Re: [Vo]:Working on possible error in my paper on Mizuno
Meanwhile Mizuno appeared to have filed his technology. WO2015008859 recently was published: http://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/originalDocument?CC=WONR=2015008859A2KC=A2FT=DND=3date=20150122DB=EPODOClocale=en_EP On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 9:51 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: I may have discovered an error in the paper I wrote on Mizuno. It may be serious enough to invalidate the results. This goes back to what I wrote here on January 21 in response to David Roberson: How do you explain the fact that the temperature in the vicinity of the palladium wire drops very quickly after the pulse? I noticed that. It will take more calibrations to sort out what is going on there. I do not fully trust that thermocouple. . . . I would like to see what's going on in the counter-electrode which is also Pd. I do not want to specify what I have in mind because I am still working on it. I may discover I am getting all upset about nothing. Give me another week or so to sort it out. I will publish full details either way, even if it turns out to be a false alarm. I mention this here just in case Dave or someone else discovers the problem and publishes before I do. (Assuming there is a problem.) To be honest, I am posting this message now mainly because I do not wish to be accused of covering up a serious mistake in my own work. You might call this a claim of negative priority. - Jed
[Vo]:How could we collect ideas and knowledge on engineering of LENR devices?
Lots of interesting ideas are flowing here on Vortex on various aspects of LENR engineering - methods to control the phenomenon, different materials to be tried, temperatures to focus on, geometries etc. How could all these ideas be collected and structured, in order to make the information searchable for anyone who's trying to develop and engineer future devices? Frank Acland made an initiative with a kind of Wiki: http://kb.e-catworld.com/index.php?title=E-Cat_World_LENR_Knowledge_Base , but I don't know if it has any chance of being used for this kind of flow of ideas. Probably the gathering of information should be automated with text analysis. Comments? Mats Mats www.animpossibleinvention.comhttp://www.animpossibleinvention.com
Re: [Vo]:How could we collect ideas and knowledge on engineering of LENR devices?
Mats, some thoughts: Maybe the guys from LENR-cities have some ideas. They promote an open IP structure, although not well defined yet. I've asked for more details, but they probably are lacking time in detailling this out for the moment. Part of valuable ideas will probably be converted into patent applications as well by individuals. Those inventors may want to promote their ideas as soon as their ideas are secured. The other part will be shared openly by those who do not care about IP. Collecting and stucturing ideas also require serious moderation to keep a certain professional level. I've been thinking of several places to moderate professional engineering ideas: - meetup groups - moderated LinkedIn groups - dedicated e-mail reflectors I see several sub-groups that handle following activities: - a think tank that defines engeneering topics and brainstorms about solutions - a review team that reviews proposed engineering ideas - a feasibility team that is able to prototype (e.g. MFMP) - F2F meetings in several regions. Another approach: Are there similar global cooperation projects that can be used to piggy back on? - How is the 3D printing society organized? - How is the Drone society organized? - Cooperate with FabLabs that facilitate tooling? - Other global cooperation activities that have usefull ways of working ? Cheers, Rob On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 10:42 AM, Lewan Mats mats.le...@nyteknik.se wrote: Lots of interesting ideas are flowing here on Vortex on various aspects of LENR engineering – methods to control the phenomenon, different materials to be tried, temperatures to focus on, geometries etc. How could all these ideas be collected and structured, in order to make the information searchable for anyone who’s trying to develop and engineer future devices? Frank Acland made an initiative with a kind of Wiki: http://kb.e-catworld.com/index.php?title=E-Cat_World_LENR_Knowledge_Base , but I don’t know if it has any chance of being used for this kind of flow of ideas. Probably the gathering of information should be automated with text analysis. Comments? Mats Mats www.animpossibleinvention.com
SV: [Vo]:How could we collect ideas and knowledge on engineering of LENR devices?
Good thoughts Rob. I believe that the main challenge for LENR Cities will be to provide substantial innovation of its own. Experience from the IT industry tells us that in order to grow a successful eco-system where talented people will contribute, you need to offer attractive innovation for others to build upon, e.g. Windows, IOS/iPhone/iPad, Android (the counter example is Nokia/Symbian that was not good enough). Just to offer a network will not do, if you want to produce revenue from you eco-system. And even if you don’t plan for profit you need to offer innovation – e.g. Wikipedia (the idea + the wiki tool), Linux (the Linux kernel by Torvalds et al). This would correspond to the part that you mention will be shared openly by those who do not care about IP. Maybe enthusiasm could do initially, but sooner or later you probably have to offer something substantial to build upon, to attract people. Yet, I think that the structures you suggest are spot-on, and the idea to look at other community projects is good. 3D printers and drones are examples of communities that are more loosely held together, and yet they have information sharing. Mats www.animpossibleinvention.comhttp://www.animpossibleinvention.com Från: Teslaalset [mailto:robbiehobbiesh...@gmail.com] Skickat: den 13 februari 2015 11:41 Till: vortex-l@eskimo.com Ämne: Re: [Vo]:How could we collect ideas and knowledge on engineering of LENR devices? Mats, some thoughts: Maybe the guys from LENR-cities have some ideas. They promote an open IP structure, although not well defined yet. I've asked for more details, but they probably are lacking time in detailling this out for the moment. Part of valuable ideas will probably be converted into patent applications as well by individuals. Those inventors may want to promote their ideas as soon as their ideas are secured. The other part will be shared openly by those who do not care about IP. Collecting and stucturing ideas also require serious moderation to keep a certain professional level. I've been thinking of several places to moderate professional engineering ideas: - meetup groups - moderated LinkedIn groups - dedicated e-mail reflectors I see several sub-groups that handle following activities: - a think tank that defines engeneering topics and brainstorms about solutions - a review team that reviews proposed engineering ideas - a feasibility team that is able to prototype (e.g. MFMP) - F2F meetings in several regions. Another approach: Are there similar global cooperation projects that can be used to piggy back on? - How is the 3D printing society organized? - How is the Drone society organized? - Cooperate with FabLabs that facilitate tooling? - Other global cooperation activities that have usefull ways of working ? Cheers, Rob On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 10:42 AM, Lewan Mats mats.le...@nyteknik.semailto:mats.le...@nyteknik.se wrote: Lots of interesting ideas are flowing here on Vortex on various aspects of LENR engineering – methods to control the phenomenon, different materials to be tried, temperatures to focus on, geometries etc. How could all these ideas be collected and structured, in order to make the information searchable for anyone who’s trying to develop and engineer future devices? Frank Acland made an initiative with a kind of Wiki: http://kb.e-catworld.com/index.php?title=E-Cat_World_LENR_Knowledge_Base , but I don’t know if it has any chance of being used for this kind of flow of ideas. Probably the gathering of information should be automated with text analysis. Comments? Mats Mats www.animpossibleinvention.comhttp://www.animpossibleinvention.com
SV: [Vo]:How could we collect ideas and knowledge on engineering of LENR devices?
Frank, Let’s hope the ECW knowledge base can contribute to this. I think it would be extremely valuable to have all these ideas and all this knowledge accessible and searchable. Actually, I believe that this is part of a new way of developing knowledge, faster than what was ever possible before the internet, which will further contribute to the well-known trend with inventions spreading over the world to mass adoption at an ever increasing speed (compare automobiles, television, mobile phones). Judging from technology history, LENR will reach mass adoption faster than any earlier invention. Mats www.animpossibleinvention.comhttp://www.animpossibleinvention.com Från: Frank Acland [mailto:ecatwo...@gmail.com] Skickat: den 13 februari 2015 14:20 Till: vortex-l@eskimo.com Ämne: Re: [Vo]:How could we collect ideas and knowledge on engineering of LENR devices? Mats, I hope that in time the the ECW LENR Knowledge Base would be useful for the kind of thing you are discussing. We certainly want to have information about LENR engineering included. The Wiki structure using MediaWiki software is familiar and quite flexible, and allows for searching capabilities. It's not organized like a discussion forum or email list, but there is the capability for discussion on every article on the site in the talk section. Right now there are just a very few people active in creating content -- and we've only just started, so it's rather limited so far. I hope in time that number of contributors will increase. Anyone interesting in getting involved in editing the KB, please email me at ecatwo...@gmail.commailto:ecatwo...@gmail.com, and I'll get you set up with an account. Best, Frank On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 5:26 AM, Lewan Mats mats.le...@nyteknik.semailto:mats.le...@nyteknik.se wrote: Good thoughts Rob. I believe that the main challenge for LENR Cities will be to provide substantial innovation of its own. Experience from the IT industry tells us that in order to grow a successful eco-system where talented people will contribute, you need to offer attractive innovation for others to build upon, e.g. Windows, IOS/iPhone/iPad, Android (the counter example is Nokia/Symbian that was not good enough). Just to offer a network will not do, if you want to produce revenue from you eco-system. And even if you don’t plan for profit you need to offer innovation – e.g. Wikipedia (the idea + the wiki tool), Linux (the Linux kernel by Torvalds et al). This would correspond to the part that you mention will be shared openly by those who do not care about IP. Maybe enthusiasm could do initially, but sooner or later you probably have to offer something substantial to build upon, to attract people. Yet, I think that the structures you suggest are spot-on, and the idea to look at other community projects is good. 3D printers and drones are examples of communities that are more loosely held together, and yet they have information sharing. Mats www.animpossibleinvention.comhttp://www.animpossibleinvention.com Från: Teslaalset [mailto:robbiehobbiesh...@gmail.commailto:robbiehobbiesh...@gmail.com] Skickat: den 13 februari 2015 11:41 Till: vortex-l@eskimo.commailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com Ämne: Re: [Vo]:How could we collect ideas and knowledge on engineering of LENR devices? Mats, some thoughts: Maybe the guys from LENR-cities have some ideas. They promote an open IP structure, although not well defined yet. I've asked for more details, but they probably are lacking time in detailling this out for the moment. Part of valuable ideas will probably be converted into patent applications as well by individuals. Those inventors may want to promote their ideas as soon as their ideas are secured. The other part will be shared openly by those who do not care about IP. Collecting and stucturing ideas also require serious moderation to keep a certain professional level. I've been thinking of several places to moderate professional engineering ideas: - meetup groups - moderated LinkedIn groups - dedicated e-mail reflectors I see several sub-groups that handle following activities: - a think tank that defines engeneering topics and brainstorms about solutions - a review team that reviews proposed engineering ideas - a feasibility team that is able to prototype (e.g. MFMP) - F2F meetings in several regions. Another approach: Are there similar global cooperation projects that can be used to piggy back on? - How is the 3D printing society organized? - How is the Drone society organized? - Cooperate with FabLabs that facilitate tooling? - Other global cooperation activities that have usefull ways of working ? Cheers, Rob On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 10:42 AM, Lewan Mats mats.le...@nyteknik.semailto:mats.le...@nyteknik.se wrote: Lots of interesting ideas are flowing here on Vortex on various aspects of LENR engineering – methods to control the phenomenon, different materials to be tried, temperatures to
[Vo]:blast from the past
Boeing - a cold fusion pioneer ?? Stumbled upon this old Boeing patent application, with priority going back to 1990 Cold nuclear fusion thermal generator EP 0461690 A2 Abstract A method and apparatus are provided for generating heat energy by the cold fusion of hydrogen with boron or lithium in an electrolytic cell. This was probably a case of a strategic filing, coming after the big announcement in Utah and based more on informed speculation than reduction to practice - and one wonders if Boeing actually built a working prototype. Here is a presentation by the inventor from 1983 ! which indicates that Boeing was interested in a portable fusion device long before PF http://commons.erau.edu/space-congress-proceedings/proceedings-1983-20th/ses sion-iia/2/
Re: [Vo]:How could we collect ideas and knowledge on engineering of LENR devices?
I think that would be a good idea to compile this knowledge in one place. My opinion is that it should start where we are in the field to facilitate advancement. The first thing needed is a relatively simple design to demonstrate LENR. I think once that has been achieved, and it has been replicated by many, the advancement would go along the lines of controlling/regulating the reaction. Accessible working designs at present include only Parkhomov. Until at least one other group can replicate his results there remains some doubt (at least to me). Jack On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 7:33 AM, Lewan Mats mats.le...@nyteknik.se wrote: Frank, Let’s hope the ECW knowledge base can contribute to this. I think it would be extremely valuable to have all these ideas and all this knowledge accessible and searchable. Actually, I believe that this is part of a new way of developing knowledge, faster than what was ever possible before the internet, which will further contribute to the well-known trend with inventions spreading over the world to mass adoption at an ever increasing speed (compare automobiles, television, mobile phones). Judging from technology history, LENR will reach mass adoption faster than any earlier invention. Mats www.animpossibleinvention.com *Från:* Frank Acland [mailto:ecatwo...@gmail.com] *Skickat:* den 13 februari 2015 14:20 *Till:* vortex-l@eskimo.com *Ämne:* Re: [Vo]:How could we collect ideas and knowledge on engineering of LENR devices? Mats, I hope that in time the the ECW LENR Knowledge Base would be useful for the kind of thing you are discussing. We certainly want to have information about LENR engineering included. The Wiki structure using MediaWiki software is familiar and quite flexible, and allows for searching capabilities. It's not organized like a discussion forum or email list, but there is the capability for discussion on every article on the site in the talk section. Right now there are just a very few people active in creating content -- and we've only just started, so it's rather limited so far. I hope in time that number of contributors will increase. Anyone interesting in getting involved in editing the KB, please email me at ecatwo...@gmail.com, and I'll get you set up with an account. Best, Frank On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 5:26 AM, Lewan Mats mats.le...@nyteknik.se wrote: Good thoughts Rob. I believe that the main challenge for LENR Cities will be to provide substantial innovation of its own. Experience from the IT industry tells us that in order to grow a successful eco-system where talented people will contribute, you need to offer attractive innovation for others to build upon, e.g. Windows, IOS/iPhone/iPad, Android (the counter example is Nokia/Symbian that was not good enough). Just to offer a network will not do, if you want to produce revenue from you eco-system. And even if you don’t plan for profit you need to offer innovation – e.g. Wikipedia (the idea + the wiki tool), Linux (the Linux kernel by Torvalds et al). This would correspond to the part that you mention will be shared openly by those who do not care about IP. Maybe enthusiasm could do initially, but sooner or later you probably have to offer something substantial to build upon, to attract people. Yet, I think that the structures you suggest are spot-on, and the idea to look at other community projects is good. 3D printers and drones are examples of communities that are more loosely held together, and yet they have information sharing. Mats www.animpossibleinvention.com *Från:* Teslaalset [mailto:robbiehobbiesh...@gmail.com] *Skickat:* den 13 februari 2015 11:41 *Till:* vortex-l@eskimo.com *Ämne:* Re: [Vo]:How could we collect ideas and knowledge on engineering of LENR devices? Mats, some thoughts: Maybe the guys from LENR-cities have some ideas. They promote an open IP structure, although not well defined yet. I've asked for more details, but they probably are lacking time in detailling this out for the moment. Part of valuable ideas will probably be converted into patent applications as well by individuals. Those inventors may want to promote their ideas as soon as their ideas are secured. The other part will be shared openly by those who do not care about IP. Collecting and stucturing ideas also require serious moderation to keep a certain professional level. I've been thinking of several places to moderate professional engineering ideas: - meetup groups - moderated LinkedIn groups - dedicated e-mail reflectors I see several sub-groups that handle following activities: - a think tank that defines engeneering topics and brainstorms about solutions - a review team that reviews proposed engineering ideas - a feasibility team that is able to prototype (e.g. MFMP) - F2F meetings in several regions. Another approach:
[Vo]:LENR in progress, no more pigeon chess!
My gratitude goes to Alain Coetmeur for this support of our Cause: http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2015/02/no-more-pigeon-chess-in-lenrs-future.html Plus news, mainly good. Best wishes, Peter -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
Re: [Vo]:How could we collect ideas and knowledge on engineering of LENR devices?
Mats, I hope that in time the the ECW LENR Knowledge Base would be useful for the kind of thing you are discussing. We certainly want to have information about LENR engineering included. The Wiki structure using MediaWiki software is familiar and quite flexible, and allows for searching capabilities. It's not organized like a discussion forum or email list, but there is the capability for discussion on every article on the site in the talk section. Right now there are just a very few people active in creating content -- and we've only just started, so it's rather limited so far. I hope in time that number of contributors will increase. Anyone interesting in getting involved in editing the KB, please email me at ecatwo...@gmail.com, and I'll get you set up with an account. Best, Frank On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 5:26 AM, Lewan Mats mats.le...@nyteknik.se wrote: Good thoughts Rob. I believe that the main challenge for LENR Cities will be to provide substantial innovation of its own. Experience from the IT industry tells us that in order to grow a successful eco-system where talented people will contribute, you need to offer attractive innovation for others to build upon, e.g. Windows, IOS/iPhone/iPad, Android (the counter example is Nokia/Symbian that was not good enough). Just to offer a network will not do, if you want to produce revenue from you eco-system. And even if you don’t plan for profit you need to offer innovation – e.g. Wikipedia (the idea + the wiki tool), Linux (the Linux kernel by Torvalds et al). This would correspond to the part that you mention will be shared openly by those who do not care about IP. Maybe enthusiasm could do initially, but sooner or later you probably have to offer something substantial to build upon, to attract people. Yet, I think that the structures you suggest are spot-on, and the idea to look at other community projects is good. 3D printers and drones are examples of communities that are more loosely held together, and yet they have information sharing. Mats www.animpossibleinvention.com *Från:* Teslaalset [mailto:robbiehobbiesh...@gmail.com] *Skickat:* den 13 februari 2015 11:41 *Till:* vortex-l@eskimo.com *Ämne:* Re: [Vo]:How could we collect ideas and knowledge on engineering of LENR devices? Mats, some thoughts: Maybe the guys from LENR-cities have some ideas. They promote an open IP structure, although not well defined yet. I've asked for more details, but they probably are lacking time in detailling this out for the moment. Part of valuable ideas will probably be converted into patent applications as well by individuals. Those inventors may want to promote their ideas as soon as their ideas are secured. The other part will be shared openly by those who do not care about IP. Collecting and stucturing ideas also require serious moderation to keep a certain professional level. I've been thinking of several places to moderate professional engineering ideas: - meetup groups - moderated LinkedIn groups - dedicated e-mail reflectors I see several sub-groups that handle following activities: - a think tank that defines engeneering topics and brainstorms about solutions - a review team that reviews proposed engineering ideas - a feasibility team that is able to prototype (e.g. MFMP) - F2F meetings in several regions. Another approach: Are there similar global cooperation projects that can be used to piggy back on? - How is the 3D printing society organized? - How is the Drone society organized? - Cooperate with FabLabs that facilitate tooling? - Other global cooperation activities that have usefull ways of working ? Cheers, Rob On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 10:42 AM, Lewan Mats mats.le...@nyteknik.se wrote: Lots of interesting ideas are flowing here on Vortex on various aspects of LENR engineering – methods to control the phenomenon, different materials to be tried, temperatures to focus on, geometries etc. How could all these ideas be collected and structured, in order to make the information searchable for anyone who’s trying to develop and engineer future devices? Frank Acland made an initiative with a kind of Wiki: http://kb.e-catworld.com/index.php?title=E-Cat_World_LENR_Knowledge_Base , but I don’t know if it has any chance of being used for this kind of flow of ideas. Probably the gathering of information should be automated with text analysis. Comments? Mats Mats www.animpossibleinvention.com -- Frank Acland Publisher, E-Cat World http://www.e-catworld.com
Re: [Vo]:How could we collect ideas and knowledge on engineering of LENR devices?
I started using gmail almost exclusively for Vortex. I began in July 6, 2006 and have over 17,000 emails. Gmail search engine makes it easy to find past messages and they are all there in the cloud. On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 4:42 AM, Lewan Mats mats.le...@nyteknik.se wrote: Lots of interesting ideas are flowing here on Vortex on various aspects of LENR engineering – methods to control the phenomenon, different materials to be tried, temperatures to focus on, geometries etc. How could all these ideas be collected and structured, in order to make the information searchable for anyone who’s trying to develop and engineer future devices? Frank Acland made an initiative with a kind of Wiki: http://kb.e-catworld.com/index.php?title=E-Cat_World_LENR_Knowledge_Base , but I don’t know if it has any chance of being used for this kind of flow of ideas. Probably the gathering of information should be automated with text analysis. Comments? Mats Mats www.animpossibleinvention.com
Re: [Vo]:Physicist Discovers New Class of Ultra-High-Energy Molecules
Protons (H+) might screen electrons orbiting heavy nuclei and serve to facilitate the formation MIMS in Pd and Ni lattices. Harry On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 5:38 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: Heavy noble gas cluster electron screening where most of the electrons in the cluster are removed from the cluster leads to high energy excimer-like cluster explosions in noble gas clusters. This is the source of the expansion of the plasma in the Papp engine and Papp's noble gas explosives. On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 5:19 PM, H Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote: Physicist Discovers New Class of Ultra-High-Energy Molecules A class of molecules 100 – 1,000 times more energetic than typical has been discovered by Dr. Young K. Bae, a physicist at Y.K. Bae Corporation, Advanced Space and Energy Technologies under the auspices of DTRA (Defense Threat Reduction Agency). Called Metastable Innershell Molecular State (MIMS), these excimer-like high-energy molecules from highly compressed materials are a new molecular class that can be formed by any combination of elements. Investigation of stellar materials under extreme pressure is a research and technology frontier in astrophysics, inertial nuclear fusion, x-ray lasers, material and biological sciences... http://www.prweb.com/releases/2014/10/prweb12229892.htm Harry
Re: [Vo]:Physicist Discovers New Class of Ultra-High-Energy Molecules
Heavy noble gas cluster electron screening where most of the electrons in the cluster are removed from the cluster leads to high energy excimer-like cluster explosions in noble gas clusters. This is the source of the expansion of the plasma in the Papp engine and Papp's noble gas explosives. On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 5:19 PM, H Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote: Physicist Discovers New Class of Ultra-High-Energy Molecules A class of molecules 100 – 1,000 times more energetic than typical has been discovered by Dr. Young K. Bae, a physicist at Y.K. Bae Corporation, Advanced Space and Energy Technologies under the auspices of DTRA (Defense Threat Reduction Agency). Called Metastable Innershell Molecular State (MIMS), these excimer-like high-energy molecules from highly compressed materials are a new molecular class that can be formed by any combination of elements. Investigation of stellar materials under extreme pressure is a research and technology frontier in astrophysics, inertial nuclear fusion, x-ray lasers, material and biological sciences... http://www.prweb.com/releases/2014/10/prweb12229892.htm Harry
[Vo]:Blast or meltdown
It came into my mind to question why Rossi put his Hot cat alumina core inside a stainless steel tube. If you remember, Rossi enclosed his alumina Hot-cat core with a stainless steel tube in the first third party test. In the second third party test at Lugano, Rossi removed the alumina core from the stainless steel shell. That stainless steel shell probably served as a blast shield to protect against a core blast as seen in the MFMP test. When a core blast as occurs as often happens in the Russian tests and also with MFMP, the hydrogen is immediately released from the core because the alumina shatters an the overheat reaction stops. However, is the rupturing core is enclosed in a metal shield which absorbs the shock of the blast by deforming, the metal not immediately released hydrogen to the surrounding air. This retention of hydrogen inside the metal shell may cause the LENR reaction once started to continue, progress, and grow larger over time. I conjecture, if an alumina core is enclosed in a metal tube to keep the hydrogen confined, a major high temperature meltdown will occur instead of being stopped by a explosive blast causing almost instantaneous hydrogen out gassing.
[Vo]:Physicist Discovers New Class of Ultra-High-Energy Molecules
Physicist Discovers New Class of Ultra-High-Energy Molecules A class of molecules 100 – 1,000 times more energetic than typical has been discovered by Dr. Young K. Bae, a physicist at Y.K. Bae Corporation, Advanced Space and Energy Technologies under the auspices of DTRA (Defense Threat Reduction Agency). Called Metastable Innershell Molecular State (MIMS), these excimer-like high-energy molecules from highly compressed materials are a new molecular class that can be formed by any combination of elements. Investigation of stellar materials under extreme pressure is a research and technology frontier in astrophysics, inertial nuclear fusion, x-ray lasers, material and biological sciences... http://www.prweb.com/releases/2014/10/prweb12229892.htm Harry
Re: [Vo]:Blast or meltdown
corrected as follows: It came into my mind to question why Rossi put his Hot cat alumina core inside a stainless steel tube. If you remember during the first third party test, Rossi enclosed his alumina Hot-cat core within a stainless steel tube. In the second third party test at Lugano, Rossi removed the alumina core from the stainless steel shell. That stainless steel shell probably served as a blast shield to protect the reactor and the people around it against a core blast as seen in the recent MFMP test. When a core blast often occurs in the Russian tests and also recently during the last MFMP test, the hydrogen core envelope is immediately released from the core because the brittle alumina shatters by the blast and the overheat reaction stops. However, if the rupturing core is enclosed in a metal shield, the metal tube will absorb the shock of the blast by deforming instead of shattering. The metal covering will not immediately release hydrogen to the surrounding air. This retention of hydrogen inside the metal shell may cause the LENR reaction once begun to continue, progress, and grow larger over time. I conjecture, if an alumina core is enclosed in a metal tube to keep the hydrogen confined, a major high temperature meltdown will occur instead of being stopped by a explosive release of hydrogen. On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 5:15 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: It came into my mind to question why Rossi put his Hot cat alumina core inside a stainless steel tube. If you remember, Rossi enclosed his alumina Hot-cat core with a stainless steel tube in the first third party test. In the second third party test at Lugano, Rossi removed the alumina core from the stainless steel shell. That stainless steel shell probably served as a blast shield to protect against a core blast as seen in the MFMP test. When a core blast as occurs as often happens in the Russian tests and also with MFMP, the hydrogen is immediately released from the core because the alumina shatters an the overheat reaction stops. However, is the rupturing core is enclosed in a metal shield which absorbs the shock of the blast by deforming, the metal not immediately released hydrogen to the surrounding air. This retention of hydrogen inside the metal shell may cause the LENR reaction once started to continue, progress, and grow larger over time. I conjecture, if an alumina core is enclosed in a metal tube to keep the hydrogen confined, a major high temperature meltdown will occur instead of being stopped by a explosive blast causing almost instantaneous hydrogen out gassing.
Re: [Vo]:Explosion May Be Out of Control LENR
In reply to Axil Axil's message of Thu, 12 Feb 2015 22:26:06 -0500: Hi, There isn't much to lay out. At a few hundred degrees LiAlH4 decomposes into LiH + Al + H2. At about 1000 deg. the LiH also decomposes into Li atoms and H atoms. As the LiH molecule breaks apart, there is a short period before the individual atoms separate too far, that they are within resonance range, and Hydrinos can form. The reaction is Li + H = Li++ + H[n=1/4] + 2e- + 122.5 eV followed eventually by Li++ + 2e- (from environment) = Li + 82 eV The heat produced by these reactions helps dissociate even more LiH, resulting in more Hydrino production. IOW a positive feedback loop resulting in possible explosion if the heat is contained in a small region. If the heat has a chance to spread out, then you just get heating beyond chemistry. (BTW these reactions may also happen to some extent when a Li battery is recharged.) The newly formed Hydrinos can also pick up electrons from the environment, becoming Hydrinohydride (negatively charged ion). There is just the right ratio of H to Li in LiAlH4 for tetrahedral LiHy4- to form, which can facilitate neutron transfer reactions between Li and other nuclei. There are two reasons why it can do this. 1) LiHy4- is about 10 times smaller than a normal Hydrogen atom. This brings the nuclei much closer together (LiHy4- is negatively charged overall, so it can approach another nucleus.) 2) One of the Hy- ions at a corner of the tetrahedron will position itself between the Li nucleus and the target nucleus, because the Hy- is negatively charged. Now that it's in a nice straight line between the nuclei, it can act as a stepping stone for the neutron. IOW you get D being formed for a brief moment before the neutron moves on to the other nucleus (thanks Gullström, and also someone on this list who suggested some months back that D might form - a notion I rejected at the time because of the weakness of the p-n bond in D.) Both 1 2 combined, significantly enhance the likelihood of neutron tunneling. Because the neutron goes from being bound in one nucleus directly to being bound in another nucleus, there are never any free neutrons, which explains the very low neutron count associated with CF experiments. (For LiHy4- formation energies see the table at the bottom of http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/LiHy4-.pdf) Well lay it all out for us. Do that and I will believe. [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
[Vo]:Re: Dog Bone Project
FYI: I just made a calculation where I assumed the Li(AlH4) Powder density to be 0.74 times 0.917 g/cc. I then calculated the remaining 3 unknowns: Mass Li(AlH4) = 106.6 mg Mass Ni = 6282.6 mg Density Ni = 1.434 g/cc I assumed the delivered volume was 0.55 cc (0.5 to 0.6 cc) I then went searching for the Ni Density by the manufacturer of the actual Ni used, by first trying to identify the manufacturer at the MFMP Site (via EverNote). I then saw that MFMP have determined the density to be 1.06 g/cc just a short while ago . This is close... ...More when I find out more. Mark Jurich -Original Message- From: AlanG Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2015 8:44 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Re: Dog Bone Project Mark, the powders were already inside the glove box when the scale (also inside the box) failed, so volume measurements were the only data I had available. As a result, precise mass measurement was not possible, nor was determination of exact densities by measurement. The relative density of the powders was taken from the bulk densities as given in the respective Wikipedia entries. Unknowns include the packing ratio of each of the powders. They are both finely divided but not nano scale, so assuming a similar packing seems reasonable in the absence of other data. The volumes were calculated from dimensions of the actual components used, measured with a digital caliper. The space between the filler rod and the ID of the tube is significant and was included in my calculation. The possible vacant volume within the powder mass was not included, nor was the possible absorption of H2 into the nickel, which we think was minimal given the time scale of the experiment. Regarding the calculation itself, the mass of the fuel was determined accurately by weighing the loaded cell after sealing and removal from the glove box. This was divided by the volume mix ratio, then by the estimated relative density ratio of the two powders to get the mass of the LiAlH4 in the cell. The amount of H was then found simply by the ratio of standard atomic weights. As you correctly pointed out earlier, the equivalent molar amount must be based on the H2 molecules in the gas, and that was the final figure used to calculate the pressure. If I missed something important in my analysis, I'd be happy to know, and make further corrections. AlanG On 2/10/2015 11:30 PM, Mark Jurich wrote: New MFMP Charge Analysis regarding the Explosion Run: http://bit.ly/1z61hEB (5 hours ago) This is a shocker to me. Here are the changes to the last values (first analysis): Free Volume for Gas: 1.09 ml -- 1.06 ml (not a large change) (Recall that Parkhomov estimates 2 ml in his experiment(s)) Weight Amount of Li(AlH4): 134 mg -- 19.7 mg (!!!)(Recall that Parkhomov/Translation states 100 mg) With these new values, the calculated pressure become approx. 1500 psi, which agrees with my calculation. But this new weight amount of Li(AlH4) is totally strange to me. The analysis goes on to state that this pressure is in line with Parkhomov's estimates, but as far as I understand, using far less Li(AlH4) than Parkhomov. The only value I have ever seen stated by Parkhomov is 100 mg, or a factor of 5 times more, by weight. Am I missing something here? This is a tremendous change that I'm having a hard time comprehending. I'm looking into the MFMP Calculation further, right now. Thanks, Mark Jurich -Original Message- From: Mark Jurich Sent: Sunday, February 08, 2015 2:56 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]:Re: Dog Bone Project I believe there maybe an error in this pressure estimate and that the calculated pressure will be exactly half of 19,861 psi (i.e., 9,930.5 psi). Although 0.0141 moles of Hydrogen are released, 0.00706 moles of Hydrogen Gas (H2) are released. I don't believe that free H atoms/ions contribute to the gas pressure in the free volume of the cell, and that the actual gas there is H2 Gas. Please see the following post for the details: https://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg101557.html Mark Jurich -Original Message- From: Craig Haynie Sent: Sunday, February 08, 2015 1:44 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Re: Dog Bone Project Pressure inside the dog bone is calculated to have been near 19,861 psi at the time of failure. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1BWYbi6tBHcjZ4PyQ0BaWn-G1NkdQdkirb-_Qx2HypKs/edit Craig
Re: [Vo]:Re: Dog Bone Project
Correction (typo) on Mass Ni (Original Message) ... Should be 563.3 mg ... The Measured Density by MFMP for Li(AlH4) is 0.492 g/cc. If I use that value instead of 0.74 times 0.917 g/cc (0.74 is theoretical maximum packing density for identical spheres), which is 0.679 g/cc, I get: Mass Li(AlH4) = 77.3 mg Mass Ni = 592.7 mg Density Ni = 1.509 g/cc I need to double-check these. Mark Jurich -Original Message- From: Mark Jurich Sent: Friday, February 13, 2015 4:57 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]:Re: Dog Bone Project FYI: I just made a calculation where I assumed the Li(AlH4) Powder density to be 0.74 times 0.917 g/cc. I then calculated the remaining 3 unknowns: Mass Li(AlH4) = 106.6 mg Mass Ni = 6282.6 mg Density Ni = 1.434 g/cc I assumed the delivered volume was 0.55 cc (0.5 to 0.6 cc) I then went searching for the Ni Density by the manufacturer of the actual Ni used, by first trying to identify the manufacturer at the MFMP Site (via EverNote). I then saw that MFMP have determined the density to be 1.06 g/cc just a short while ago . This is close... ...More when I find out more. Mark Jurich -Original Message- From: AlanG Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2015 8:44 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Re: Dog Bone Project Mark, the powders were already inside the glove box when the scale (also inside the box) failed, so volume measurements were the only data I had available. As a result, precise mass measurement was not possible, nor was determination of exact densities by measurement. The relative density of the powders was taken from the bulk densities as given in the respective Wikipedia entries. Unknowns include the packing ratio of each of the powders. They are both finely divided but not nano scale, so assuming a similar packing seems reasonable in the absence of other data. The volumes were calculated from dimensions of the actual components used, measured with a digital caliper. The space between the filler rod and the ID of the tube is significant and was included in my calculation. The possible vacant volume within the powder mass was not included, nor was the possible absorption of H2 into the nickel, which we think was minimal given the time scale of the experiment. Regarding the calculation itself, the mass of the fuel was determined accurately by weighing the loaded cell after sealing and removal from the glove box. This was divided by the volume mix ratio, then by the estimated relative density ratio of the two powders to get the mass of the LiAlH4 in the cell. The amount of H was then found simply by the ratio of standard atomic weights. As you correctly pointed out earlier, the equivalent molar amount must be based on the H2 molecules in the gas, and that was the final figure used to calculate the pressure. If I missed something important in my analysis, I'd be happy to know, and make further corrections. AlanG On 2/10/2015 11:30 PM, Mark Jurich wrote: New MFMP Charge Analysis regarding the Explosion Run: http://bit.ly/1z61hEB (5 hours ago) This is a shocker to me. Here are the changes to the last values (first analysis): Free Volume for Gas: 1.09 ml -- 1.06 ml (not a large change) (Recall that Parkhomov estimates 2 ml in his experiment(s)) Weight Amount of Li(AlH4): 134 mg -- 19.7 mg (!!!)(Recall that Parkhomov/Translation states 100 mg) With these new values, the calculated pressure become approx. 1500 psi, which agrees with my calculation. But this new weight amount of Li(AlH4) is totally strange to me. The analysis goes on to state that this pressure is in line with Parkhomov's estimates, but as far as I understand, using far less Li(AlH4) than Parkhomov. The only value I have ever seen stated by Parkhomov is 100 mg, or a factor of 5 times more, by weight. Am I missing something here? This is a tremendous change that I'm having a hard time comprehending. I'm looking into the MFMP Calculation further, right now. Thanks, Mark Jurich -Original Message- From: Mark Jurich Sent: Sunday, February 08, 2015 2:56 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]:Re: Dog Bone Project I believe there maybe an error in this pressure estimate and that the calculated pressure will be exactly half of 19,861 psi (i.e., 9,930.5 psi). Although 0.0141 moles of Hydrogen are released, 0.00706 moles of Hydrogen Gas (H2) are released. I don't believe that free H atoms/ions contribute to the gas pressure in the free volume of the cell, and that the actual gas there is H2 Gas. Please see the following post for the details: https://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg101557.html Mark Jurich -Original Message- From: Craig Haynie Sent: Sunday, February 08, 2015 1:44 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Re: Dog Bone Project Pressure inside the dog bone is calculated to have been near 19,861 psi at the time of failure.
[Vo]:Re: Dog Bone Project
If one takes the MFMP measured densities along with the volume ratio 2.5 (neglecting the delivered volume value as data), one gets: mass Li(AlH4) = 124 mg mass Ni = 0.67 - .124 = 546 mg This is similar to the way Alan calculated it in the Revision, but I couldn't recreate his exact value in that revision ( 0.0197 g; I get 0.0276 g), so I may have an error in the above values The maximum pressure comes out to be approx. 9480 psi ... If one uses the van der Waals Equation of State instead of the Ideal Gas Law, the maximum pressure will be approx. 1.07 times that (10,144 psi). ... Anything over 10,000 psi is not good. Consider the fact that an abrupt pressure change may cause the Alumina to crack (just like an abrupt temperature change causes glass to crack). If the pressure rushed up to such a value, it may be the cause. I believe this data is probably tabulated somewhere for Alumina, at high temperatures. We need to find a paper or some values. Mark Jurich -Original Message- From: Mark Jurich Sent: Friday, February 13, 2015 5:33 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Re: Dog Bone Project Correction (typo) on Mass Ni (Original Message) ... Should be 563.3 mg ... The Measured Density by MFMP for Li(AlH4) is 0.492 g/cc. If I use that value instead of 0.74 times 0.917 g/cc (0.74 is theoretical maximum packing density for identical spheres), which is 0.679 g/cc, I get: Mass Li(AlH4) = 77.3 mg Mass Ni = 592.7 mg Density Ni = 1.509 g/cc I need to double-check these. Mark Jurich -Original Message- From: Mark Jurich Sent: Friday, February 13, 2015 4:57 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]:Re: Dog Bone Project FYI: I just made a calculation where I assumed the Li(AlH4) Powder density to be 0.74 times 0.917 g/cc. I then calculated the remaining 3 unknowns: Mass Li(AlH4) = 106.6 mg Mass Ni = 6282.6 mg Density Ni = 1.434 g/cc I assumed the delivered volume was 0.55 cc (0.5 to 0.6 cc) I then went searching for the Ni Density by the manufacturer of the actual Ni used, by first trying to identify the manufacturer at the MFMP Site (via EverNote). I then saw that MFMP have determined the density to be 1.06 g/cc just a short while ago . This is close... ...More when I find out more. Mark Jurich -Original Message- From: AlanG Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2015 8:44 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Re: Dog Bone Project Mark, the powders were already inside the glove box when the scale (also inside the box) failed, so volume measurements were the only data I had available. As a result, precise mass measurement was not possible, nor was determination of exact densities by measurement. The relative density of the powders was taken from the bulk densities as given in the respective Wikipedia entries. Unknowns include the packing ratio of each of the powders. They are both finely divided but not nano scale, so assuming a similar packing seems reasonable in the absence of other data. The volumes were calculated from dimensions of the actual components used, measured with a digital caliper. The space between the filler rod and the ID of the tube is significant and was included in my calculation. The possible vacant volume within the powder mass was not included, nor was the possible absorption of H2 into the nickel, which we think was minimal given the time scale of the experiment. Regarding the calculation itself, the mass of the fuel was determined accurately by weighing the loaded cell after sealing and removal from the glove box. This was divided by the volume mix ratio, then by the estimated relative density ratio of the two powders to get the mass of the LiAlH4 in the cell. The amount of H was then found simply by the ratio of standard atomic weights. As you correctly pointed out earlier, the equivalent molar amount must be based on the H2 molecules in the gas, and that was the final figure used to calculate the pressure. If I missed something important in my analysis, I'd be happy to know, and make further corrections. AlanG On 2/10/2015 11:30 PM, Mark Jurich wrote: New MFMP Charge Analysis regarding the Explosion Run: http://bit.ly/1z61hEB (5 hours ago) This is a shocker to me. Here are the changes to the last values (first analysis): Free Volume for Gas: 1.09 ml -- 1.06 ml (not a large change) (Recall that Parkhomov estimates 2 ml in his experiment(s)) Weight Amount of Li(AlH4): 134 mg -- 19.7 mg (!!!)(Recall that Parkhomov/Translation states 100 mg) With these new values, the calculated pressure become approx. 1500 psi, which agrees with my calculation. But this new weight amount of Li(AlH4) is totally strange to me. The analysis goes on to state that this pressure is in line with Parkhomov's estimates, but as far as I understand, using far less Li(AlH4) than Parkhomov. The only value I have ever seen stated by Parkhomov is 100 mg, or a factor of 5 times more, by weight.
Re: [Vo]:Explosion May Be Out of Control LENR
In reply to mix...@bigpond.com's message of Sat, 14 Feb 2015 11:40:42 +1100: Hi, I wrote: [snip] 1) LiHy4- is about 10 times smaller than a normal Hydrogen atom. This brings the nuclei much closer together (LiHy4- is negatively charged overall, so it can approach another nucleus.) [snip] I should add that this is for my variation on Mills theory. For his original version it's about 46% the size of a Hydrogen atom. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
Re: [Vo]:How could we collect ideas and knowledge on engineering of LENR devices?
A wiki is an interesting idea for something like this. A challenge with such a project is that opinionated folks are likely, through the force of personality, to end up irremediably skewing the content towards their own view of what's going on with LENR, and even what LENR supposedly is. I have seen this happen in other cold-fusion wiki projects and in forums. As far as I can tell, there is nothing to be done about it. Nonetheless it would be great if there were a wiki that became a clearinghouse to which people carrying out actual experiments contribute concrete details about their experiments. A very nice addition to such a wiki would be a file store of experimental results -- csv files, data dumps, etc -- which could be analyzed using statistical software. Perhaps common protocols might gradually be sorted out, and the format of the data would become more and more similar across different trials by different experimenters, making it possible to do cross-comparisons. I think such a site would be great even if the only contributors were hobbyists and not big personalities in LENR circles. I do not think LENR will become the subject of regular meetups until it breaks out of obscurity. Eric
Re: [Vo]:How could we collect ideas and knowledge on engineering of LENR devices?
Again I think it would be practical and realist to separate in great extent- classic LENR that has an excellent database, library, reviews from LENR+ enhanced heat excess. Needing its own strategy. I will publish today about the LENR + KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT PROJECT Thanks to Mats and you all for the initiative. Peter. On Sat, Feb 14, 2015 at 9:19 AM, Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.com wrote: A wiki is an interesting idea for something like this. A challenge with such a project is that opinionated folks are likely, through the force of personality, to end up irremediably skewing the content towards their own view of what's going on with LENR, and even what LENR supposedly is. I have seen this happen in other cold-fusion wiki projects and in forums. As far as I can tell, there is nothing to be done about it. Nonetheless it would be great if there were a wiki that became a clearinghouse to which people carrying out actual experiments contribute concrete details about their experiments. A very nice addition to such a wiki would be a file store of experimental results -- csv files, data dumps, etc -- which could be analyzed using statistical software. Perhaps common protocols might gradually be sorted out, and the format of the data would become more and more similar across different trials by different experimenters, making it possible to do cross-comparisons. I think such a site would be great even if the only contributors were hobbyists and not big personalities in LENR circles. I do not think LENR will become the subject of regular meetups until it breaks out of obscurity. Eric -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
