thermoelectric converters predisposed him to improving his reaction with catalytic elements commonly uses in that discipline. On Sun, Oct 23, 2011 at 11:33 AM, Peter Heckert peter.heck...@arcor.dewrote: If you browse google for nickel nanopowder and hydrogen, then you find countless scientific research articles. Of course almost all must be payed. It is mentioned that water resulting from the process can poison the process and this is still heavily researched. There is not one process, there are hundrets of research and proprietery industrial processes that involve nickel powder and hydrogen. Yes Nickel powder and Raney nickel can self ignite on air and is dangerous and toxic but there are no dangers in combination with hydrogen mentioned. The biggest danger is, it doesnt work, and they try all tricks to make it work. Especially never neutrons or soft gamma-rays or gamma-ray injury of persons where reported. Am 23.10.2011 17:09, schrieb Wm. Scott Smith: One would not have to use pure Hydrogen; I bet they have identified an H2-Noble Gas mixture that is slow-enough to be safe. You can dissolve most metals in acid and cause them to precipitate as nano-particles. The you would expose it to your gas mixture. Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2011 10:57:43 -0400 Subject: Re: [Vo]:How to make Nickel Nano Powder. From: hohlr...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com On Sun, Oct 23, 2011 at 9:12 AM, Peter Heckert peter.heck...@arcor.depeter.heck...@arcor.dewrote: Nickel Nano powder is made like this: Nickel is oxidized. The nickel oxide is milled. The Nickel oxide powder is reduced to nickel in hydrogen athmossphere under high pressure and high temperature. Why doesnt this sometimes explode? It will! Read the safety and risk statements: http://www.sigmaaldrich.com/catalog/ProductDetail.do?D7=0N5=SEARCH_CONCAT_PNO |BRAND_KEYN4=577995|ALDRICHN25=0QS=ONF=SPEC http://goo.gl/vENfr Note that AR does not use nanopowder according to his patent ap for the US. Particle size appears to be on the order of 10 micrometers, two orders of magnitude larger than this manufacturer's guaranteed size. The curious part to me are the kernels or protrusions on his particles. If his reaction occurs with IRM at the crystalline discontinuities, I would think they would be plentiful in this geometry. Of course, all this has been discussed before. Nothing new under the sun. T
Re: [Vo]:1 MW plant testing is underway.
I am currently of the opinion that all the resistance to accepting the possibility of cold fusion is irrational on the part of many. This irrational way of thinking, the reluctance to accept new things, and he emotional disruption of the judgment process may be rooted in the fact that cold fusion is based primarily on the weirdness of quantum mechanics being far removed from everyday life. Having been faced with this clear and growing resistance to cold fusion, early on, Rossi decided that a logical scientific argument was not the best way to present cold fusion to the world. Rossi instinctively recognized that the most powerful motivator of human nature whether that nature is being expressed in terms of business, government or simply the guy on the street is competition. If an innovative business can use cold fusion to gain a decisive edge on its competition, all other business must follow its lead or eventually face bankruptcy; no matter what the religious, scientific, ideological, or strategic position of those other companies might be. The same is true for national governments. If one nation gains through the adoption of cold fusion a decisive competitive global economic and military advantage over all others, all these other national governments must eventually follow along the same path of this early adopter or eventually lose out to the demands of global competition. For example, even if lowly starving North Korea or bankrupt Greece first adopts cold fusion to generate power, it will eventually force the all-powerful US government to incentivize the adoption of cold fusion no matter how the Nuclear Regulatory Commission decides to disrupt cold fusion initiative based on the traditional fear of possible military or radiation dangers that this disruptive technology might imply. If a nuclear scientist has spent his whole life studying the intricate and obscure ways of the fission process of the light water reactor or the hot fusion process of the tokomak, no matter how distasteful, that person must eventually come over to the new cold fusion theory of the Rossi reactor because that is where all the work will be...or he can retire. When one analyzes the Rossi thought process, one must weigh in heavily the primacy of competition as a means and a method in the Rossi commercial and engineering strategy. Like the tiniest of sparks struck in a tinder dry forest, a conflagration of the old naysayer doctrinaire will once started be irresistible and unstoppable. On Sun, Oct 23, 2011 at 3:23 PM, Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com wrote: Cousin Jed, I simply think Rossi wants to convince the Customer and all the potential customers that he already has a usable industrial product, however in fact he has only some technologically underdeveloped generators. Defkalion has called them lab prototypes. Like a car that has some weak motor but no reliable acceleration and with very bad brakes. I don't think this analogy helps much, but... If the Customer is an engineering Company, this could be of use but not fast Peter On Sun, Oct 23, 2011 at 9:40 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.comwrote: That's excellent news. Very open of Rossi. Entirely reasonable. We complain about Rossi's habits, but you have give him credit for allowing a lot of access to this tests, and for giving out a great deal of information. The problem is not that he is unwilling to share data. It is that his tests do not produce good data, and he does not write scientific papers. People have said that Rossi is a liar, or he exaggerates, or he cannot be trusted. As I see it, he has a split personality. When he talks about business or personal matters, I think he gets excited and he blurts out nonsense. I don't take this nonsense seriously. He scapegoats people -- including me. He can be devious, sometimes planting misinformation to cause dissension. I know he does that, because he did it to me several times. However, when it comes to engineering-based technical claims, as far as I know, Rossi is the soul of honestly. He has often made astounding claims that seem utterly impossible. As far as I know, all the ones that have been put to the test turned out to be true. I do not know about that factory heater that ran for a year. Cousin Peter says he cannot believe it. I can't be sure it is real, but I am sure it is unwise to bet against Rossi. I do not think there is a shred of evidence that Rossi has ever tried to use a hidden source of energy, fake instruments, or any other kind of fraud. It would be much harder to do this with his cells and reactors than with any previous cold fusion devices, because the scale of the reaction is so much larger. He is careless with instruments, and sloppy, and this sometimes obscures the results. That is not a deliberate effort to hide results or escape from scrutiny. It is what it appears to be: sloppy. Lots of people are like that. Some
Re: [Vo]:1 MW plant testing is underway.
“The only part I do not get is: Why 1 MW? 10 kW is just as persuasive.” Whether it is true or not, Rossi believes that the large size reactor format is the easiest to get to market because this form needs to conform far less to regulation, bureaucratic restriction, and brouhaha. He believes that getting the Ni-H product to market in this large format is the least encumbered by regulation. This product introduction will break the cold fusion market wide open for the first to market. He needs to be the first to market to beat his competition who he thinks is breathing down his neck in the Ni-H marketplace. The first guy with a product on the market will have a stronger intellectual property claim than the late comers. In point of fact, the first to market will own the market and set the agenda to claim its intellectual property. On Sun, Oct 23, 2011 at 6:11 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: Having been faced with this clear and growing resistance to cold fusion, early on, Rossi decided that a logical scientific argument was not the best way to present cold fusion to the world. Yes, that is what he said. Rossi instinctively recognized that the most powerful motivator of human nature whether that nature is being expressed in terms of business, government or simply the guy on the street is competition. I agree that is probably what he thinks. I agree that competition is good motivation. The only part I do not get is: Why 1 MW? 10 kW is just as persuasive. There is probably a ~$500 billion marketplace for small reactors, say from 1 to 50 kW. This market in the aggregate will probably be larger than the market for reactors 1 MW and above. I believe this is true for today's fossil fuel heat engines. I believe the market for automobile motors is larger than the market for megawatt-scale motors. Worldwide light automobile sales are 78 million per year. The motors range from $600 to $2000 each. Just for the motor assembly I mean, not the whole car. That's $47 billion to $156 billion. I do not know know what the market value for big heat engines is but I doubt it is on that scale. The worldwide market for power plants is $164 billion, but that includes a lot more than just the turbines (the functional equivalent to the motor assembly in a car). Granted, Rossi would be selling the functional equivalent of the boiler in a power plant. Or an external combustion chamber. It is not a turbine or other heat engine. Still, I think it is fair to compare his market to that of the automobile engine or turbine. Mainly because it supplants most engine components. With his device, the energy costs nothing, the fuel weighs essentially nothing, and there is no pollution or exhaust. That has a huge impact on the design of the heat engine and other components in an automobile or a power plant. It greatly reduces cost and it simplifies everything. Many major components are not needed, such as the fuel delivery system, pollution controls, and complex mechanisms to improve efficiency. This design simplification is one of the reasons I say cold fusion will radically reduce energy costs, far below the level you get merely by eliminating the cost of fuel. That's only the first step. Fifty years later the hardware itself will be ten times cheaper per watt of capacity than what we have now. Later it will be 100 times cheaper. That has the been the trend with other big ticket mass produced technology such as automobile tires, shoes and food. That can only happen when the core technology cost is radically reduced. In agriculture, for example, cost was lowered by eliminating human labor and horses. We went from 41% of U.S. laborers working in agriculture circa 1900 to 0.7% now, approximately a 100-fold reduction. That kind of reduction in cost will surely happen in heat engines and energy overall. (By the way, 0.7% in agriculture is still way too many people. Watch people working on a farm and you will see that robots or a food factory will eliminate most of the remaining labor.) - Jed
[Vo]:Rossi’s customer
There has been a rumor floated that the US Navy is Rossi’s customer in this week’s upcoming E-Cat trial. This rumor is entirely believable. With the fragmentary background that Rossi has let slip during the last year regarding US government knowledge and participation in the development of the E-Cat, the US Navy would be the obvious US government point organization and primary customer for the E-Cat. First off, it would be extremely difficult for any one commercial company to bring the E-Cat to market. It would take many years or decades to safely commercialize the E-Cat and loads of up upfront money. The Greeks are out of their heads if they think that people would put a nuclear reactor in their basements or that the IAEA would allow it. Next, the megawatt size reactor format is the right power level for utilization of Ni power by the military. From way back, Rossi has targeted his design and development toward this large size reactor power format. It is perfectly reasonable that this design emphasis was inspired by the needs of the US Military. Furthermore, if the E-Cat showed any indications of working in those early government trials and demos which we suspect were conducted, the Navy would be aware of them, and made it their business to closely monitor the progress of Rossi’s RD. The US government monitors of Rossi’s development would have encouraged the emphasis of the megawatt size format. The US Navy will do a good job at protecting the design of the E-Cat from international competition both commercial and military since this technology would be critical and decisive to national defense. A private company would never be permitted to broadcast this critical military technology around the world nor would a company have the financial resourses to develop a home safe nuclear product. The Navy is not concerned about the product safety of the E-Cat reactor. Military personnel endure a high level of on-the-job risk and the E-Cat though dangerous in itself would tend to lower the overall risk load the war fighter would be exposed to on the battle field. The E-Cat would lower and eventually eliminate the need for fossil fuel in military operations and mitigate the risk of oil embargo from war operations. When all the threads of what we know about the history of E-Cat development are tied together in the framework of US Navy sponsorship and support, the whole ball of yarn makes sense. But the US military will have a hard time keeping Rossi’s mouth shut. It will be interesting and amusing to see how the various forces of secrecy in the government and the flapping lips of Rossi work themselves out.
[Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Rossi’s customer
I recognize that if the US government gets control of E-Cat development that will be bad for the cold fusion community because the government will lock down the technology consistent with other nuclear technologies. Jed will naturally fear this turn of events. But consider that Rossi has made a lot of money working for US government agencies in past endeavors and has made many friends and connections in US federal organizations. In point of fact, the founders of Ampenergo are Karl Norwood, Richard Noceti, Robert Gentile and Craig Cassarino, friends of Rossi. Two of them also founded the consulting firm LTI – Leonardo Technologies Inc. – which for 10 years has been working on contracts amounting to several millions of dollars for the U.S. Defense and Energy departments, and with a recent contract with DOE amounting to 95 million dollars. Robert Gentile was also Assistant Secretary of Energy for Fossil Energy at the Department of Energy during the early 1990’s. Rossi is near the bottom of his barrel and has even mortgaged his house to make this upcoming demo. When Rossi could soon be homeless without a sponsor with deep pockets, his altruistic principles of world beneficence might be reluctantly turned aside. 2011/10/25 Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: There has been a rumor floated that the US Navy is Rossi’s customer in this week’s upcoming E-Cat trial. This rumor is entirely believable. I have no idea whether this is true or not, but I note that Rossi is firmly opposed to selling his devices to any military organization anywhere in the world. He has said this several times. Even Defkalion says they will abide by this policy. Actually, this policy is illegal. It violates fair trade laws and probably other laws too. You cannot refuse to sell goods to a legitimate customer. As long as the customer is conducting a legal business, you have to sell to them on a first-come first-served basis at the same unit price as any other customer. You cannot refuse to sell because you dislike their ideology or their line of work. You also cannot refuse to sell to customers because of their race, religion or national origin. You cannot refuse to sell to a customer who happens to be competitors, and whom you suspect intends to reverse engineer the product. This part of the law was not enforced much until the 1970s. When they start enforcing it many high-tech companies groused and try to evade the law. They found all kinds of reasons to delay shipping to know competitors. They probably still do. Any businessman knows this. Rossi knows this because I told him several times. I expect he knew it before I told him. I expect the EU has similar fair trade laws so I do not think Defkalion will be able to enforce this policy. I think it makes them look stupid even mentioning it. Who are they kidding? I suppose they are trying to kid Rossi, or at least humoring him. In short, this policy is damn nonsense, but you will not pin down Rossi on that. He will say meep meep! Zm! - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Rossi H and Ni consumption
There are some ifs and buts associated with this subject. It has been known for over a hundred years how that hydrogen will defuse through a hot metal enclosure. The rate of diffusion is subject to the temperature and pressure of the hydrogen, together with the exact kind, thickness, and temperature of the metal. These are all variables in the calculation of the diffusion rate. Furthermore, the presence of oxides and/or carbides on the surface of the metal can reduce the rate of diffusion of hydrogen by up to 5 orders of magnitude. We don’t know for sure what the accurate values of some of these variables are and additionally they would vary widely within an operational range throughout the operational lifetime of the E-Cat. However, since hydrogen is very slippery and notoriously hard to contain, a good guess can be made that most of the hydrogen consumed by the Rossi reactor would be lost through diffusion through the hot walls of the stainless steel reaction vessel. Because of all these large uncertainties, calculation of the nuclear reaction rates as a function of hydrogen consumption implying a clue to the nuclear processes going on inside the E-Cat reaction vessel cannot be made in my opinion. With best regards, Axil On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 7:48 AM, Horace Heffner hheff...@mtaonline.netwrote: From: http://www.rossilivecat.com/ Quote: - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Andrea Rossi October 25th, 2011 at 4:59 PM Dear Thomas Blakeslee: Grams/Power for a 180 days charge Hydrogen: 18000 g Nickel: 1 g Warm Regards, A.R. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - End quote. At atomic weight of 1.0079 the 18000 gm of H is 1786 mols. At an atoommic weight of 58.69 the 10,000 gm of Ni is 170.4 mol. This means 10.48 atoms of H need be provided per 1 atom of Ni. Assuming the reaction is Ni-H, as claimed, only about 1 in 10 atoms of H is consumed, thus 170.4 mols of H and a170.4 mols of Ni are consumed, maximum. This involves the obviously wrong assumption that all the Ni atoms are transmuted, not a more realistic 3 percent. There is also an outside possibility the H reacts with daughter products, giving the possibility of 10 subsequent daughter reactions per primary Ni+H reaction. Three such reactions is an outside possibility. One MW for 180 days is 1.556x10^13 J, or 10^7 MJ. That is (6.241x10^24 eV/MJ)*(1.556x10^13 J)/(170.4 mol * 6.022x10^23 atoms /mol) = 9.464x10^5 eV/(Ni atom). If there is one reaction per atom and all Ni is consumed by single reactions than that is 0.9464 MeV per Ni-H event. The gammas from this would be lethal at short range, even through 2 cm of lead. If it is assumed that 3% of the Ni is consumed then that is 0.9464 MeV/0.03 = 31.5 MeV per reaction. If there are an average of 3 daughter reactions per primary reactions that is about 10 Mev per reaction. If 10 MeV gammas are produced then 5 cm of lead shielding will be of no use in protecting the operators. If near 1 MeV gammas are produced the lead shielding is inadequate. One MW of gammas is 6.241x10^24 eV/s, or, for 1 MeV gammas, 6.24x10^18 gammas per second. using: I = I0 * exp(-mu * rho * L) where mu for 1 MeV is 0.02 cm^2/gm), and density of lead 11.34 gm/cm^3, we have for 5 cm of lead: I = (6.24x10^18 s^-1) * exp(-(0.02 cm^2/gm) * (11.34 gm/cm^3) *(5 cm)) I = 2x10^18 free gammas per second. About half that, or 10^18 gammas/s would be directed toward the interior of the container housing the E-cats, and most of the 2x10^18 gammas per second would end up escaping the container. This is an approximate calculation. Even if it is off by an order of magnitude, this kind of 1 MeV gamma flux, even 1/32 of it from one E-cat, would be readily detected by a geiger counter at significant range. It does not seem credible the energy from a Ni-H reaction, at least in the form of one gamma per reaction, provides any explanation for 1 MW of heat, if that thermal power is in fact achieved. Best regards, Horace Heffner http://www.mtaonline.net/~**hheffner/http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
Re: [Vo]:Rossi's customer
There is one perspective that us believers in cold fusion might not understand or not consider operative in the minds of the naysayers. They think that Cold fusion is simply lot of non-sense and that Rossi is just another wacko who is just configured a Robe Goldberg Machine of pipes that mean absolutely nothing. At most, it is a scam and won’t work a damn. To officially acknowledge the slightest possibility that this reactor may be real will bring on withering ridicule and humiliating news coverage that will destroy reputations. On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 3:09 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: A couple of people have written to me to say that this is a test reactor so you would not need a permit for it. I doubt that. In the US you are not allowed to install a 1 MW conventional boiler without a license, and you are not allowed to operate it without a permit. I do not think they would make an exception for a nuclear reactor that works by unknown principles. On the contrary, this would probably invite more scrutiny than usual. Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com wrote: At such a great scale The Oct. 28 Test is a contradiction in terms- it has to be at least the 3 days test starting on Oct. 28 No company having elementary idea of engineering would accept a short test for such a Behemoth, there are necessary hours to make all the 52 Fat-Cats functional . . . I agree. Plus you would need a week or two setting up and calibrating the instruments beforehand, and some days to take apart the machine and look inside it, either before the run or after. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Rossi H and Ni consumption
In the Miley presentation that he has recently released, Miley shows transmutation to 39 isotopes over possible contamination levels. The nuclear reactions and transmutation patterns that are going on inside the Rossi reactor are similar to what Miley documents as mentioned in Rossi’s original patent. The presence of a large amount of iron in the Miley results is interesting and similar iron contamination was found in the Rossi ash(10%) when they were analyzed by the swedes. The assumption that the nuclear reactions taking place in the Rossi reaction are exclusively restricted to copper transmutation is mistaken in my opinion. The possibility that the reactions going on are hydrogen only cannot be ignored with the production of copper as only one of many reactions going on. On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 3:21 PM, Horace Heffner hheff...@mtaonline.netwrote: This is a nonsensical argument. The less hydrogen available for nuclear reactions the *more* the MeV per reaction that is required to make the 1 MW output, thus the less effective any shielding would be, and the *less credible* it is that the MW heat comes from nuclear reactions. On Oct 27, 2011, at 11:14 AM, Axil Axil wrote: There are some ifs and buts associated with this subject. It has been known for over a hundred years how that hydrogen will defuse through a hot metal enclosure. The rate of diffusion is subject to the temperature and pressure of the hydrogen, together with the exact kind, thickness, and temperature of the metal. These are all variables in the calculation of the diffusion rate. Furthermore, the presence of oxides and/or carbides on the surface of the metal can reduce the rate of diffusion of hydrogen by up to 5 orders of magnitude. We don’t know for sure what the accurate values of some of these variables are and additionally they would vary widely within an operational range throughout the operational lifetime of the E-Cat. However, since hydrogen is very slippery and notoriously hard to contain, a good guess can be made that most of the hydrogen consumed by the Rossi reactor would be lost through diffusion through the hot walls of the stainless steel reaction vessel. Because of all these large uncertainties, calculation of the nuclear reaction rates as a function of hydrogen consumption implying a clue to the nuclear processes going on inside the E-Cat reaction vessel cannot be made in my opinion. With best regards, Axil On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 7:48 AM, Horace Heffner hheff...@mtaonline.netwrote: From: http://www.rossilivecat.com/ Quote: - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Andrea Rossi October 25th, 2011 at 4:59 PM Dear Thomas Blakeslee: Grams/Power for a 180 days charge Hydrogen: 18000 g Nickel: 1 g Warm Regards, A.R. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - End quote. At atomic weight of 1.0079 the 18000 gm of H is 1786 mols. At an atoommic weight of 58.69 the 10,000 gm of Ni is 170.4 mol. This means 10.48 atoms of H need be provided per 1 atom of Ni. Assuming the reaction is Ni-H, as claimed, only about 1 in 10 atoms of H is consumed, thus 170.4 mols of H and a170.4 mols of Ni are consumed, maximum. This involves the obviously wrong assumption that all the Ni atoms are transmuted, not a more realistic 3 percent. There is also an outside possibility the H reacts with daughter products, giving the possibility of 10 subsequent daughter reactions per primary Ni+H reaction. Three such reactions is an outside possibility. One MW for 180 days is 1.556x10^13 J, or 10^7 MJ. That is (6.241x10^24 eV/MJ)*(1.556x10^13 J)/(170.4 mol * 6.022x10^23 atoms /mol) = 9.464x10^5 eV/(Ni atom). If there is one reaction per atom and all Ni is consumed by single reactions than that is 0.9464 MeV per Ni-H event. The gammas from this would be lethal at short range, even through 2 cm of lead. If it is assumed that 3% of the Ni is consumed then that is 0.9464 MeV/0.03 = 31.5 MeV per reaction. If there are an average of 3 daughter reactions per primary reactions that is about 10 Mev per reaction. If 10 MeV gammas are produced then 5 cm of lead shielding will be of no use in protecting the operators. If near 1 MeV gammas are produced the lead shielding is inadequate. One MW of gammas is 6.241x10^24 eV/s, or, for 1 MeV gammas, 6.24x10^18 gammas per second. using: I = I0 * exp(-mu * rho * L) where mu for 1 MeV is 0.02 cm^2/gm), and density of lead 11.34 gm/cm^3, we have for 5 cm of lead: I = (6.24x10^18 s^-1) * exp(-(0.02 cm^2/gm) * (11.34 gm/cm^3) *(5 cm)) I = 2x10^18 free gammas per second. About half that, or 10^18 gammas/s would be directed toward the interior of the container housing the E-cats, and most of the 2x10^18 gammas per second would end up escaping the container. This is an approximate calculation. Even if it is off by an order of magnitude, this kind of 1 MeV gamma flux
Re: [Vo]:Vertical farming, urban farming
It just struck me that there is a tradeoff relationship between the use of land and energy production. When energy is expensive the use of land and associated food production loss is traded off against bio-fuel production. When energy is very cheap, energy use can be directly traded off for increased food production via vertical farming/ urban farming. On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 10:49 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.comwrote: See: Despommier interview. http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2007/12/is-the-world-re/ Hydroponic farm. Read the captions under the photos: http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2011/10/gotham-greens-hydroponic-farm - Jed
Re: [Vo]:ideal client -- sekrit
I am of the contrarian opinion; for an American, this is the very best of news. If the customer is a military organization (the US Navy), the security apparatus of the associated country (the US) is now available in all its varied and potent forms both known and clandestine to protect the Rossi technology. Recall from the recent past how the United States Air Force protected the F-117 Stealth Fighter and B-2 Stealth Bomber technology with a cunning decade’s long campaign of disinformation and obfuscation: Spy and stealth planes--many with bizarre, bat-shaped wings, others with triangular silhouettes that inspire otherworldly designs in the minds of the general public--have long been cultivated by the military: the defense intelligence agency and the CIA. UFO sightings and lore and their official denials, feed rumors that the government isn't telling us about alien ships. The CIA estimates that over half of the UFOs reported from the '50s through the '60s were U-2 and SR-71 spy planes. At the time, the Air Force misled the public and the media to protect these Cold War programs; it's possible the government's responses to current sightings of classified craft--whether manned or remotely operated--are equally evasive. The result is an ongoing source of UFO reports and conspiracy theories. The armadas of secret Earth-built Air Force craft that have likely have lit up 911 switchboards over the years remain largely unknown in the minds and lives of the general public. Cold fusion is the ideal framework for a similar campaign of disinformation as a cover for advance Ni-H powered weapons systems. Rossi will quietly fade from the scene; while the US government paints anyone that believes that cold fusion is real as a kook, not only to protect defense secrets but to maintain the economic continuity of the fossil fuel economy that has served the US so well from disruptive turbulence. In a few decades, when the oil is much depleted and the natural gas from US shale deposits are petered out, cold fusion will emerge from the shadows of the skunk-works defense labs to continue the hegemony of the US and its oil producing allies. For all of us who own substantial holdings of oil and gas stocks, this is good news…the best. We can anticipate continued lucrative distributions of dividends into the indeterminate future with no prospect of disruptions or diminishment. On Sat, Oct 29, 2011 at 2:50 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote: The Customer is of a category that usually maintains secret all they do. . . . A skeptic forum member elsewhere predicted those words almost verbatim. Not hard to predict. Rossi said that before the test. It may not be true, but that is what he claimed all along. - Jed
Re: [Vo]: Is the ECAT out of the bag?
“Dr. Ed Storms, in his book, makes a good point that any theory of the mechanism should explain all of the experimental evidence, not just a convenient subset.” Why does deuterium kill the Rossi Reaction (Ni-H)? Why is high hydrogen pressure required to maintain the Ni-H reaction? Why is a catalyst(secret) needed in the Rossi Reaction? How is the catalyst activated by heat? Why is high temperature required over the curie point of nickel? Why does the Rossi reaction only self-sustain for six hours or less; what is consumed? What causes run-away reactions and meltdown? Why is there no residual radioactivity (nuclear waste)? Why can copper (and other transition metals) replace nickel in the reaction? Why are there many secret catalysts alternative elements possible in the Rossi reaction? Why are tubules required as custom nano-engineered nano-structures on the surface of the micro powder? Why is no tritium created by the Rossi process? … All of the above strikes me as evidence to disqualify the WL ultra-low momentum (ULM) neutron theory. . On Sun, Oct 30, 2011 at 9:43 AM, Higgins Bob-CBH003 bob.higg...@motorolasolutions.com wrote: And let us not forget Occam’s razor. Dr. Ed Storms, in his book, makes a good point that any theory of the mechanism should explain all of the experimental evidence, not just a convenient subset. It seems to me (Occam’s razor) that there is only one truly new phenomenon taking place in this cold fusion effect as opposed to many. After reading some of the proposed theories, I think that Widom and Larsen (WL) may have at least part of the solution. If we can place some pieces of the puzzle, it may help focus the search for the pieces that still don’t fit. ** ** There has been documented cases of tritium and He formation in PF cells. There has been widely documented transmutation. As hard as it is for skeptical physicists to accept the possibility of D+D fusion in solid state, it is even more unthinkable that such high coulombic barrier as a nickel nucleus would have could be crossed by a charged particle. This strikes me as supporting evidence for WL ultra-low momentum (ULM) neutron theory. WL hypothesize that ULM neutrons are formed form hydrogen or deuterium (how is a separate issue). A ULM neutron is a relatively stationary neutron. Once it is formed, it will drop into the nearest nucleus almost immediately – as a neutral particle, it is unaffected by the coulomb barrier. The nearest nucleus could be another hydrogen atom causing formation of deuterium. It could be a nickel nucleus giving rise to an isotopic shift in the nickel that ultimately may decay into something else. If deuterium is present, then this process of ULM neutron creation creates them in pairs because deuterium already comes with one neutron – thus you have formed a neutron pair that can fall into a nucleus. There has been evidence of nuclear weight increasing in multiples. These two neutrons could also fall into another hydrogen and make tritium. ** ** Now imagine a flood of such ULM neutrons being created. As these get pumped into nearby nuclei, the nuclei will become unstable and decay into daughter elements by fission giving off energy. Whenever a neutron enters a nucleus, the result is an excited nucleus that will need to give off something (as I understand it). If it decays into a proton as at falls to a ground state, it will give off a beta particle and a neutrino to account for the spin. Some nuclei will get a greater and some a lesser number of neutrons. In this neutron rich environment, nearby nuclei may be constantly undergoing neutron transmutation while the nuclei are still excited, or just after fission. Perhaps when lots of ULM neutrons are present, it statistically results in more rapid upswings in nuclear weight that allows the subsequent relaxation to more stable heavy isotopes like copper. It would be an interesting statistical simulator to write. ** ** But on startup, the reaction would go from producing no ULM neutrons to a situation where there is a flood of ULM neutrons being created. Between must come the case where there is a low density of ULM neutrons. Perhaps in this case, it is more likely that the fissions occur to lighter weight elements in a process that yields short term gammas, not as prompt radiation, but due to the fissions. This might explain the reported bursts of gamma at the startup and shutdown of the reaction. ** ** Also, it is interesting to note that Focardi’s early reports of isotopic analysis of the ash showed substantial generation of light nuclei. Yet Kullander’s analysis of the ash showed Cu and Fe. Possibly in the early days when Focardi reported the results, the catalyst design was not optimized and resulted in lower ULM neutron density. In that case lower neutron density might have biased the
Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Mill's and Lu paper define hydrino as fractional Rydberg
I will remind the theorists among us again that Rossi states in his patent that copper can be used as a micro powder material as an alternative to nickel. This implies that the physical and/or chemical properties of Nickel are not critical to the Rossi reaction. Rossi has surveyed many other transition metals to support his reaction. He found that nickel performed the best but conversely the other transition metals work almost as well. Nano-engineering is all important in the Rossi process. This indicates to me that the nuclear and/or chemical properties of the micro-metal are not as important as the nano surface preparation of the micro-powder. In simple terms in my opinion, the topology of the nano-structures is what makes the Rossi reaction go. Rossi calls this topology tubules and spent six months working day and night to optimize this surface structure. The changing work functions of the varied polycrystalline structures of these tubules will break apart H2 into H. Somehow inverse Rydberg matter may be formed between and among these tubules with the help of the high pressure and temperature of the hydrogen envelop and the mediating action of an alkaline catalyst. When all those electrons and protons that comprise a inverse Rydberg molecule are packed into the very small space between these surface tubules, this set of subatomic particles gain a lot of energy… maybe from Zero Point Energy…or just from the uncertainty principle. Dr. George Miley shows in his experiments and also in the Rossi ash, what comes out of this process is a zoo of other transmuted elements all up and down the periodic table. On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 1:44 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: Does anyone understand what happens to one of these fractional Rydberg hydrogen atoms once it is released into the atmosphere? Does it gain energy from the air and become standard hydrogen? I am just curious? Dave -Original Message- From: Roarty, Francis X francis.x.roa...@lmco.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tue, Nov 1, 2011 1:41 pm Subject: RE: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Mill's and Lu paper define hydrino as fractional Rydberg That is exactly what I was saying… Now that Mills admits the “hydrino” is actually fractiona Rydberg hydrogen the term hydrino not only becomes redundant but also carries all the baggage of his previously wrong definition that caused so much controversy. The term should be eradicated with extreme predjudice. *From:* Danny Ross Lunsford [mailto:antimatte...@yahoo.comantimatte...@yahoo.com?] *Sent:* Tuesday, November 01, 2011 1:28 PM *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com *Subject:* EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Mill's and Lu paper define hydrino as fractional Rydberg You can forget the hydrino. It does no good to adhere to bad ideas. Angular momentum conservation prevents it. We need to use good physics to get to the bottom of this phenomenon, and ruthlessly eliminate the bad ideas. *-- I write a little. I erase a lot. *- Chopin --- On *Tue, 11/1/11, Roarty, Francis X francis.x.roa...@lmco.com*wrote: A recent paper “Time-resolved hydrino continuum transitions with cutoffs at 22.8 nm and 10.1 nm” http://www.springerlink.com/content/q8005267210x3568/fulltext.pdf...http://www.springerlink.com/content/q8005267210x3568/fulltext.pdf
Re: [Vo]:Rossi Nickel enrichment : is a liquid-phase Calutron possible?
I don't think that as a practical matter electroplating can work to coat the particles of a micro powder but vapor disposition will work. Furthermore, the powder can be made of bulk material, only the nanometer thick secret surface treatment needs to be heavy nickel (Ni62-64). This is not that much material at all and is a very small fraction of the total weight of nickel. Think about the colored sugar coating on the surface of an MM but far thinner. Using vapor disposition, isotope selection by weight can be done by using a magnetic field. I would like to call attention to the patents of special interest that are mentioned in the Rossi 2009 patent. The ones taling about vapor disposition caught my special attention. On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 8:46 AM, Berke Durak berke.du...@gmail.com wrote: Hello everyone, My name is Berke and I'm not an electrochemist. Nor a physicist for that matter. (Just a comp. sci. guy.) That being said, I'd like to discuss this issue nonetheless. I find this subject extremely interesting. Also, congratulations for this well-kept and informative list. Some people have speculated that the heavier nickel isotopes (in particular Nickel-64) are the active elements in Rossi's alleged reaction. I recall reading that Rossi claimed that the enrichment is quite an easy process. Prof. S. Çelebi asked Rossi about the quantity of energy required to produce the fuel assembly, and Rossi responded that 200 W.h are enough for a 1 MW unit. Since Rossi claims that 10 kg of (enriched) nickel is good for 180 days worth of 1 MW production, I suppose that this 200 W.h figure is what is required to process 10 kg of nickel, or maybe the corresponding amount of some nickel ore or salt. On the other hand, there is talk of nickel powder being used, although I don't know if nanometric powder is required. I don't know anything about powdering, but based on some quick web research and back-of-the-envelope number crunching, it seems that 200 W.h is a reasonable amount of energy to pulverize 10 kg of some softish metal into a 70 micrometer-ish powder using commercially available equipment. Now, that doesn't solve the enrichment issue. Note that we don't necessarily need pure Nickel 64. Some Reddit folks were talking of a 64 Ni - 65 Cu reaction giving off 40 keV (as gammas I suppose). Since 64 Ni has .00926 abundance, you'd need to enrich that isotope by something like 5 times. So how could nickel 64 be cheaply enriched x 5? I had this weird idea, which may well be completely unfeasible. Take a nickel electroplating bath. There you have negatively charged nickel ions moving towards the anode. If you place a sufficiently long bath in a magnetic field, won't the trajectories of the nickel ions be deviated, in a quantity decreasing with their mass? If this is true, then you may be able to separate the heavier nickel ions from the lighter ones. Note that Nickel-64 is about 10% heavier than the most abundant isotope, so maybe this won't require require too many stages, if feasible. Basically, this would be a liquid-phase Calutron. Maybe there is a good physical or chemical reason why this wouldn't work, so I'd like any knowledgeable persons to step forward and give their opinion. If this works, from the couple pages I've read on electroplating, I gathered that it should be possible to obtain relatively brittle nickel by controlling the parameters of the process. This is probably a good thing, since after enrichment, you'll want to pulverize your nickel. In addition, it probably is not unreasonable to use a copper anode. Then, your fuel will be contaminated with natural copper. So, if the fuel sample you provide for analysis didn't run for very long, you'll have way more natural copper than transmuted copper, and the isotopic composition may well be indistinguishable from that of natural copper. Now if that enrichment process is feasible, we need to run some numbers to see if 200 W.h is in the ball park for 5 x enrichment of Ni-64. -- Berke Durak
Re: [Vo]:Inverted Rydberg Matter
*There is a very good chance that both the non-inverted Rydberg matter abbreviated as D(1) and the inverted Rydberg matter abbreviated as D(-1) are both coherent assemblages of around 100 atoms more or less and that the entanglement an coherence of these assemblages are determinative in the way both the D(1) and the D(-1) species behave in the Rossi process.* * * *D(-1) is the excited state of D(1) where protons and electrons chance places when sufficient kinetic energy is added to the D(1) species to form D(-1).* * * *The structure of these assemblages is like a stack of pancakes of 20 or so of hexagonal flattened atomic structures where the quantum mechanical states of all electrons in D(1) and protons in D(-1) are identical, synchronized and entangled.* * * *In effect, the Rydberg matter of all 100 or so atoms behave as if the entire assemblage was a single large atom defined by a single QM wave form. * * * *It may be that IRM that is comprised of the deuterium hydrogen isotope will produce nuclear reactions as seen in the experiments with pynco deuterium by Yoshiaki ARATA Yue C. ZHANG. * * * *In these experiments, the grains of pynco-deuterium powder show complete melting in micrographs by the extreme heat of a nuclear reaction even though the powder is made of mixture of palladium and zirconium oxide each with a very high melting point.* * * * * *On the other hand, the nickel powder that supports Rossi’s reaction has a very low melting point which is lowered further by a covering on each grain of nano-dimensional fibers of polycrystalline nickel.* * * *This powder is purported to survive for months of continual use even though the nickel undergoes transmutation to copper is high percentages. This speaks against the source of heat being nuclear fission or fusion as we commonly understand these processes.* * * *The fermionic condensate formed by fermionic particles: namely protons in the Rossi D(-1) must transfer heat from a quantum mechanical mechanism other than fission or fusion because of the low temperature nature of that heat source.* * * *The heat of the Rossi reaction must be from an as yet unknown quantum process(es) in the lattice defects where the D(-1) some how picks up energy and continually transfers it to the surrounding lattice when the proper lattice excitation temperature is reached.* * * *Copper transmutation in the micro-powder may be a side reaction caused by proton tunneling expelled from the D(-1) as hydrogen is continually recycled and replenished into the defect structures in and around the nano-fibers.* * * *The quantum blockade of the fermionic condensate in the defects must reduce the gamma emissions of the copper formation process into the x-ray radiation range and speed up or eliminate nuclear product decay processes formed by proton absorption in nickel.* * * * * * * On Sun, Nov 6, 2011 at 4:26 PM, Jeff Driscoll hcarb...@gmail.com wrote: Regarding ultra dense deuterium, George Miley and Leif Holmlid: In Rydberg matter: - the electrons and protons are inverted in terms of a metal (though not clear what this means) - the distance between nuclei in the planar Rydberg matter made from deuterium is on the order of 150 picometers. This is the non-inverted Rydberg matter termed D(1) by Holmlid. - there is a planar nature to the outer electron orbits But I can't figure out how they calculate the 2.3 picometer spacing distance in the D(-1) inverted Rydberg matter. Apparently they irradiate the surface with just enough energy to create deuterium atoms that have a kinetic energy of 630 eV. Then they conclude that the deuterium spacing of the inverted Rydberg matter D(-1) being irradiated is 2.3 picometers. They also create either protons or neutrons with kinetic energies of 1.8 MeV which has to be nuclear in origin - though I suppose it's possible there is some sort of Mills hydrino process that can lead to some nuclear process. I have a website that describes Mills's theory. It can be seen here www.zhydrogen.com === From Holmlid's website: My main research interest is Rydberg Matter, which is a state of matter of the same status as liquid or solid, since it can be formed by a large number of atoms and small molecules. For a more complete description, see Wikipedia. The lowest state of Rydberg Matter in excitation state n = 1 can only be formed from hydrogen (protium and deuterium) atoms and is designated H(1) or D(1). This is dense or metallic hydrogen, which we have studied for a few years. The bond distance is 153 pm, or 2.9 times the Bohr radius. It is a quantum fluid, with a density of approximately 0.6 kg / dm3. See for example Ref. 167 below! A much denser state exists for deuterium, named D(-1). We call it ultra-dense deuterium. This is the inverse of D(1), and the bond distance is very small, equal to 2.3 pm. Its density is extremely large, 130 kg /
Re: [Vo]:Focardi 1998 cell replication
* * *Hydrogen Ions are protons and are positively charged.* * * * * *The Piantelli theory is based on a quasiparticle: a negative hydrogen ion that acts as an electron in the nucleus of a nickel atom. * * * *In a nutshell according to the the Piantelli theory, the negative hydrogen ion enters the orbit of the nickel atom as an electron would and because it is so heavy being composed of two electrons and a proton. This heavy multi sub atomic particle quasiparticle will approach the nucleus of the nickel atom very closely in the same way that a negatively charged muon would in Muon-catalyzed fusion (μCF). * * * *The cross section of fusion between the negative hydrogen ion and the nucleus of the nickel atom is large because the very heavy negative hydrogen ion orbits so closely to the nucleus of the nickel atom.* ** *best regards,* ** *Axil* * * * * On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 11:42 AM, Peter Heckert peter.heck...@arcor.dewrote: Am 08.11.2011 15:56, schrieb Aussie Guy E-Cat: These is a very descriptive write of of the Piantelli process in the patent application I referenced. Link here: http://www.wipo.int/** patentscope/search/en/detail.**jsf?docId=WO2010058288recNum=** 1docAn=IB2009007549**queryString=ALLNAMES:%**28piantelli%29maxRec=1http://www.wipo.int/patentscope/search/en/detail.jsf?docId=WO2010058288recNum=1docAn=IB2009007549queryString=ALLNAMES:%28piantelli%29maxRec=1 There is nothing specific written about the nuclear mechanism. He writes:causing the atoms of the metal to capture the hydrogen ions, with liberation of heat, preferably in the presence of a gradient of temperature on the active core. Hydrogen Ions are protons and are positively charged. The nickel nucleus is also positively charged and so both repel. Mainstream physics therefore says it is impossible to fuse the nuclei. Look up Coloumb wall in wikipedia for this. It is the big problem how to overcome the coloumb wall and there are several non mainstream theories how this could been achieved but most are not accepted by mainstream science. It is believed by mainstream physics, something like this can happen in stars white dwarfs under very high pressure but on earth it is impossible. LENR researchers believe this can happen, when the protons are inside a metal lattice. There is a mechanism tunneling that can make it possible. Other ways would be high pressures in microscopical clusters inside the metal or resonance effects or whatever. Other ways would be if a hydrogen atom could be converted into a neutron. The patent does not say, how fusion is achieved, there is no specific mechanism explained. Therefore this would not pass a peer review by mainstream scientists. There is no theory presented in the document, only some unclear assumptions that are not proven to be true. Is this the latest? The newer patents of Piantelli are not published now. I cannot say, if this is the latest patent. I read everything I find, but I have no systematic list of documents. Best, Peter AG On 11/9/2011 1:05 AM, peter.heck...@arcor.de wrote: - Original Nachricht Von: Aussie Guy E-Cataussieguy.e...@gmail.com** An: vortex-l@eskimo.com Datum: 08.11.2011 15:17 Betreff: Re: [Vo]:Focardi 1998 cell replication I'm on my 2nd read of the Piantelli patent application WO 2010/058288 Al. I'm starting to understand the nuclear process he is describing. Is this for real? To me it seems logical and simple to understand but then I'm not a physicists. Has this nuclear fusion like exchange of Piantelli's been peer reviewed? If so can you please provide a link to the paper or the paper itself? I must say, I am absolutely not involved in nuclear physics. Know only the very basics. So I am no one who could give advice. NASA has investigated the Piantelli research and they favorize the so called Widom Larsen theory. Easy to find, but others could give you direct pointers. I must search myself. Rossi does strictly deny the Widom Larsen theory. Possibly his reason is, because this was made by a competitor. He is not a scientist and does not think like a scientist. I think there is currently no LENR theory that is fully acknowledged by mainsteam physicists. The Piantelli group has announced to release a theory that is not in conflict with existing physics. So far I know, they want to do this in 1st quarter 2012, but who knows, if it will happen. Best, Peter
Re: [Vo]:Control Mechanism
*The Rossi reactor has evolved over time and these changes inform how Rossi controls his reactor.* * * *Initially, Rossi had an internal heater whose function it was to produce exotic forms of hydrogen.* * * *It is these little known hydrogen assemblages that make the Rossi reactor work.* * * *In detail, the area around and very close to the internal heater produces hydrogen plasma.* * * *With the help of carbon doped with one of the alkaline elements (let us say potassium) also heated by the internal heater, a material call Rydberg matter is formed. This strange stuff is composed of potassium atoms (picked for the sake of explanation) and is formed when these excited alkaline atoms enter the colder regions of the hydrogen envelop just outside of the plasma region generated by the internal heater. This output from this secret catalyst quantum mechanically catalyzes another type of Rydberg matter made from hydrogen atoms through a quantum mechanical blockade process.* *Another type of hydrogen is also produced called a heavy Rydberg system. This consists of weakly bound positive and negative ions orbiting their common center of mass. Such systems share many properties with the conventional Rydberg atom and consequently are sometimes referred to as heavy Rydberg atoms. * * * *This stuff is what makes the Piantelli Reactor go.* * * *More specifically in the Piantelli system, a quasiparticle: a negative hydrogen ion acts as an electron in the nucleus of a nickel atom. * * * *In a nutshell according to the the Piantelli theory, the negative hydrogen ion enters the orbit of the nickel atom as an electron would and because it is so heavy being composed of two electrons and a proton. This heavy multi sub atomic particle quasiparticle will approach the nucleus of the nickel atom very closely in the same way that a negatively charged muon would in Muon-catalyzed fusion (μCF). * * * *The cross section of fusion between the negative hydrogen ion and the nucleus of the nickel atom is large because the very heavy negative hydrogen ion orbits so closely to the nucleus of the nickel atom.* * * *In the Rossi system, the negative hydrogen ions do damage by producing heat and radiation from nuclear reactions with nickel just as they do in the Piantelli system.* * * *In the Rossi reactor, when the temperature of the nickel powder is below the Curie point, these negative ions damage the coating of the micro powder and produce intense gamma radiation. * * * *When the temperature of the nickel powder is above the Curie point, the Rydberg matter mechanism takes over and dominates the negative ion mechanism which is essentially depressed.* * * *Later, Rossi added an external heater into his reactor design to get the nickel powder above the Curie point of nickel before the negative ion reaction takes place to any substantial intensity. * * * *This improvement has eliminated gamma bursts and powder damage during startup.* * * *To sum up, there are many different reactions involved in the class of phenomena commonly called cold fusion and some of them do not involve fusion at all.* * * *Next in the Rossi reaction, there is a very good chance that both the non-inverted Rydberg matter abbreviated as H(1) and the inverted Rydberg matter abbreviated as H(-1) are both coherent assemblages of around 100 atoms more or less and that the entanglement an coherence of these assemblages are determinative in the way both the H(1) and the H(-1) species behaves in the Rossi process.* * * *H(-1) is the excited state of H(1) where protons and electrons change places when sufficient kinetic energy is added to the H(1) species to form H(-1).* * * *The structure of these assemblages is like a stack of pancakes of 20 or so of hexagonal flattened atomic structures where the quantum mechanical states of all electrons in H(1) and protons in H(-1) are identical, synchronized and entangled.* * * *In effect, the Rydberg matter of all 100 or so atoms behave as if the entire assemblage was a single large atom defined by a single QM wave form. * * * *In a separate class of reactions studied by Miley and Arata where a deuterium isotope of hydrogen is used, it may be that IRM designated as D(-1) will produce nuclear fusion reactions as seen in the experiments with pynco deuterium by Yoshiaki ARATA Yue C. ZHANG. * * * *In these experiments, the grains of pynco-deuterium powder show complete melting in micrographs by the extreme heat of a nuclear reaction even though the powder is made of a mixture of palladium and zirconium oxide each with a very high melting point.* * * *Neutrons in the nucleus of the deuterium change the quantum mechanical nature of the IHR reaction. Fusion results and lends itself to a QM incompatibility between H and D reactions. * * * *Furthermore, this reaction uses palladium as a spill over catalyst to get deuterium into the lattice defects of the zirconium oxide powder or foil.* * * *On
Re: [Vo]:Control Mechanism
*Great but why doesn't the heat produced by the reaction itself form more plasma? You are treating one heat different from the other, unless there is some geometry involved?* * * *Geometry is involved.* * * *I have always assumed that there is a space between the powder and the heater where there is only hydrogen. If there was no such insolation, the high heat of the internal heater would melt the powder.* * * *With this geometry, when the powder gets too hot, it makes its own exotic hydrogen species and a runaway reaction begins. * * * *The powder must be kept in an operational temperature range (goldilocks range) to function. To cold and the powder will be destroyed or to hot and the powder will burn up.* * * * * 2011/11/9 Jeff Sutton jsutton.sudb...@gmail.com You make some good points and we know that there are neat and as yet unknown processes at play. wrt *In detail, the area around and very close to the internal heater produces hydrogen plasma. * Great but why doesn't the heat produced by the reaction itself form more plasma? You are treating one heat different from the other, unless there is some geometry involved? 2011/11/9 Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com *The Rossi reactor has evolved over time and these changes inform how Rossi controls his reactor.* * * *Initially, Rossi had an internal heater whose function it was to produce exotic forms of hydrogen.* * * *It is these little known hydrogen assemblages that make the Rossi reactor work.* * * *In detail, the area around and very close to the internal heater produces hydrogen plasma.* * * *With the help of carbon doped with one of the alkaline elements (let us say potassium) also heated by the internal heater, a material call Rydberg matter is formed. This strange stuff is composed of potassium atoms (picked for the sake of explanation) and is formed when these excited alkaline atoms enter the colder regions of the hydrogen envelop just outside of the plasma region generated by the internal heater. This output from this secret catalyst quantum mechanically catalyzes another type of Rydberg matter made from hydrogen atoms through a quantum mechanical blockade process.* *Another type of hydrogen is also produced called a heavy Rydberg system. This consists of weakly bound positive and negative ions orbiting their common center of mass. Such systems share many properties with the conventional Rydberg atom and consequently are sometimes referred to as heavy Rydberg atoms. * * * *This stuff is what makes the Piantelli Reactor go.* * * *More specifically in the Piantelli system, a quasiparticle: a negative hydrogen ion acts as an electron in the nucleus of a nickel atom. * * * *In a nutshell according to the the Piantelli theory, the negative hydrogen ion enters the orbit of the nickel atom as an electron would and because it is so heavy being composed of two electrons and a proton. This heavy multi sub atomic particle quasiparticle will approach the nucleus of the nickel atom very closely in the same way that a negatively charged muon would in Muon-catalyzed fusion (ěCF). * * * *The cross section of fusion between the negative hydrogen ion and the nucleus of the nickel atom is large because the very heavy negative hydrogen ion orbits so closely to the nucleus of the nickel atom.* * * *In the Rossi system, the negative hydrogen ions do damage by producing heat and radiation from nuclear reactions with nickel just as they do in the Piantelli system.* * * *In the Rossi reactor, when the temperature of the nickel powder is below the Curie point, these negative ions damage the coating of the micro powder and produce intense gamma radiation. * * * *When the temperature of the nickel powder is above the Curie point, the Rydberg matter mechanism takes over and dominates the negative ion mechanism which is essentially depressed.* * * *Later, Rossi added an external heater into his reactor design to get the nickel powder above the Curie point of nickel before the negative ion reaction takes place to any substantial intensity. * * * *This improvement has eliminated gamma bursts and powder damage during startup.* * * *To sum up, there are many different reactions involved in the class of phenomena commonly called cold fusion and some of them do not involve fusion at all.* * * *Next in the Rossi reaction, there is a very good chance that both the non-inverted Rydberg matter abbreviated as H(1) and the inverted Rydberg matter abbreviated as H(-1) are both coherent assemblages of around 100 atoms more or less and that the entanglement an coherence of these assemblages are determinative in the way both the H(1) and the H(-1) species behaves in the Rossi process.* * * *H(-1) is the excited state of H(1) where protons and electrons change places when sufficient kinetic energy is added to the H(1) species to form H(-1
Re: [Vo]:Control Mechanism
*If memory serves, someone on vortex saw that the internal heater was pulsed from looking at a movie of a scope either in the first or a very early demo.* * * *I would think that an alternating plasma would increase the production of Rydberg matter since RM condenses out of the plasma as the ions cool.* * * On Wed, Nov 9, 2011 at 1:54 PM, Jeff Sutton jsutton.sudb...@gmail.comwrote: Agreed regarding self-sustaining time and there is something in the reactor that needs to be reset. I suggest however, that simply adding heat again cannot be it as that is saying one type of heat is different from the other. Is the heater a DC device or AC with some important frequency? On Wed, Nov 9, 2011 at 1:43 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.comwrote: Jeff Sutton jsutton.sudb...@gmail.com wrote: He has shown it in self-sustaining mode but always shuts it down after a few hours with some excuse. Why does he do that when the blockbuster note would be the ecat just keeps on going. I suggest this must mean that the ecat cannot just keep on running for 6 months has he notes; at least in self-sustaining mode. . . . Did he say it can go 6 months in self-sustaining mode? I don't recall hearing that. He said that one of them ran for a year or so in Italy -- the address was listed in a patent. But I do not think it was self-sustaining the whole time. I don't know if it was self-sustaining at all. The data from that patent always shows some input power. Technologically, there is no point to a self-sustaining reaction. A reaction with a low level of input power to control it is better. Rossi has said lately that 6 hours is about the limit of a self sustaining reaction. The reasons are unclear. Maybe it peters out. Or does it go out of control? Who knows. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Physorg comments : new Krivit Crusade
/snip/ Additionally it has been disclosed that Rossi and NI have been working together for some time as well as the fact that Rossi had 107 modules working in parallel for 5.5 hours and maintained a very good regulation on the heat output. /snip/ The reactivity of Rossi's reactor is directly related to the tendency of the reactor core to change power level: if reactivity is positive, the core power tends to increase; if it is negative, the core power tends to decrease; if it is zero, the core power tends to remain stable. For the E Cat the reactivity adjusts sharply in both the positive and negative direction. Once this reactor begins to follow a changing slope, it does not self adjust. The adjustment must be done manually. The operator must monitor the slope of reactivity to insure it stays in the goldilocks zone. The reactivity of the core may be adjusted by the reactor control system in order to obtain a desired power level change (or to keep the same power level). It can be compared to the reaction of an automobile as conditions around it change (for instance, wind intensity and direction or road slope), and therefore the corresponding counter-measure that the driver applies to maintain road speed or execute a desired maneuver. Up until now, Rossi has not developed an automated control system. He may be smart but not that smart and such a job is probably beyond his skill set. Coming up with a control system that works well requires decades of specialized computerized automation expertise that Rossi may have not had time to establish. Such an automated control system can adjust reactivity in many ways, including hydrogen temperature and pressure, reactor wall and powder temperature, and internal and external heater temperatures. Net reactivity in this reactor is the sum total of all these contributions and is very difficult to properly coordinate manually. This is why Rossi has contracted a top company with experience in this field to help him in his continuing development of the E-Cat. On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 9:40 AM, Robert Leguillon robert.leguil...@hotmail.com wrote: /snip/ Additionally it has been disclosed that Rossi and NI have been working together for some time as well as the fact that Rossi had 107 modules working in parallel for 5.5 hours and maintained a very good regulation on the heat output. /snip/ Statements from NI do not indicate that they have been directly working with Rossi in any capacity that would convince them that his technology actually works: I would love for him to be right. We support every kind of research for the betterment of human kind. Whoever is interested in doing that, we would be happy to support. They have confirmed that they are willing to develop controls for Rossi. Their statements make it pretty evident that they are NOT confirming that the technology works. It is a very positive sign that Rossi is developing some manufacturing channels, and it lends credulity to his production claims. On the other side of the coin, earlier this year, the claims coming out of Defkalion had the same effect. N.I., though, is a real company I'll take a lot more stock in their press releases than any that have come so far.
Re: [Vo]:Physorg comments : new Krivit Crusade
“Many of his supporters have reviewed the sparse data supplied during his demonstrations and have convinced ourselves that it is real.” There are different levels of SCAM that Rossi can be perpetrating. The one level that I think currently applies to Rossi is the ability of his reactor to function for months on end to provide industrial heat safely in a factory setting. This he says he has now demonstrated but I find this very hard to believe. It is analogous to the Wright brothers claiming the ability to fly the Atlantic after their first demo of powered flight. At that time in the history of aviation, an enlighten observer could have foreseen that this capacity to connect the continents of the world could be developed in the future from the beginnings of the first airplane demo but that observer would be foolish to buy a ticket to fly the Atlantic without many transatlantic crossings routinely done clearly in the full glare of the public eye. This claim of sustained industrial heat production that Rossi is now making is not believable even though the potential may eventually be there. I think that Rossi like most entrepreneurs are sorely tempted to exaggerate the current state of the capabilities of their invention to gain continued funding for their RD. * * On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 12:44 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: OK Mary, you are correct in realizing that Rossi could be attempting a fake. Many of his supporters have reviewed the sparse data supplied during his demonstrations and have convinced ourselves that it is real. I am confident that we are seeing a real LENR device. Rossi succeeded in operating a single core ECAT for a length of time that makes it dificult to be absolutely 100 % certain that it could not be faked. Now the game, some atomic bombs are suitcase size and have a small yield. I perform an underground test of a very large quaintly of conventional explosives that has a yield equal to the suitcase device that I show you before I safely lower it into the cavity to be sealed within. Of course I do not allow you to inspect my setup before the test or bring your equipment as it is too dangerous for you to enter the cavity. Who knows, you might break a finger nail or something. ;-) This is similiar to the proceedure that magicians use when they do their magic. No more games Mary. Dave -Original Message- From: Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Fri, Nov 11, 2011 12:06 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Physorg comments : new Krivit Crusade Mary, you seem to love to find ways to scam scientific tests or do magic tricks or whatever. Let me ask you a question. Can you name one scientific experiment that is impossible to scam from the past? I tried and can not come up with one, so give it a try. There are many ways to suggest a trick that could, maybe be done. I will grant you this: Rossi has left the possible field open to a lot of tricks. Give one example of an experiment that is fool proof to save me from having to think too hard. I bet the vortex can figure a way to fake any you name. OK, I'll play. Fake an atomic bomb. But the argument is silly. I agree almost any subtle looking and complex experiment can be faked. THAT'S MY POINT. And Rossi's experiments are so loosely done and so different from one to another that it's hard to follow what he's doing. The whole purpose of having independent testing is to rule out fakery. Sure, the experimenters can be in on a scam. That's why they need to have no association with Rossi and an excellent reputation for skill and fairness. That's why I named the companies and labs I did. You suggest that because we accept other experiments from the past that could have been faked, we should also accept Rossi's. But that's defective reasoning. The only evidence that Rossi's device works has always involved Rossi's equipment and methods. That's the problem. The problem is not that anything can be a scam. It's that Rossi's device could fairly easily be a scam. The corollary is that a scam can be easily ruled out except that Rossi, who has done all sorts of complicated and time/effort consuming maneuvers, won't allow it!
Re: [Vo]:People who will not do their homework do not deserve a response
see http://www.new.ans.org/pubs/journals/fst/a_114 On Sun, Nov 13, 2011 at 7:20 PM, Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote: It's also possible that cold fusion occurs in nature, and through the eons, the copper we see around us is the product of the same reaction. What reaction is that?
Re: [Vo]:NI-H cell replication, some thoughts
I will attempt to address this question from Aussie Guy E-Cat: “He would need another naked, so to speak, element heater to boil off the electrons needed to form the H- ions, once they were broken apart from the supplied H2.” I don’t think that this “boiling off” is required. First some background quoted from ecatrepor: “although one might first think “the finer the better” because the finer the powder the more surface area per volume you get, this is not the case. Because in order to reach useful reaction rates with hydrogen, the powder needs to processed in a way that leads to amplified tubercles on the surface of his nano-powder. The tubercles are essential in order for the reaction rate to reach levels high enough for the implied total power output per volume or mass to reach orders of magnitude kW/kg – this level of power density is required for any useful application of the process. Rossi tells that he worked every waking hour for six months straight, trying dozens of combinations to find the optimal powder size for the Energy Catalyzer, or E-Cat. He further stresses that specific data about the final optimal grain size cannot be revealed, but can tell us that the most efficient grain size is more in the micrometer range rather than the nanometer range.” I remember seeing a picture of the Rossi stippled catalyst surface in pictures of his catalyst shown in his patent. This surface was bumpy and lumpy; and in my opinion, it was the surface wall of the reaction vessel and not an image of a pile of nano-powder. My current opinion is the micro powder is affixed to the walls of the reaction chamber through the use of some powder coating technique. This coating is porous and allows hydrogen to circulate in and among the micro-powder and at the same time provide a good thermodynamic heat transfer path with good conduction properties to the walls of the reaction chamber. For example, I believe that Rossi could produce such a mottled nickel surface by using a technique commonly found in the fabrication of artificial joints by medical device manufacturers. This technique produces the rough bone facing surface of metal knee or hip joints. The process involves “Inorganic Nanoparticles as Protein Mimics”. There has been a recently developed biomedical technology that produces metal surfaces that bond well with bone; a metal surface scaffold that optimizes bone growth onto and into the surface of these artificial joints. But there are many ways to skin a cat. There may be an easier way to get to the same result: a scaffold of micro sized nickel particles that extend out from the walls of the reaction chamber a fair distance (centimeters) which allows for a good circulation of hydrogen gas in and around the micro-particles. These micro-particles support a coating of nano-sized tubules that do all the work in the Rossi reaction. Why is this rough surface so all important? Now for some theory; a bumpy surface of the lattice wall is required to activate the Rossi process because such a surface will ionize the exotic hydrogen molecules that the pressurized hydrogen envelope will produce. The bumpy surface of a nickel lattice will “field-ionized” the Rydberg atoms in a highly excited hydrogen envelope that hug the surface of the reaction vessel. This phenomenon may be visualized as arising from the interaction of the Rydberg atom with the electric fields due to its electrostatic “image.” Compared to a hydrogen atom in the ground state, a Rydberg atom has an enhanced susceptibility to these fields. This is because the Rydberg electron experiences a greatly reduced electric field from the ion core due to their larger average separation. Polycrystalline metal surfaces of the nickel lattice will generate inhomogeneous “patch” electric fields outside its surface. These electrostatic fields also influence Rydberg atoms, potentially causing both level shifts and ionization and competing with the more intrinsic image charge effects. In general, patch fields arise from the individual nano-grains or “tubules” of a polycrystalline lattice surface exposing different crystal faces of the individual nano-crystals. Each of these faces has a different work function due to differing surface dipole layers. For example, Singh-Miller and Marzari have recently calculated the work functions of the (111), (100), and (110) surfaces of gold and found 5.15, 5.10, and 5.04 eV, respectively. These differing work functions correspond to potential differences just outside the surface beyond the dipole layer. Consequently, charge density must be redistributed on the surface to satisfy the electrostatic boundary conditions, producing macroscopic electric fields. While patch fields were first discussed extensively in the context of thermionic emission they are present near polycrystalline metal structures of any type, including electrodes and
Re: [Vo]:Was it ever detected isotopes with medium half lives in transmutations
See Reports of tritium production from Rossi-like experiments Jones Beene http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg49057.html On Sun, Nov 13, 2011 at 11:10 PM, Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.comwrote: Oh! Nice! Would you mind showing a paper with such transmutation? Perhaps an example in each order of magnitude in the interval. 2011/11/14 Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net *From:* Daniel Rocha ** ** **Ø **Before seeing it, I am referring to transmutations of cold fusion. I wonder why such isotopes haven't been seen, as far as I could search the literature. ** ** Not sure what you are referring to, but there are many isotopes in that stability range – notably radium 226 (1,600 years half-life) which was commercially important many years ago for clock and watch dials. ** **
Re: [Vo]:Oct. 28 demo: 3716 liters of water vaporized
Rich Murray: Re: Joshua Cude, can you assess Robert E. Godes, Brillouin Energy Corp. energy claims and theory? Rich Murray 2011.02.27 http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg43133.html You brought up Brillouin Energy Corporation awhile back. You asked for some reaction from people. Many people think that Brillouin experiments supports Rossi's claims. Mary Yugo has Steorn on the brain. These two systems:Steorn and Rossi, are not alike. I would like a critic of Brillouin Energy Corporation from the naysayers; their science is on a track that somewhat parallels Rossi. Mary will be more technically conformable with Brillouin since it does produce neutrons and radioactive wastes. Brillouin is also very open and you can replicate their reaction right from their documentation. Kind Regards: Axil On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 12:00 AM, Rich Murray rmfor...@gmail.com wrote: Well, Mary Yugo, I find the similarities between Steorn and Rossi pretty compelling -- you've shifted my attitude a lot -- it's less plausible for me now to hope that Rossi is merely deluded, rather than running a competent scam -- you suggest it is actually to carry out such a scam and get away with the cash -- obviously works over 2 decades so far for BlackLight Power... thanks, Rich On Sun, Nov 13, 2011 at 9:49 AM, Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote: It's pretty easy to scam a customer if you only sell one item and flee, if you sell items so cheaply that the duped find the cost of recovery higher than the value recovered, or if the item sold is actually illegal. But selling large industrial equipment to a knowledgeable customer with a large legal department, in the hope of then selling them another one in three months is a scammers nightmare. Investors exchange money for an unknown future return. Business plans typically change radically as they encounter reality, unknown unknowns dominate the landscape. Decisions to invest are often irrational, emotional, and have less to do with physics than with hope. Investors are the ideal targets for a scammer: they are already dealing in intangibles and the time lines are long and the opportunities for the scammer to exit, stage left, are numerous. Investors are making high risk, high return bets. When we discuss the flow of money here, I think we should be clear about the role of the customer vs. investor, and draw conclusions as appropriate. Steorns actions are entirely consistent with wishful thinking on the part of investors and entrepreneur (if not an outright scam); Rossis actions are entirely consistent with a bold attempt to bootstrap a business on personal capital and customer sales. Perhaps you're relying too much on what Rossi *says*. The Rossi story looks superficially much like Steorn's. In January 2010, Steorn gave a big and flamboyant but silly demo at the Waterways Museum in Dublin. They claimed that their spinning magnetic motor was overunity (making more energy than it used) but it required an obvious and large battery to run. It was tested in public but only with Steorn's instruments, setup and methods. The test results were not as convincing as Rossi's but Steorn said they were good. In this case, the audience asked better questions than the sort Rossi is asked after his demos. Steorn deflected the questions. They also removed the question and answer portion from their videos of the event. Fortunately, someone else preserved them. They helped confirm in many people's minds that Steorn did not have any unusual device and that their claims were wrong. Steorn also claimed that they were setting aside two days of the museum rental period in order to let private companies who had applied to test the device do so on their own terms. That is analogous to Rossi's claim that someone bought a megawatt plant and is testing it. Since then, Steorn said many companies tested but they have never told anyone who the companies were. No company has ever confirmed that they tested or bought any Steorn product. Free Energy Truth (Craig Brown) reported only glowing praise of those events, not the proper questions and ridiculous answers that followed. I don't recall exactly but best I remember, Sterling Allan also continued to promote Steorn from his site despite the bizarre results of the Waterways demo. Possibly, that is where we will be in a year with Rossi. He may claim more sales but they may be secret also. He may claim university research is being done but it also may remain secret. Steorn's scam, for those who accept that it was and is a scam, was collecting 20+ million Euros from investors. They did not scam buyers/customers because there probably never was one. One theory about Rossi is that it's an investor scam, not a purchaser scam. You are relying on Rossi's word for the customer being real and distinct and separate from Rossi. But even Jed Rothwell admits that much
Re: [Vo]:Was it ever detected isotopes with medium half lives in transmutations
If you read Mileys results, he produced 39 elements many new with diverging isotopic concentrations. One of the most interesting parts of Miley’s work (presented in the slides) is that he has created a unique analysis tool to do precise but broad based analysis of content of elements within the nickel powder. He checks the powder, sets up the machine, heats up the device, then lets it run wherein it generates more energy than is put into it. Then he takes the powder and analyzes its content again. He finds that 39 different elements have statistically significant shifts of isotope abundance. That’s interesting to say the least. The results really haven’t been processed by anyone yet in terms of what it means for a theory describing how these things work, I have my own ideas but that doesn’t mean much. But Miley wants the test run on Rossi’s device and I sure would like to see that also. On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 12:17 AM, Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.comwrote: What about other elements than tritium? Tritium is a consequence of the decay of Lithium and Berilium formed by the successive stages of deuterium fusion or hydrogen, for example. I am thinking more about heavier elements, that should be formed by transmutation of the containing lattice. 2011/11/14 Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com See Reports of tritium production from Rossi-like experiments Jones Beene http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg49057.html On Sun, Nov 13, 2011 at 11:10 PM, Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.comwrote: Oh! Nice! Would you mind showing a paper with such transmutation? Perhaps an example in each order of magnitude in the interval. 2011/11/14 Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net *From:* Daniel Rocha ** ** **Ø **Before seeing it, I am referring to transmutations of cold fusion. I wonder why such isotopes haven't been seen, as far as I could search the literature. ** ** Not sure what you are referring to, but there are many isotopes in that stability range – notably radium 226 (1,600 years half-life) which was commercially important many years ago for clock and watch dials. ** **
Re: [Vo]: Rossi Deserves Our Gratitude
To me, Rossi’s actions are entirely understandable given the nascent state of his invention. In the very early stages of development, a presenter at a sales demo will emphasize what works and try to hide what doesn’t work well. I confess I have done this myself. It is the job of the audience to tease out the truth of the state of development. It takes work to do this. One cannot sit back and whine that the true does not unfold before them without some effort to inquire and analyze. In this cat and mouse game between Rossi and his customers, Rossi will be developing his invention for many years to come continuing by revising and improving it as he goes along just as he has done for the last year. Edison, the Wright brothers, and Tesla did the same sort of things as Rossi is doing now. Customer feedback is important which presupposes that the product will evolve over time. Nobody introduces a world changing technology full blown into our world right from its start. On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 1:33 PM, Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote: So let’s show a little more appreciation and compassion toward the guy that got the ball rolling. His business plans might cause him to be eclipsed by a more professional organization now that the door has been cracked open but I will always remember what Mr. Rossi has accomplished no matter what transpires. I disagree. Rossi could have easily proven his device and principle real by now, many times over at little risk and cost. He was told, here and elsewhere including his blog and probably by phone, exactly how to do that. Instead, he continued to use bad measurement methods and brief tests, all conducted under his auspices. For some inexplicable reason, he decided to make a large machine consisting of small modules. There would be no conceivable reason for anyone to buy it except to reverse engineer it if it's real.. Nobody can prove he actually sold it. Nobody can prove *convincingly* that Rossi's E-cat works as he says he does. All of this is entirely Rossi's fault. I have no idea what if anything he accomplished except to keep a monumental soap opera going for nine months.
Re: [Vo]:Defkalion : first pictures of their lab released.
“I have seen nothing to suggest it and I would be careful not to base any decision whatever on it.” Both Rossi and Defkalion are doing their best to keep all the decision making in their own hands and out of the hands of their propagandist detractors. On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 3:33 PM, Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 12:25 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.comwrote: I refer to your posts on the Defkalion site. You repeated a million times (maybe a few less) that they should show you anything at all. That was your desire for many posts and now they have done what you requested. Now, you need to let the world know that they did what you begged them to do and not keep raising the bar. Is it possible that nothing could satisfy your desire to trash Rossi and Defkalion? What is the next issue for you to harp upon? Excuse me for being abrupt, but I do not see how the broken record repetition is going to improve the world. You can be as abrupt as you like. But it'd be more interesting if you were also correct and if you showed that you understood the very real issues I raise. I asked many things of Defkalion-- evidence of their government regulatory application, a photo of a factory, people making lots of Hyperions, performance data, evidence of customers, and most of all independent testing to show it works. Perhaps you missed it. Defkalion showed a few blurry images of some lab equipment. That's nice and it demonstrates that they did build up *something* related to Rossi's supposed invention. What it is and what they did is, however, nor much clearer than before. They have provided some images but there is no way to know what those signify. So please stop examining the minutiae of my requests and consider the broad picture. What Defkalion has done is not much better than nothing. Being a broken record is a response to other broken records -- those that keep insisting that the world is now different because of Rossi and Defkalion. I have seen nothing to suggest it and I would be careful not to base any decision whatever on it.
Re: [Vo]: Rossi Deserves Our Gratitude
From my perspective gleaned from many months of Rossi watching, Rossi is not attempting to perpetrate a SCAM. If SCAMMING was Rossi’s intent, why would Rossi complicate each and every demo with a new reactor design? No, Rossi wants to perfect his invention through these numerous dog and pony shows and has complicated each one in their turn by adding new unknowns to serve to only confuse his scamming message, and then compound the confusion by making an attempt to keep the details of his design changes a secret. In an effective SCAM, just keep the scam simple and get the money quick on the way out of town. I can’t see past why Rossi would confuse his scam attempt by completely changing his design over and over and over again. This goes against my concept of how a good scam should be done. This scam, if it is one, is taking way too long and is very confusing and convoluted which is against everything that a good scam should be. I can guarantee you that if Rossi's machine worked… It’s all in the meaning of the word WORKED… The E-Cat works to a 1.0 release level. Remember when Microsoft released their initial operating system? It was almost useless but fun to play with. It would not support any mission critical real world functions but it had promise…great promise. It would take Microsoft decades to perfect their product. With every day that passed it would have a few less bugs and would stay up just a little longer. Rossi has just released Cold Fusion 1.0. He will need many years to perfect his new invention to mission critical capability in industry. 1.0 releases are infamous for the aggravation that they cause. If you are a first adopter and and a cold fusion geek who desn't mind some extensive and never ending back and forth with the vender, you will have a ball, otherwise if you need the reactor to do a job, your experience as Rossi's customer will be hell. On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 3:14 PM, Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote: Rossi and other other researchers have encountered opposition from people in other ways. Especially from people such as Yugo and Park who accuse them of being frauds. I never said Rossi *is* a fraud. I have said many times and many different ways that his overall story is unlikely and that he *could be* a fraud. That's not the same thing. I also said that Rossi could easily prove any number of different safe ways that he's not a fraud. YOU (Jed) have told him the methods yourself many times and he has never availed himself of them. You keep saying the results of Rossi's demos were obvious but there is continuing disagreement over that from very smart people so you could be wrong. You have said Rossi lies at times but somehow that his lies exempt claims about his device's performance. That makes no sense. You and others persist in making unlikely excuses for Rossi. Rossi's problem is a failure to conduct his tests properly and to get independent testing. The skeptics merely point this out. They also point out simple and safe, inexpensive ways to remedy the problems. It's Rossi's fault, not the fault of the skeptics, that he doesn't follow your advice, much less skeptics' advice. Axil sees a cat and mouse game. I can guarantee you that if Rossi's machine worked and he showed it to just one reliable, intelligent, wealthy and influential person, a robust source of fusion energy from inexpensive fuel would be no cat and mouse game. Not for very long.
Re: [Vo]:Nanomagnetism Theory
Examining the web's limited oscillon information, it would appear that it is important that the powder not be bound to the side of the reactor as conjectured by others. The powder must remain free and could be located in the center of the reactor as stated on the ecat.com web site. In defense of the “particles bound to the side of the reactor conjecture’ made with the greatest respect to your opinion… I don’t yet see a justification that the powder must vibrate. In fact, Rossi has stated that the powder was in the micron range which may be too heavy to be affected by sub-nanometer quantum mechanical vibrations which affect atoms at very low temperatures. Rossi has indicated that his powder is micron sized. It is the tubercle surface coverings on the particles that are nano-sized. Vacuum energy springing forth from any particular point in space, is most probably too feeble to move a micron sized particle into motion. But the particle may need to be as small as those found in cold hydrogen dusty plasma. A dusty plasma contains tiny charged particles of dust (as typically found in space), which also behaves like a plasma. Plasma that contains larger particles is called grain plasma. The information we have about the Rossi reaction points to the formation of exotic hydrogen spices comprised of multiple atoms configured in a number of crystalline forms. It may be these plasma derived dust particles which are the subject to vibrations. Next, the temperatures within the Rossi reactor are above the Curie temperature of nickel which would remove any magnetic property interactions that are mentioned associated with these vibrations. However, Rydberg hydrogen crystals are exquisitely reactive to magnetic influence because of their electromagnetic characteristics. Furthermore, in living systems that have been referenced, nickel is seldom if ever involved, but hydrogen in some form or another are always found. In short, Rydberg hydrogen crystals may be the subject of the oscillon mechanism. On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 12:37 PM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote: Examining the web's limited oscillon information, it would appear that it is important that the powder not be bound to the side of the reactor as conjectured by others. The powder must remain free and could be located in the center of the reactor as stated on the ecat.com web site. Also, if oscillon activity does explain the anomalous heat in the Rossi Reactor, it is easily understood why an external exciter is necessary, eg the frequencies described by AR. Now comes the speculation for the heat source. It definitely could be a ZPF heat generator considering that the standing collisions could be limiting the pair formation much like a Casimir cavity or could be allowing rapid pair separation similar to the mirror discussed previously. In such case, the energy source could really be positron annihilation, each one liberating 0.511 MeV. I think Ahern, et al have found the secret with this oscillon theory. If so, the new game begins. Here is a simple explanation of oscillons: http://www.raczynski.com/art/oscillon.htm T
Re: [Vo]:ECAT site claims thin Ni layer at center of reactor core
One indication that speaks against the production of steady state plasma is the pulsed nature of the power fed to the internal heater. The internal heater is most probably made of nichrome. *Nichrome* is a non-magnetic alloy of nickel, chromium, and often iron, usually used as a resistance wire. When the electric power pulses into the internal heater, plasma may form very close to the hot surface of the internal heater. When the power is periodically removed, the plasma very near the surface of the internal heater cools and Rydberg species of some form will assemble into crystals and float throughout the volume of the hydrogen envelop. In a pulsed power feed mode, the power may be high during the on period. However when the power is measured over time, the meter will measure an average power delivered to the heater which will be much less then that maximum power that produced the plasma in burst mode. Also, the temperature of the hydrogen envelope must always remain below the plasma production temperature to avoid a runaway burn up reaction. I conclude from the aforementioned train of thought, the active agent of the Rossi reaction must be stable at low temperatures under that production temperature needed for production of steady state plasma. On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 12:21 PM, Ron Wormus prot...@frii.com wrote: True enough but the temp is a bit higher. I just don't see igniting a plasma at those pressures with the input power being reported. Ron --On Thursday, November 17, 2011 2:50 PM -0200 Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com wrote: Sun's core operates in even higher pressure! :) 2011/11/17 Ron Wormus prot...@frii.com What makes you think that a plasma is formed in Ross's device? It operates at high pressure (25 Bars) so I doubt that plasma is involved at all.
Re: [Vo]:Nanomagnetism Theory
Rossi is not the only show in town. There is good promise that there will be a hand full of other LENR events that will hold our interest over the winter. Rossi is just one of many interesting LENR players that are in the offing. First off, I am interested in what Brian Ahern of Ames National Laboratory has to say in early December. This will hold interest for quite a while. Ahern has also been guiding George Miley’s group at UIUC on this nanotechnology, and the group seems to be enjoying a great deal of success in the month of October. Interesting… Miley has been the patron saint of my LENR opinions for sometime now. Miley has researched Rydberg hydrogen species and I have not seen any deviation to reduce his interest in this possible causation. What is missing in Miley's theories includes exact details on how Rydberg species produces LENR power. Bose Einstein condensates were often mentioned as involved. But maybe this has been recently replaced with a new powder causation mechanism. It seems to me that the long term survival of the transiton metal lattice excludes nuclear reactions as we commonly understand them. IT PROVIDES A CONCISE EXPLANATION FOR THE BIOENERGETICS OBSERVED IN ALL ASPECTS OF NATURE.” LENR in living systems also exclude traditional nuclear reactions. * * * * * * On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 1:20 AM, Rich Murray rmfor...@gmail.com wrote: Given that REAL is single, self-interactive, fractal and infinite in every possible way, then it is a reasonable fantasy to guess that something like adjacent nearby realms of yet undiscovered energetic things exist, able to feed tiny to huge to infinite amounts of energy and momentum into our realm in unexpected ways, just as in 1896 when unexpected and inexplicable excess heat output appeared in ancient uranium atoms, with various lighter weight heavy element inpurities, including lead -- so all of us have to always be alert for black swan anomalies -- in the long run, more fun, too... from an incompetent scientific layman and pragmatic skeptic... the new realm was the nuclear, incredibly deep within the flighty little clouds of the chemical level of electrons and a million times more energetic... Anyone predict that? Rutherford looked for and found proof for the nucleus in 1911, using theory to measure the size and density of the nucleus in the first nuclear scattering experiments with alpha particles from radium, with the scientist peering at a screen in the dark, counting the little flashes -- did he ever shiver, hair standing on end? Only 34 years to Hiroshima... the output of the Sun in all directions for hundreds of millions of years was a similar embarassment, until 1905, when E = MC^2 opened the door to more of REAL a crack -- On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 9:38 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: Examining the web's limited oscillon information, it would appear that it is important that the powder not be bound to the side of the reactor as conjectured by others. The powder must remain free and could be located in the center of the reactor as stated on the ecat.com web site. In defense of the “particles bound to the side of the reactor conjecture’ made with the greatest respect to your opinion… I don’t yet see a justification that the powder must vibrate. In fact, Rossi has stated that the powder was in the micron range which may be too heavy to be affected by sub-nanometer quantum mechanical vibrations which affect atoms at very low temperatures. Rossi has indicated that his powder is micron sized. It is the tubercle surface coverings on the particles that are nano-sized. Vacuum energy springing forth from any particular point in space, is most probably too feeble to move a micron sized particle into motion. But the particle may need to be as small as those found in cold hydrogen dusty plasma. A dusty plasma contains tiny charged particles of dust (as typically found in space), which also behaves like a plasma. Plasma that contains larger particles is called grain plasma. The information we have about the Rossi reaction points to the formation of exotic hydrogen spices comprised of multiple atoms configured in a number of crystalline forms. It may be these plasma derived dust particles which are the subject to vibrations. Next, the temperatures within the Rossi reactor are above the Curie temperature of nickel which would remove any magnetic property interactions that are mentioned associated with these vibrations. However, Rydberg hydrogen crystals are exquisitely reactive to magnetic influence because of their electromagnetic characteristics. Furthermore, in living systems that have been referenced, nickel is seldom if ever involved, but hydrogen in some form or another are always found. In short, Rydberg hydrogen crystals may be the subject of the oscillon mechanism. On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 12:37 PM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.comwrote
[Vo]:Scientists create light from vacuum
Scientists create light from vacuum http://www.physorg.com/news/2011-11-scientists-vacuum.html Is this new? this demo of the dynamical Casimir effect was done in the recent past.I remember.
Re: [Vo]:Gain from the cold side
I for one forgive Jones for his slight breech of posting etiquette for briefly expressing the understandable frustrations that will eventually bubble up in the trench warfare that surrounds the Rossi issue. But looking beyond the noise, the scientific implications of LENR discoveries could open a doorway into some seemingly unresolvable questions in cutting edge physics. LENR may provide a doorway of understanding into dark/zero point/vacuum energy, additional dimensions of space time, quantum mechanical entanglement, oscillon vibrations, and many other neat ideas that jones will introduce us to. Jones and his like make this site interesting and I forgive his venial sins of protocol as trivial. The equation in this case is clear. You do not condemn a man when he steps on an ant. On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 2:39 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: I agree with what you say Terry. Dave -Original Message- From: Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Fri, Nov 18, 2011 2:30 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Gain from the cold side On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 2:07 PM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: As for the scammed investors: fools and their money will always be parted – with or without our help. Rossi represents chump-change compared to Enron or Madoff – or especially the hot fusion swindle. Hah! If you look at the real cost of the hot fusion swindle you have to consider the consequential costs. Had MIT correctly reported their positive results at the time, we could be will within a LENR energy society. And it's not just the dollars but the cost in human lives, the wars fought over oil, and on and on. Future history will condemn those who perpetrated and participated in this swindle. If there is a future history. T
Re: [Vo]:Gain from the cold side
If cold fusion is ever properly demonstrated, thousands of scientists will want to investigate it just as thousands turned to PF when they made their initial announcement. Excess heat, wet steam, and the other legions of nonsense offered to degrade the term cold fusion are not the issue. At the heart of the matter is transmutation of elements without radioactive decay. This miracle is all important. Such wonderment is impossible within the constraints of our current science. I think that this degradation of the term cold fusion is misdirection, prevarication perpetrated by the enemies of the ascent of man, the perpetuators of human misery, and fools bewitched by the simple and ignorant. What is being explored of late under the term LENR is the craftsmanship of nano-technology and the mysticism of quantum mechanics. It is beyond dispute that recent experiment by Miley, and Arata most prominent among others together with the numerous demos by Rossi offer examples of the transmutation of elements that are inconsistent with any theories propounded by the witch doctors at CERN. Many billions of euros have been dumped into the big science machines in Europe and America to find the Higgs boson keystone that would purport to validate the current thinking in the science of the small. But this make or break concept has not been found as real and will not be found so the scientific work of decades will eventually fall. But science has a chance to open a new door into reality which the power barons which now bestride, smother and strangle science will not allow to be explored. What is your opinion on that? Should human ignorance persist to advance unending funding of dead end science? If you do, you certainly must draw your paycheck from CERN. On Sat, Nov 19, 2011 at 9:08 PM, Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Nov 19, 2011 at 5:49 PM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: *From:* Mary Yugo ** ** Are you always this flippant with your logical deductions - when faced with the inadequacy of the same old lame argument that we have been hearing for weeks? I suppose you realize that fewer and fewer participants here are taking your seriously anymore – so why not play the fool. ** ** What it means, of course, is that getting clean cost effective energy from non-combustion, non fission sources is extremely difficult, and requires proper funding levels. ** ** Conventional science has not only failed society badly in this regard, many of the recipients of public largess have actively conspired to keep funding away from alternative solutions. ** ** We cannot really expect the ‘killer paper’ from LENR without a fair proportion of that $20 billion… ** ** … but we might get lucky and get it anyway, and sooner than anyone thinks. ** ** The paper cited in the prior post should have opened up the floodgates of funding – as it is almost there - instead you find the opposite happening: a good research paper leads to a “circle the wagons mentality” for a few thousand high level physicists, who can see their cushy 6 figure incomes and stress-free jobs going away, not just away – but the funds being transferred to “uncredentialed” inventors and engineers. It has been almost a class war type of thing since 1989 - with the Ivory Tower, Ivy League set realizing that they are basically unemployable in industry or Public Universities - where performance counts - at anywhere near their current compensation packages - if the alternatives succeed. Is that because none of them could use any basic skills in a new discipline? Did buggy mechanics all die off when cars came out? Of course not, they switched to working on cars. If cold fusion is ever properly demonstrated, thousands of scientists will want to investigate it just as thousands turned to PF when they made their initial announcement. The problem was that nobody could replicate what they did and, in the end, neither could they.
Re: [Vo]:Tovima: Defkalion says the catalyst formula is not Rossi's
At 02:31 PM 11/21/2011, Mary Yugo wrote: Just out of curiosity, is there anything written about nuclear catalysts other than related to LENR/cold fusion energy generation? I never heard of a nuclear catalyst before Rossi. I've always thought of a catalyst as a substance which changes the rate of a chemical reaction without being consumed and without changing the equilibrium constant of the underlying reaction. I will also give this one a shot. A number of prominent commenters on the subject of cold fusion: Dr. Miley and Kim, think that quantum entanglement is central to the reaction that transmutes elements. I also hold to this speculation to be true. In explanation as background, the alkali metals are a series of chemical elements in the periodic table. In the modern IUPAC nomenclature, the alkali metals comprise the group 1 elements, along with hydrogen. The alkali metals are lithium (Li), sodium (Na), potassium (K), rubidium (Rb), cesium (Cs), and francium (Fr), Hydrogen (H), although nominally also a member of Group 1. The Rossi catalyst could be a compound of one of these elements. It has been observed that in certain processes involving cold dusty plasmas including thermal-electric processes, that alkali metals will form quantum mechanical(QM) entangled ensembles of atoms that will tend to produce coherent entanglements of exotic hydrogen species of dust or crystals which hold promise to drive unanticipated nuclear processes like cold fusion. (QM) entanglement was rejected by Albert Einstein as totally unbelievable and contrary to his theory of relativity but after many years of experimentation (QM) entanglement was observed to defy the rules of the Einsteinian Universe thereby defying its rules for both space and time. The question becomes what happens when an entangled sub-atomic particle enters a nuclear reaction when it finds its way into an atomic nucleus and participates in that nuclear reaction. How do the strong force and/or the weak force affect a proton and/or an electron that is entangled with some 100 other protons and electrons outside and far away from that nucleus? Is the entanglement of the tunneling particle broken or does it still remain uncertain (stays entangled)? It has been shown that QM blockade caused by a nuclear catalyst will affect material over very long distances (centimeters) by inducing that exposed material (hydrogen and/or nickel) into an entangled state. This is a possible QM mechanism that underlies how the Rossi catalyst might work. On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 2:34 PM, Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 11:32 AM, Alan J Fletcher a...@well.com wrote: Look up Muon-Catalyzed Fusion. (Recently discussed with Joshua Crude). http://www.mail-archive.com/**vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg56320.**htmlhttp://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg56320.html Thanks. Will do.
Re: [Vo]:Published today in the UK
I am starting to see things from your perspective, if you are correct about propagation speed inside a nucleus being faster than C and if this holds true for super atoms of condensed matter then you have a potential force converter where energy supplied by normal propagation limit of C now has an alternate path through a BEC that is several times faster than C. The teleportation of entangled quantum mechanical properties has been seen to exceed 10,000 times the speed of light at a minimum. See: Quantum weirdness wins again: Entanglement clocks in at 10,000+ times faster than light http://www.scientificamerican.com/blog/post.cfm?id=quantum-weirdnes-wins-again-entangl-2008-08-13 On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 5:04 PM, Roarty, Francis X francis.x.roa...@lmco.com wrote: Frank, I am starting to see things from your perspective, if you are correct about propagation speed inside a nucleus being faster than C and if this holds true for super atoms of condensed matter then you have a potential force converter where energy supplied by normal propagation limit of C now has an alternate path through a BEC that is several times faster than C. I think you are implying this superluminal propagation leads to what the British author was describing as a translation between magnetic and gravatic energy – he actually used the analogy of a tsunami below. The theory doesn #8217;t by itself explain excess heat or gravity anomalies but I think you may have defined the key metrics that make this possible. Supplying the other leg of an oscillator tank and energy of some sort to operate the tank could take many forms but the superluminal portion of the tank would provide the anomalous conversions required to exploit the energy source whether you think it is ZPE, LENR or whatever. [snip]Znidaric suggests that the BEC in the superconducting disc somehow locally amplifies the magnetic components of the forces. An increased magnetic field is required to carry the same amount of energy at a lower velocity. The process is similar to that of a tsunami, as the tidal wave slows, its height piles up in an amount necessary to carry its energy. This increased gravitomagnteic field gives apparent antigravity effects. In other words, the weak and strong forces and gravity balance out via their amplified magnetic components. Znidarsic emphasizes that this does not violate any law of conservation, as it is known that magnetic, as well as electric permittivity can be modified locally. The BEC therefore, acts like a soft iron core, only much more so, as the magnetic component of mass (gravitomagnetic force) is only 10-39 that of the ordinary electromagnetic field When asked how that amplification could be achieved, Znidarsic says he does not exactly know, but suspects it involves an increase in the magnetic component of the fields that compensates for the reduced velocity of the fields; “just as water flows in a river bed through a valley electrons transit between states through channels of matching impedance.” Could this be the “zero-point energy” that has been the holy grail of Haisch and Puthoff and their followers, including Podkletnov and Znidaric [/snip] *** * ** ** ** ** *From:* fznidar...@aol.com [mailto:fznidar...@aol.com] *Sent:* Monday, November 21, 2011 3:31 PM *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com; acgrav...@gmail.com; jbarro...@hotmail.com; ajo...@tribdem.com; andy_buc...@cfc.com; leola2...@gmail.com; bob.isenb...@power.alstom.com; bobp...@umd.edu; coo...@ctc.com; mldais...@yahoo.com; dzu...@crownamerican.com; edit...@kurzweilai.net; edit...@sciam.com; ew...@heathkit.com; earfu...@verizon.net; cefo...@windstream.net; frederick.e.la...@power.alstom.com; g...@ias-spes.org; debroger...@roadrunner.com; h heff...@mtaonline.net; threes...@aol.com; iass...@ias-spes.org; i...@erols.com; isenb...@aol.com; jack.d.wal...@power.alstom.com; jedrothw...@gmail.com; jmar...@aol.com; jmar...@aol.de; ajo...@tribdem.com; khug...@ameriservfinancial.com; larryleeg...@hotmail.com; lars.o.blomb...@power.alstom.com; frederick.e.la...@power.alstom.com; mcgyver28...@yahoo.com; mk...@aol.com; mm...@joy.com; mrkn...@hotmail.com; nickgjur...@atlanticbb.net; pam.b...@navy.mil; paul.fos...@power.alstom.com; puth...@aol.com; mike1...@atlanticbb.net; rvargo1...@yahoo.com; sbarro...@hotmail.com; s...@scalettacpa.com; spectrumradionetw...@gmail.com; st...@infinite-energy.com; ste...@newenergytimes.com; tcvfr...@aol.com; diaterl...@yahoo.com; klthoma...@gmail.com; howard...@gmail.com; ntho...@usa.redcross.org; tkep...@yahoo.com; tocbutter...@yahoo.com; william.ba...@meppi.com; williamla...@bellsouth.net; wkep...@genion.com; wkep...@rrienergy.com; john..dudeck@genon.com; joseph.zambo...@gmail.com *Subject:* EXTERNAL: [Vo]: Published today in the UK ** ** http://www.i-sis.org.uk/The_Z_theory_of_everything.php ** ** it a nice article ** ** Frank
Re: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:Overview of (Ahern) Vibronic Energy Technologies Approach
My intuition tells me that quantum mechanical entanglement is the primary mechanism that underlies what is going on in “Cold Fusion” Cooper pairing of fermions could be one of many ways that nuclear reactions happen in a way that the resultant nuclear energy associated with the relaxation of the excited nucleus is QM teleported to a non-local reference frame microns away as thermal energy. For example, one proton of a cooper pair tunnels into a nickel nucleus and the kinetic energy of the nuclear event is teleported to the remote paired proton: the other member proton of the cooper pair far away from the nuclear reaction. Cooper pairs are formed primarily by phonon excitation in a metal lattice. As in superconductivity, so the thermal state of the lattice, the type of material (nickel isotope) involved, the many and sundry mechanisms of QM entanglement that can occur, and the paramagnetic nature of the material cause by temperatures of the metal (nickel) lattice being above the Currie point may all be very important and come into play in an interactive way. On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 3:45 PM, Roarty, Francis X francis.x.roa...@lmco.com wrote: I like the timeline Ahern presents to connect the dots and would like to know more about the VETC information regarding vibrational properties between 3-15 nm. The information appears to be from experimental result and doesn't suggest a particular theory responsible for the atypical vibration modes or where the energy is coming from.. did I get that right? Is this also the basis for oscilions and is it just a coincidence that this is the most active range for Casimir geometry? Ahern also notes modified half lives of radioactive gas in these regions but doesn't mention Jan Naudt's paper suggesting that these gases are relativistic. Also mentioned in the time line [snip] Romanowski (6) has suggested that copper is the promoter element best suited for dense hydrogen loading.[/snip] which is an entirely new slant that I don't think was previously considered on Vortes that the copper however derived in the reactor is NOT just an addative or ash but rather an active part of the ongoing reaction that aids in condensing the hydrogen! Regards Fran -Original Message- From: pagnu...@htdconnect.com [mailto:pagnu...@htdconnect.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 23, 2011 1:47 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:Overview of (Ahern) Vibronic Energy Technologies Approach I don't think this has been posted to Vortex before. I believe it describes Brian Ahern's approach to LENR. Does this imply he believe Rossi's results? Any comments? Thanks, Lou Pagnucco From: http://www.scribd.com/doc/55221791/Clean-Enenergy-From-Nano-Materials /**START** New Clean Energy Opportunity Vibronic Energy Technologies Corp In 1961 newly appointed physicist Otto Reifenschweiller infused 15 nanometer titanium particles with tritium and found a 40% reduction in radioactivity by cycling the material above 140 degreesC (1). His mentor advised him that this result was heretical and advised burying the result in order to have a viable career. Indeed, he buried the result until after his retirement in 1998 as Director of the Laboratory at Philips Eindhoven ND, perhaps the premiere research laboratory in Europe. In 1995 VETC personnel identified a new class of vibrational properties in a narrow size regime between 3 - 15 nanometers (2). All materials processed in this very narrow size regime have unusually large vibrational modes. The modes are so unusual that they catalyze a wide range of new energy pathways. In 2008 Yashiaki Arata, Japan's most decorated scientist, made a major announcement about energy release from nanopowders infused with hydrogen (3). Arata and Reifenschweiller both used metal nanopowders below 15 nanometers and both observed a surprise in output. Reifenschweiler saw a reduction in radiative output. Arata saw energy output without any of the anticipated radiation. Clearly the chaotic movement of the dissolved hydrogen isotopes was profoundly affected. The Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) (4) agreed to a replication effort of the Arata experiment that began in July 2009. The Arata reports of continuous thermal energy output with no electrical energy input were achieved with full reproducibility. Arata used nanoscale nickel-palladium islands encased in a matrix of zirconium oxide and infused with hydrogen gas. On January 15, 2011 Sergio Focardi and Andreas Rossi (5)demonstrated commercial scale, 12 kilowatt power output from nanomaterials in fused with hydrogen similar to the EPRI study.They used nickel nanopowders with an undisclosed promoter element to enhance the loading of hydrogen to ever higher concentrations. Romanowski (6) has suggested that copper is the promoter element best suited for dense hydrogen loading. These high loading conditions are believed to favor a new form
Re: [Vo]:Short report on Kullander's cold fusion lecture
I wonder if Rossi will change his tune on testing if Defkalion starts conducting public tests. A little competition is worth a million MYs On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 10:58 PM, Eric Woudenberg e...@woudy.org wrote: Mary Yugo writes: Thanks. ... And did anyone ask what he thinks about Rossi insists on using the heat of evaporation of water to test the e-cat when simply repeating Levi's test with better controls and documentation would be much more probative? Hi Mary, I've also wondered about this but I recall Levi saying in a video somewhere that Rossi was actually alarmed during this test that the core was running too hot. My guess is that running it with liquid water ends up leaving the core too cold to produce much excess heat. Somehow 100c or thereabouts appears to be the reactor's sweet spot (by accident or design). I'm on board with you that a few well conducted tests by independent observers would radically change this whole story. I wonder if Rossi will change his tune on testing if Defkalion starts conducting public tests. Eric
Re: [Vo]:Overview of (Ahern) Vibronic Energy Technologies Approach
What I am curious about is whether the reduced radioactivity that Reifenschweiler observed for tritium and heavier nuclei meant that the radioactive decays were actually suppressed, or that the energetic decay products were thermalized in the small monocrystalline particles via some hypothetical collective quantum enhancement of absorption. I speculate that the energetic decay products were thermalized. In an experimental series performed by Piantelli, he observed the production of either heat or gamma radiation but not both at the same time, if memory serves. From the demo of the first one liter Rossi reactor during the time at startup when the lattice was cold, a massive radiation burst appeared for a second or two. From this, I deduce that the energy production mechanism will generate large amounts of radiation if the lattice is cold and the phonons present in the lattice are not energetic enough. One problem of that early design was the generation of bursts of radiation during startup and shutdown. I assume that the lattice was cold at those times. Rossi was greatly concerned by these radiation bursts, and changed his design so that an external heater warmed the nickel lattice before the reaction begins. This tells me that there is a second quantum mechanical reaction that converts the radiation generated in the metal atom’s nucleus to thermal energy within the lattice. The lack of radioactive decay products after the Rossi reactor is shut down also speaks to a radiation thermalization mechanism rather than a radiation suppression mechanism. From Otto Reifenschweiler: This assumption is confirmed by the observation, that a decrease of tritium radioactivity is never observed with Ti-preparations which are generally used for storage of tritium. Such preparations don.t have the above stated properties. They consist of single and big non monocrystalline Ti-particles, in my experience. The radiation thermalization mechanism is a surface phenomenon that is maximized by the large surface area of nano-powder. The a variant of the quantum Zeno effect in which an unstable particle, if observed continuously or in the case of quantum activity in a metal lattice cycles rapidly through repeating cycles of entanglement in a continuing process of quantum decoherence, that particle will thermalize its nuclear power output as thermal energy in the metal lattice. The originating mechanism of the nuclear energy is not caused by vibrations (phonons) in the lattice. However, the thermalization of that nuclear energy is caused by the rapid cycling decoherence of the entangled metal atoms caused by quantum phonons vibrating in that lattice. Phonons in the metal lattice will cause the energy of the unstable particle to be transferred away from its originating nucleus and enter the metal lattice non-locally some large distance away. This may be why Rossi went with a micron sized particle rather than a nano-sized particle. The question now is what particle produces the LENR energy. Speculating, that unstable particle is probably the transition metal atom; in Rossi’s case, it is the nickel atom. This nuclear reaction is very weird in the Rossi reactor where it does not rip that lattice apart but contrary to all good sense, thermalizes the lattice into a gentle low grade heat. I can only speculate that the entanglement mechanism provides an otherworldly energy pipeline that gently moves energy/heat away from the nuclear production zone. On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 11:09 PM, pagnu...@htdconnect.com wrote: Francis, Axil, What I am curious about is whether the reduced radioactivity that Reifenschweiler observed for tritium and heavier nuclei meant that the radioactive decays were actually suppressed, or that the energetic decay products were thermalized in the small monocrystalline particles via some hypothetical collective quantum enhancement of absorption. Reifenschweiler is also puzzled by the temperature dependence of this effect. Crystal size and proximity of the crystals appear critical also. No wonder these phenomena are so elusive. Maybe, also some new physics appears in the mesoscale at the boundary separating classical from quantum dynamics? One theory for similar phenomena has been proposed in: Quantum Zeno Effect, Nuclear Conversion and Photoionization in Solids http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0003491696900639 BTW, some of Reifenschweiler's refences are: Reduced radioactivity of tritium in small titanium particles http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/Reifenschwreducedrad.pdf Cold Fusion and Decrease of Tritium Radioactivity http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/Reifenschwcoldfusion.pdf About the possibility of decreased radioactivity of heavy nuclei http://www.osti.gov/energycitations/product.biblio.jsp?osti_id=512913 I don't think this has been posted to Vortex before. I believe it describes Brian Ahern's approach to LENR. Does this imply he believe
Re: [Vo]:New Youtube videos from SRI features a lecture by McKubre
*However Rossi has said in the past that Deuterium kills the reaction.* If the conjecture that coherent entanglement is involved in the LENR reaction, then mixing bosons and fermions will stymie the formation of the associated condensate Nitrogen is known to kill the Ni-H reaction. I will predict that any gas composed of bosons will kill the Ni-H reaction because this reaction that only depends on the formation of cooper pairs like superconductivity will be blocked. Bosons base gases must somehow inhibit the production of fermionic based cooper pairs and their associated condensate formation. The Piantelli reaction is especially sensitive to interference from boson contaminants like oxygen and nitrogen. On the other hand, Rossi who depends on Rydberg based species for his coherence and entanglement can tolerate a large amount of boson contamination. This sort of boson contamination is not a problem for Rossi. I predict that any reactor that uses the Piantelli reaction where high hydrogen purity is required will suffer from low power production and short run times due the contamination of gaseous boson based transmutation reaction products. * * On Fri, Nov 25, 2011 at 12:40 PM, Man on Bridges manonbrid...@aim.comwrote: Hi, On 25-11-2011 17:13, Aussie Guy E-Cat wrote: Rossi has said it becomes too much Cu. I seem to recall he said the fuel was 30% Cu after 6 months and 60% Cu after 12 months. On 11/26/2011 2:33 AM, Alain dit le Cycliste wrote: moreover Deuterium is known to be a killing contaminant of Ni-H cells... maybe is it why the fuel have to be changed despite very few is used? i'm curious to know why the Ni fuel have to be change every 6month, while it is very little consumed? it is cooked (crytal lattice modified by heat, chemical reactions), or contaminated with Cu, or D ... I fail to see the problem with Cu. If Stable 62Ni (or 64Ni) is used as the binding agent for the hydrinos then this results in Stable 63Cu (or 65Cu) which is on itself also a very good binding agent for the hydrinos and results in Stable 64Zn (or 66Zn). However Rossi has said in the past that Deuterium kills the reaction. Kind regards, MoB
Re: [Vo]:Piantelli's amazing claims
“where one of the two protons fuses, and the other is ejected carrying the energy of the fusion reaction of the first proton.” Could these two protons derive from a cooper pair of protons coming from a Bose-Einstein condensate of entangled protons? On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 3:59 PM, mix...@bigpond.com wrote: In reply to Jed Rothwell's message of Tue, 29 Nov 2011 14:38:04 -0500: Hi, [snip] * Confirms the presence of 6-7 Mev Protons The suggestion that 6-7 MeV protons are responsible doesn't add up. If you bombard Nickel with 6-7 MeV protons you don't get enough energy from the fusion reactions to accelerate the original protons (otherwise this method would have been employed years ago). It also leaves open the question of where the 6-7 MeV protons came from in the first place. IOW this sounds like a half-baked theory. Of course it's possible that either a small Hydrino molecule or IRH is fusing with the Ni, and the energy is being carried away by unfused protons, some of which achieve an energy of 6-7 MeV. A few of these would then also undergo the occasional fusion reaction, contributing a little extra. However most of the energy must of necessity come from the original reaction that gave the protons their energy. Note also that 6-7 MeV is the energy that you get from fusing a proton with a Ni nucleus, so a likely reaction is the fusion of a Hydrino molecule with a Ni nucleus, where one of the two protons fuses, and the other is ejected carrying the energy of the fusion reaction of the first proton. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Makup of Ni powder in Hyperion
“I think we have to assume it is another gas or becomes gaseous with heating.” I have always believed that the proprietary catalyst under discussion here transforms the hydrogen in the reaction envelope to some exotic hydrogen form; specifically Rydberg matter. This catalyst need not be gaseous but it would emit some crystalline forms of Rydberg matter. For example a carbide of an alkali metal will emit Rydberg matter when heated; this is true for such compounds containing such elements as potassium or cesium. The six month recharge timeframe for the Rossi reactor could well be the depletion or burnout timeframe for such an alkali compound. Furthermore, in just the last few weeks, Rydberg two atom molecules of alkali metal have been found to possess a strong dipole moment contrary to current scientific doctrinaire. Such dipole behavior will do wonders at overcoming the coulomb barrier as has been discussed at great length on this forum in the recent past. Also remember this valuable post by Mark Iverson-ZeroPoint as copied in part below. Excited atoms spin out of equilibrium http://physics.aps.org/pdf/10.1103/PhysRevA.84.031402.pdf What makes the setting different from traditional experiments with cold atoms, and therefore particularly interesting, is the use of atoms in highly excited states—so-called Rydberg states [4]. An alkali-metal atom, with its single active electron, shares many properties with the hydrogen atom. Excited states form a Rydberg series whose states can be labeled, just like in hydrogen, by the principal quantum number n. Interesting physics emerges in the presence of more than one Rydberg atom, as the large distance between the nucleus and the valence electron renders these atoms into electric dipoles. Depending on the particular Rydberg state, the interaction between two such atoms is then either determined by a van der Waals or a dipole-dipole potential. The authors consider the former potential, which is, in principle, also present between ground-state atoms. The striking difference, however, is that the interaction between atoms in Rydberg states is enhanced by a factor of up to n^11. For values of the principal quantum number typically used in experiments, n=40…80, this means an increase of 10 orders of magnitude, i.e., the interaction affects even atoms that are separated by several micrometers. This is in contrast to the contact potential usually present between ground-state atoms. In the most extreme case, interaction-induced level shifts are so huge that a simultaneous excitation of two nearby atoms to Rydberg states is virtually impossible [for an illustration see Fig. 1(a)]. This so-called Rydberg blockade mechanism [5] lies behind a number of exciting phenomena that make Rydberg atoms useful for applications ranging from quantum information processing and quantum simulation to nonlinear quantum optics and ultracold chemistry. On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 1:03 PM, Roarty, Francis X francis.x.roa...@lmco.com wrote: proprietary catalysts involved in reaction chamber seems to imply the proprietary additive pervades the entire reaction chamber rather than just the powder. Mixing with the pressurized h2 I think we have to assume it is another gas or becomes gaseous with heating. Fran ** ** *From:* Jed Rothwell [mailto:jedrothw...@gmail.com] *Sent:* Wednesday, November 30, 2011 11:03 AM *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com *Subject:* EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Makup of Ni powder in Hyperion ** ** Robert Lynn robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com wrote: ** ** And importantly: proprietary catalysts involved in reaction chamber ** ** Oh yeah. Not sure what that means. I guess it means the raw material is mostly Ni and they add proprietary catalysts -- whatever that means. In other words, this does not tell us anything. ** ** Well, at least we know the purity of the starting Ni material. ** ** - Jed ** **
Re: [Vo]:LENR Presentation by Joseph Zawodny, NASA Langley Research Center Edit
Mark Iverson-ZeroPoint posted a study on Rydberg matter a few weeks ago which stated that this special form of exotic hydrogen (alkali matter) can amplify quantum mechanical properties of atoms by some 11 orders of magnitude; that is 10 to the 11th power. The Coulomb barrier cannot protect the nucleus of the atom from proton intrusion when exposed to such a huge and powerful masking force. On Mon, Dec 5, 2011 at 10:52 AM, Joshua Cude joshua.c...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Dec 5, 2011 at 2:17 AM, Mark Iverson-ZeroPoint zeropo...@charter.net wrote: JC wrote: “Say what? That's just gibberish. I seriously doubt that Zawodny has any idea what that sentence means, if it means anything at all. A physical effect is allowed by a breakdown in a mathematical approximation? What that sentence does is make people's eyes glaze over, and think it sounds sophisticated enough that it must be true.” ** ** That certainly is one possibility… but it’s just as plausible that your and MY’s eyes glaze over because you don’t have enough in-depth knowledge of the relevant physics to fully understand what’s being proposed. But my failure to understand something does not make it any more plausible to me. Someone could come along and claim to have a theory that explains perpetual motion machines, but I wouldn't believe it just because he could string a bunch of sophisticated buzz-words together into an incomprehensible sentence. You need 780 keV at a single atomic site to induce electron capture by a proton. This is allegedly induced by heating the lattice. So, random atomic motion representing a fraction of an eV per atom is somehow supposed to be concentrated by a factor of much more than a million by some resonant phenomenon. No amount of jargon makes that plausible. WL present all sorts of equations to justify the idea, but they don't actually calculate a reaction rate for a given hydrogen loading in Pd or Ni. People are skeptical of cold fusion because of the Coulomb barrier. The big selling point about the WLT is that it is supposed to be more plausible because it avoids the Coulomb barrier. The problem is it introduces a much bigger energy barrier. So then, the same skeptics should be more skeptical of WLT, not less skeptical. Why should telling people they are not sophisticated enough to understand the mechanism be any more effective for the WLT than for breaching the Coulomb barrier? It's another matter to pitch it at theoretical physicists, but people like Bushnell and Krivit pitch it at their lay audiences. And the last time I checked, no theoretical physicists of any stripe were citing WL, even though it would be breakthrough physics if it were right. Even among LENR advocates, the theoretical physicists like Hagelstein don't give it much respect. this was only an internal workshop. It was most likely background for others who might be interested in helping. It most certainly was NOT a full description of all the LENR work that they have done. How the hell do you know what data they have or don’t have? What experiments they’ve done or not done? It's true. It's possible they have evidence that he did not present. They might have done an experiment where gamma rays that otherwise go right through a nickel powder, are blocked when it's heated in an atmosphere of hydrogen under pressure. Or other experiments that make WL more believable. But if he's trying to attract helpers, wouldn't it make more sense to present evidence like that? The presentation looks pretty similar to the one he gave in 2009. No indication of progress at all. But again, maybe he's got a reason for hiding it. Maybe, but I doubt it. Anyway, based on what's available, I remain skeptical.
Re: [Vo]:LENR Presentation by Joseph Zawodny, NASA Langley Research Center Edit
So sorry, I should have included a reference to that paper for the convenience of Mr. Cude. http://physics.aps.org/pdf/10.1103/PhysRevA.84.031402.pdf Best regards, Axil On Mon, Dec 5, 2011 at 1:16 PM, Mark Iverson-ZeroPoint zeropo...@charter.net wrote: Hi Axil, ** ** Gee, I don’t even remember whether I posted that one or not, but what’s important is that there is plenty of evidence that extraordinary CONDITIONS frequently produce results that don’t make sense. Nice to know that someone has seen my FYI postings to be potentially useful… Why did I post that particular article??? When I read thru the latest science headlines, I just get a feeling that certain ones have some importance beyond the obvious. Is it ‘intuition’? Not sure about intuition… some ascribe to it some kind of ‘magical’ qualities… I’m think more along the lines that the subconscious mind is much more aware of things and ‘sees’ the connections which the conscious mind does not… thus, the light bulb going on seems magical to the conscious mind, but is perfectly clear why to the unconscious mind. ** ** -m ** ** *From:* Axil Axil [mailto:janap...@gmail.com] *Sent:* Monday, December 05, 2011 9:31 AM *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:LENR Presentation by Joseph Zawodny, NASA Langley Research Center Edit ** ** ** ** Mark Iverson-ZeroPoint posted a study on Rydberg matter a few weeks ago which stated that this special form of exotic hydrogen (alkali matter) can amplify quantum mechanical properties of atoms by some 11 orders of magnitude; that is 10 to the 11th power. The Coulomb barrier cannot protect the nucleus of the atom from proton intrusion when exposed to such a huge and powerful masking force. ** ** On Mon, Dec 5, 2011 at 10:52 AM, Joshua Cude joshua.c...@gmail.com wrote: ** ** On Mon, Dec 5, 2011 at 2:17 AM, Mark Iverson-ZeroPoint zeropo...@charter.net wrote: JC wrote: “Say what? That's just gibberish. I seriously doubt that Zawodny has any idea what that sentence means, if it means anything at all. A physical effect is allowed by a breakdown in a mathematical approximation? What that sentence does is make people's eyes glaze over, and think it sounds sophisticated enough that it must be true.” That certainly is one possibility… but it’s just as plausible that your and MY’s eyes glaze over because you don’t have enough in-depth knowledge of the relevant physics to fully understand what’s being proposed. ** ** ** ** But my failure to understand something does not make it any more plausible to me. Someone could come along and claim to have a theory that explains perpetual motion machines, but I wouldn't believe it just because he could string a bunch of sophisticated buzz-words together into an incomprehensible sentence. ** ** You need 780 keV at a single atomic site to induce electron capture by a proton. This is allegedly induced by heating the lattice. So, random atomic motion representing a fraction of an eV per atom is somehow supposed to be concentrated by a factor of much more than a million by some resonant phenomenon. No amount of jargon makes that plausible. WL present all sorts of equations to justify the idea, but they don't actually calculate a reaction rate for a given hydrogen loading in Pd or Ni. ** ** People are skeptical of cold fusion because of the Coulomb barrier. The big selling point about the WLT is that it is supposed to be more plausible because it avoids the Coulomb barrier. The problem is it introduces a much bigger energy barrier. So then, the same skeptics should be more skeptical of WLT, not less skeptical. Why should telling people they are not sophisticated enough to understand the mechanism be any more effective for the WLT than for breaching the Coulomb barrier? ** ** It's another matter to pitch it at theoretical physicists, but people like Bushnell and Krivit pitch it at their lay audiences. And the last time I checked, no theoretical physicists of any stripe were citing WL, even though it would be breakthrough physics if it were right. Even among LENR advocates, the theoretical physicists like Hagelstein don't give it much respect. ** ** this was only an internal workshop. It was most likely background for others who might be interested in helping. It most certainly was NOT a full description of all the LENR work that they have done. How the hell do you know what data they have or don’t have? What experiments they’ve done or not done? ** ** It's true. It's possible they have evidence that he did not present. They might have done an experiment where gamma rays that otherwise go right through a nickel powder, are blocked when it's heated in an atmosphere of hydrogen under pressure. Or other experiments that make WL more believable. But if he's trying to attract helpers, wouldn't
Re: [Vo]: ECAT Triggered by Cosmic Rays?
It seems to me that a universal theme in “cold fusion” is a triggering mechanism that releases stored potential energy. In all cases, a “cold fusion” system is a system that is heavily coherent in a quantum mechanical(QM) sense. Potential energy builds up and is stored by these coherent atoms. When one of these coherent atoms becomes QM decoherent and leaves the QM assemblage through the action of a trigger, it releases this potential energy over the entire QM assemblage. This averaging tends to transform and lower the intensity of the energy spike over the entire assemblage to thermal levels. Such triggers can be in the form of a laser pulse, an electric spark, a high energy particle, a phonon in a metal lattice, a mechanical shock… This trigger can precipitate a cascade of potential energy conversion to kinetic energy release such as has been seen in a Mills or an Arata powder, or it could be a continuing phonon based thermalization process as has been seen in a Piantelli or Rossi system. On Mon, Dec 5, 2011 at 2:14 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: It is apparent that a lot of energy is required to initiate the nuclear reaction in ECAT type devices. This problem is always a sticking point for the skeptical point of view and certainly makes the process seem less likely to most of us in the other camp. I proposed the possibility of cosmic rays acting as the trigger for the reactions since they are known to be very energetic and always present. If you think about explosives in general, it is evident that they could in theory self explode under the right circumstances. Nitroglycerin comes immediately to mind when I think of a really nasty substance to play with. A drop of this material hitting a surface from a short fall will explode violently. This is an example of a triggered explosion which must have interesting characteristics in order to occur. Plain old fashioned black gunpowder is another example of a triggered explosive material that is quite stable under normal circumstances. You can place a match onto a small pile of the powder and it will just lay there and burn for a while until the entire mass of material erupts rapidly with a bright flash. The initiation process for these two materials must depend upon the geometry and energy release characteristics. I am not an expert on explosives but have given consideration to the process that I assume leads to a mass explosive event. In the case of the gunpowder, I consider the reaction to be started by the application of heat energy to a small region of the material. The heat energy is sufficient to cause a tiny portion of the powder to ignite and release additional heat. This relatively large heat energy must escape the small volume through the surface area surrounding it. If the burn is to continue, then the heat escaping the initial volume must be sufficient to ignite more material at the surface to continue the process. If there is insufficient heat to ignite the new material then the burn would die out and there would be no explosion. This model that I have envisioned would tend to suggest that there would be a minimum volume of initial burning material required in order to achieve an explosive event. Heat is generated throughout the volume while it escapes through the surface area. This is where the story might get interesting. Chemical energy released by burning of a material such as black powder is many thousands if not millions of times less than that released by a fusion reaction and I would expect the differences to show up clearly. One of the main differences I would expect is for the initiated volume to be many times smaller in the case of fusion than that seen with chemical reactions. Also, the energy required to initiate a fusion reaction could be concentrated into the region occupied by the nickel atom and the adjacent hydrogen nuclei and might be available in the form of cosmic ray interactions. I suspect that we all would agree that there is sufficient energy contained within a cosmic ray to overcome the coulomb repulsion barrier. If the fusion of a nickel atom and a hydrogen nucleus is possible as a result of the interaction of a cosmic ray, then it seems that we have achieved a trigger that might result in additional reactions if sufficient energy is released. The time domain release nature of the induced energy as well as the form it takes could be the reason for continued reactions. Most of the information available suggests that heat is the major form of energy outputted during the LENR events and that this is released after a short delay period instead of instantaneously after the proton is acquired. This delay is fortunate; otherwise an explosion of the entire structure might occur. The pictures of damage to electrodes by pitting suggest that the fusion reaction once initiated prorogates fairly rapidly throughout a significant amount
Re: [Vo]: ECAT Triggered by Cosmic Rays?
I speculate that when a coherent proton who is a member of a large coherent ensemble of protons penetrates the nucleus of a nickel atom, this nickel atom will retain the energy of the nuclear reaction as potential energy. When a thermal phonon that propagates in the nickel lattice perturbs this atom into decoherence, the potential energy of this nuclear reaction will be released over the entire proton assemblage thereby transforming a erstwhile megavolt energy release into many kilovolt releases over the entire coherent assemblage. In heavily coherent QM systems as per Piantelli or Rossi, coherence will be immediately reestablished and other nuclear based energy producing reactions will occur and stored as potential energy. Increasing heat in the system will further increase QM decoherence and result in more potential energy transformation to kinetic energy. As in the Mills and Arata systems, with no lattice heating, no potential energy transformations to kinetic energy will occur until a trigger sets off a QM chain reaction. Regards, Axil On Mon, Dec 5, 2011 at 3:54 PM, mix...@bigpond.com wrote: In reply to Axil Axil's message of Mon, 5 Dec 2011 15:46:07 -0500: Hi, [snip] When one of these coherent atoms becomes QM decoherent and leaves the QM assemblage through the action of a trigger, it releases this potential energy over the entire QM assemblage. Surely the energy of any one atom would be small, and if released over the entire assemblage would result in a truly minute amount being deposited with each member? Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
Re: [Vo]: ECAT Triggered by Cosmic Rays?
The crystal structure of transition metal hydrides especially when oxides are involved, leads to imposition of coherent confinement of protons in the hydride crystal structure on the macro level. In some compound, absolutely all the protons are entangled temperature notwithstanding. This macro entanglement has been experimentally verified in potassium bicarbonate. I suspected that this macro proton entanglement occurs in potassium carbonate, the favorite “cold fusion” electrolyte compound. Water has also been found to be heavily entangled. For more theory see: *The Macroscopic Quantum Behavior of Protons **in the KHCO*3 *Crystal: Theory and Experiments* http://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/docs/00/36/96/87/PDF/Fillaux3.pdf On Mon, Dec 5, 2011 at 4:04 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: I personally think that the evidence points toward small regions of heat generation such as hot spots. The fantastic pictures of electrode pitting looks so much like the craters left after an explosion with their typical conical shape scream out to me that this is a localized effect. The use of small micron sized particles of nickel by Rossi also tends to point toward smaller active points. What evidence is there that the entire metallic structure is behaving in a QM assemblage other than the theories that attempt to allow the large energy requirement for reaction to accumulate in a small local? Perhaps we need to find a method that does not require that amount of cooperation. Dave -Original Message- From: Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Mon, Dec 5, 2011 3:46 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]: ECAT Triggered by Cosmic Rays? It seems to me that a universal theme in “cold fusion” is a triggering mechanism that releases stored potential energy. In all cases, a “cold fusion” system is a system that is heavily coherent in a quantum mechanical(QM) sense. Potential energy builds up and is stored by these coherent atoms. When one of these coherent atoms becomes QM decoherent and leaves the QM assemblage through the action of a trigger, it releases this potential energy over the entire QM assemblage. This averaging tends to transform and lower the intensity of the energy spike over the entire assemblage to thermal levels. Such triggers can be in the form of a laser pulse, an electric spark, a high energy particle, a phonon in a metal lattice, a mechanical shock… This trigger can precipitate a cascade of potential energy conversion to kinetic energy release such as has been seen in a Mills or an Arata powder, or it could be a continuing phonon based thermalization process as has been seen in a Piantelli or Rossi system. On Mon, Dec 5, 2011 at 2:14 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: It is apparent that a lot of energy is required to initiate the nuclear reaction in ECAT type devices. This problem is always a sticking point for the skeptical point of view and certainly makes the process seem less likely to most of us in the other camp. I proposed the possibility of cosmic rays acting as the trigger for the reactions since they are known to be very energetic and always present. If you think about explosives in general, it is evident that they could in theory self explode under the right circumstances. Nitroglycerin comes immediately to mind when I think of a really nasty substance to play with. A drop of this material hitting a surface from a short fall will explode violently. This is an example of a triggered explosion which must have interesting characteristics in order to occur. Plain old fashioned black gunpowder is another example of a triggered explosive material that is quite stable under normal circumstances. You can place a match onto a small pile of the powder and it will just lay there and burn for a while until the entire mass of material erupts rapidly with a bright flash. The initiation process for these two materials must depend upon the geometry and energy release characteristics. I am not an expert on explosives but have given consideration to the process that I assume leads to a mass explosive event. In the case of the gunpowder, I consider the reaction to be started by the application of heat energy to a small region of the material. The heat energy is sufficient to cause a tiny portion of the powder to ignite and release additional heat. This relatively large heat energy must escape the small volume through the surface area surrounding it. If the burn is to continue, then the heat escaping the initial volume must be sufficient to ignite more material at the surface to continue the process. If there is insufficient heat to ignite the new material then the burn would die out and there would be no explosion. This model that I have envisioned would tend to suggest that there would be a minimum volume of initial burning material required in order to achieve an explosive
[Vo]:Schroedinger's cat and cold fusion
On June 7 of 1935, Erwin Schroedinger wrote to Albert Einstein to congratulate him on what is now known as the EPR paper, a famous problem in the interpretation of Quantum Mechanics. Soon thereafter, he published what was to become one of the most celebrated paradoxes in quantum theory: A cat is placed in a box, together with a radioactive atom. If the atom decays, and the geiger-counter detects an alpha particle, the hammer hits a flask of prussic acid (HCN), killing the cat. The paradox lies in the clever coupling of quantum and classical domains. Before the observer opens the box, the cat's fate is tied to the wave function of the atom, which is itself in a superposition of decayed and undecayed states. Thus, said Schroedinger, the cat must itself be in a superposition of dead and alive states before the observer opens the box, ``observes'' the cat, and ``collapses'' its wave function. You may ask in respect to cold fusion, what does all this have to do with Schroedinger's cat? Well, when the proton who is a member of a coherent ensemble: a classical macroscopic domain has coherently tunneled into a nickel atom who lives on the surface of a nickel lattice, Quantum Mechanics tells us the state of the proton must be described by a ``superposition''. The proton inside this nickel nucleus is at the same time as it were, much like the cat is in a superposition between dead and alive because its fate is coupled to the quantum coherence decay. However, as our proton/nickel nucleus system shows, the effect of an environment on a quantum superposition can be drastic, even destroying the superposition, thus hinting that for all practical purposes, the cat's wave function will be ``collapsed'' into either the dead or the alive state. Finite temperature behavior of the lattice is interesting in and of itself. The rate of decoherence turns out to be proportional to the temperature to the power (2alpha -1), and thus increases with increasing temperature if alpha 1/2, mimicking the so-called Quantum Zeno effect. The Quantum Zeno effect, also known by terms such as a watched pot never boils, was named after Zeno, the fourth century Greek philosopher famed for his paradoxes and conumdrums. It is usually invoked for a class of effects in which constant monitoring of a quantum subsystem drastically slows down its dynamics. As the temperature rises, the substrate vibrates more, more phonons are excited, and the combined effect of each phonon ``measuring'' the position of the proton and increases QM decoherence. We can exactly calculate the coupling constant alpha in terms of the elastic constants, the density and the force difference between the positions of the atoms. These can be independently measured, and thus an experiment could carefully test all these theories of how the environment (phonons) affects an embedded quantum system (our tunneled coherent proton).
Re: [Vo]: Of Rydberg and Radiofrequencies...
Is there a connection? There is a connection. The purpose of the RF generator is to maintain Rydberg Matter excitation for as long as possible during the self-sustain mode when the internal heater is shut down. During self-sustain mode no additional Rydberg matter is produced by the internal heater; and what has already been generated during startup must be maintained in its full potency for as long as possible. Without this magnetic excitation, the Rydberg matter would eventually decay and disintegrate. This would remove the source of the ultra-strong dipole moment coulomb barrier masking needed for the protons from atomic hydrogen to penetrate the nuclei of the heavy atoms of nickel. Since the stainless steel reaction vessels are at a high enough temperature above their curie point, the magnetic radiation produced by the RF generator will penetrate these metal shells to stimulate and maintain the excitation levels of the Rydberg matter within. Rydberg matter is very responsive to both magnetic and electrostatic excitation. The development of this module by Defkalion, tells me that Defkalion understands in detail what reaction processes make the E-Cat go. When Rossi uses this RF generator, Rossi infers that Defkalion knows more than he does. So Rossi must understand that Defkalion is a powerful and knowledgeable competitor whose detailed technical understanding of the E-Cat reaction processes goes well beyond his own. This sort of obscure technical inference which goes well beyond what a scammer would ever think is needed to pull off his con, encourages me in my faith that the E-Cat technology is real. On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 3:04 AM, Mark Iverson mark2...@charter.net wrote: Leif Holmlid ** ** “Precision bond lengths for Rydberg Matter clusters Kn (N = 19, 37, 61 and 91) in excitation levels n = 4 - 8 from rotational radio-frequency emission spectra” ** ** The Rf frequencies involved are less than 100Mhz… certainly within the realm of the RF generator used in one of Rossi’s demos. ** ** Is there a connection? Who knows… ** ** If anyone wants the entire PDF, just send me your email… ** ** - Mark ** **
Re: [Vo]:Codeposition of Ni/H
There are three basic things that must be accomplished to make an E-Cat design successful. - High hydrogen packing into nickel nano-powder. - Strong Coulomb barrier masking. - Gamma Radiation thermalization, mitigation, and prevention. Industry standard electrodeposition of Ni does none of these key things. On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 1:57 AM, James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote: Since codeposition of Pd/D seems to be one of the better ways to get reproducible PF effects, and there has been a lot of work done in electrodeposition of Ni, with the inevitable result of Ni/H codeposition, where are the reports of anomalous heat in the world of Ni electrolysis?
Re: [Vo]: Of Rydberg and Radiofrequencies...
Your suggestion may be possible when a automated fail safe control system is developed (maybe by National instruments) to provide some sort of negative feedback control on heat output. IMHO, until such controls are put in place, a runaway meltdown using the strategy you suggest is likely at some juncture. On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 11:43 AM, Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 7:59 AM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: Is there a connection? There is a connection. The purpose of the RF generator is to maintain Rydberg Matter excitation for as long as possible during the self-sustain mode when the internal heater is shut down. Wouldn't it be simpler to route some heat from the thermal output back to the input -- maybe through some sort of heat exchanger? Instead of doing like Rossi did during his first set of experiments -- dumping it in a bucket or into a wall.
Re: [Vo]: Of Rydberg and Radiofrequencies...
“It's doubtful that Rossi exhibited anything that would have enough RF power to melt down the core in all the E-cats in the megawatt plant at once. Where would he store that much power?” I humbly submit in a simplified example, the RF generator is like an antenna connected to a radio, but not as sensitive. The minuscule current produced by an antenna can control the output of a radio. So to relatively speaking, not much RF generator power is required to stoke up the Rydberg matter. “Anyway, wouldn't stopping the coolant flow be the best way to melt down a runaway core?” In order to adjust things based on reactor temperature, a fast reacting control system is required. In such a control system, a temperature probe is sampled rapidly, and a micro-processor controls a flow valve regulating the coolant flow based on the analog value of the temperature probe. Without such a automated control system, Rossi must do all this manually without letup when running in self-sustain mode. He must be a man with great stamina. If I where him, I would keep these demos down to a bare minimum to avoid a nervous breakdown. “The more one looks at the concept of a safety heater, especially one that runs at appreciable power levels during most supposedly exothermic runs, the worse it smells.” I agree, the Rossi E-Cat is a very crude product. When you buy one, you are buying a pain in the neck. The customer should know that going in. On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 1:07 PM, Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Dec 6, 2011 at 10:02 AM, Mark Iverson-ZeroPoint zeropo...@charter.net wrote: In addition, the RF would have a near instantaneous effect, whereas Mary’s suggestion would have a very significant time-lag… thus, as Axil pointed out, a much greater likelihood of runaway. It's doubtful that Rossi exhibited anything that would have enough RF power to melt down the core in all the E-cats in the megawatt plant at once. Where would he store that much power? Anyway, wouldn't stopping the coolant flow be the best way to melt down a runaway core? The more one looks at the concept of a safety heater, especially one that runs at appreciable power levels during most supposedly exothermic runs, the worse it smells.
