Re: [Vo]:Defkalion/MFMP implications for electrolysis?
Follow vorts When a dipole composed of an oscillation of electron and an ion encounters a boundary cndition, a ring like circulation of current is induced in the motion of the electron. Does that revelation help you understand anything about the production of a large magnetic field? Well it should. On Sat, Jul 27, 2013 at 1:21 AM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: My recent way of thinking suggests that heat energy is just random sound. If some way is found to direct the movements of the atoms in a coordinated manner, then that would look very much like a sound wave passing through the medium. I bet we could figure out how much the effective temperature of that wave is by the speed change of the atoms subjected to that signal. Double the instantaneous velocity of the atoms and you multiply the instantaneous energy by a factor of 4. This is like heating up the material a large amount. Since heat is apparently what makes Rossi's ECAT function, then this type of sound wave traveling through it should do something similar. At least that is the concept. Heat appears to equal sound with a random momentum vector that balances out over the entire mass of material while still having energy due to the motion of the atoms. The energy always adds regardless of the direction of the motion, while the momentum is a vector that can balance out. Sound to me is just the condition where momentum is directed by some source. That is why sound travels rapidly through materials while heat slowly spreads out. Give the idea some thought. Dave -Original Message- From: Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Sat, Jul 27, 2013 12:59 am Subject: Re: [Vo]:Defkalion/MFMP implications for electrolysis? On Sat, Jul 27, 2013 at 12:55 AM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.comwrote: It just might be possible for sound waves alone to do the job. It's not really sound. It's quantized heat energy. When you understand that, you realize that spin up and spin down electrons can mate if only for a brief period.
Re: [Vo]:MFMP on a possible independent report of DGT's Hyperion
I imagine that yo know Nassim Nicholas Taleb vision. what you do is matching his advices . the highly improbable is much undesrestimated, even if still improbable. 2013/7/27 blaze spinnaker blazespinna...@gmail.com In terms of my credentials though, which might be more interesting, I spent about the last 8 years or so on Intrade making buckets of money on making big bets on highly improbable events like this which came true. The opportunities for profit there were incredible. Some examples, I made money on Obama on McCain winning their primaries by making early bets (admittedly though I had hedged a bit, but was over all long on them).
RE: [Vo]:Kiplinger Letter, July 26, 2013 - Advances in Desalination Technology is coming
From: ChemE Stewart ... Really needs a large source of green energy to power Sans a more environmentally friendly green energy source, I wonder if anyone has done the math to determine whether constructing and dedicating a significant portion of the energy resources generated by a nearby nuclear plant would make the conversion process more economical through large scale volume. Again, I wonder what the cost per gallon'o'water is likely to be. With demand for fresh water constantly increasing... at some point water extracted via desalinization is likely to become a more palpable economical political choice for large portions of the planet's population centers. I would imagine the number crunchers have already have done the math, and that is why they are building the plants regardless of what energy source is used. It's inevitable that the price of fresh water will go up. It's becoming the most valuable commodity on the planet. They would be fools not to build desalinization plants. As always, there's money to be made. Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson svjart.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/newvortex/
Re: [Vo]:Kitamura much improved
DJ Cravens djcrav...@hotmail.com wrote: sounds like the Les Case system I have now. Tube in a tube. I think it is just a sensor mounted on the outside of a copper tube. The oil flows through the tube. Not having a T will reduce the likelihood of a leak. McKubre and I have some concerns about mixing. Not many concerns, because the calibration looks good. The problem is if you have the delta T too high the properties of the oil (heat cap., viscosity,...) start to confuse things.- at least for me. Yes. They have thought about these issues. blaze spinnaker blazespinna...@gmail.com wrote: I read 195 watts input, up to 20 watts excess. Is that correct? You may be right. I don't have access to the slides or abstract. That's a little weak and seems subject to measurement error. It sounds like a small percent of input but I do not think it is a problem because the input power is direct current resistance heating. It is only needed to bring the cell up to the working temperature. It does not contribute directly to the reaction. It does not control the reaction the way Rossi's heat does, or Defkalion's sparking does. DC power is very stable and easy to measure with high precision. If this were 195 W of electrolysis, sparking or glow discharge the input power would be irregular and somewhat difficult to measure, but 195 W of DC power has to be the easiest thing in experimental science to measure. So the background noise is low. Having said that, from Kitamura's lecture and slides it is a little unclear what the background noise level is. Unclear to me, anyway. - Jed
[Vo]:Nickel hydride magnetism - was: Defkalion/MFMP implications for electrolysis?
One further possibility for the magnetic anomaly. It's been mentioned earlier that in metallurgy, there is a unique metallic form of nickel-hydride which is stable all the way to the melting point of hydrogen. There is a Wiki article which explains some of this. Hydrogen essentially becomes metallic in this alloy, which is precisely one part hydrogen to fourteen parts Ni, where H becomes a true alloy (hydrogen can be no more than .002% of this alloy by mass). The structure is FCC with the monatomic hydrogen nested in the middle of 14 nickel atoms. It is extraordinarily stable but not often encountered, since extra hydrogen will destroy the FCC crystal by embrittlement and the alloy is difficult to produce. The $64 question relates to how fractional hydrogen f/H, which already can have a magnetic field which is hundreds of times more intense than the 12T field of monatomic hydrogen, would alter the ferromagnetic properties of this NiH alloy, even in the low percentage. The Curie temperature could be raised for instance and the coercivity greatly enhanced. Note that the neodymium magnets, the powerful ones which we are all familiar with, are mostly iron by far, and in fact the ratio is 14:2 (Fe14 Nd2B) which has a tetragonal crystalline structure not FCC. The point being that coercivity in a ferromagnetic material like iron or nickel can be controlled by smaller amount of another element. Essentially NiH in the proper ratio of 14:1 when the hydrogen is fraction could produce a unique magnet structure - and could exist as a permanent magnet at high temperature, and one wonders if not at high temperature ONLY. . since there is the possibility that the aligned field only develops under combined thermal agitation and EM input (from Rossi's resistive coils or DGTs pulsed discharge). From: David Roberson Excellent point Eric. Rossi appears to operate his ECAT at much higher temperatures than this while DGT was very close to it. I wonder if there is significance to the difference? -Original Message- From: Eric Walker Also note that the Curie temp for nickel is 357 C. I believe above that temperature nickel would lose any permanent magnetism. So if there is a strong field above that temperature, I assume it would be induced from something going on with the reaction. David Roberson wrote: Stack a zillion of these guys up and you might get a significant field at a distance. My take on this is that the size of the field needs to be clarified as well as the magnitude if it is real. It is too early for us to determine exactly what is occurring. Dave
[Vo]:electron screening, Rydberg states and tunneling
I have two questions for Robin (or anyone else who might know). First, some context. In a metal lattice, normally the electrons are highly localized around the lattice sites. In the example of palladium, if you look at a density map of the electron orbitals, they are highly clustered around the palladium atoms, and there is a very low density in the interstitial sites. In relatively unloaded palladium, hydrogen occupies the octahedral sites. I recently read a calculation looking at the electron density, and it suggested that almost none of the electrons were located in the vicinity of the octahedral sites. The implication was that there was little to no shielding. They were arguing against a reduction in the Coulomb barrier for two deuterium nuclei occupying adjacent sites (they might have been considering the highly loaded case, where some tetrahedral sites are also occupied; I don't remember). They found the effect of electrons in the host lattice to be negligible on the tunneling rate, if I understand the calculation. That was a calculation for equilibrium conditions (e.g., not much going on). They thought they could draw conclusions on the basis of it for nonequilibrium conditions as well. In this context I note that the ionization cross section is a function of energy. At higher energies, you're likely to get ionization, and at lower energies you're likely to get an excited (Rydberg) state, but not ionization. When there is no ionization, the electron steps up into an orbital of increased reach -- a Rydberg state. It goes out further. Now imagine a host lattice with a population of Rydberg-excited electrons. The density map of the lattice would look somewhat different. There would still be the tightly bound inner shell electrons clustered around the lattice sites, but in the rest of the lattice, the density would be evened-out somewhat. Perhaps there would be an overall increase in the level of screening, even out in the octahedral sites (note that nickel is also fcc). Presumably, as the energy of the hydrogen population is increased there will be increasing Rydberg excitations of the lattice site electrons, and perhaps this would not necessarily get to the point of ionization because the energy is still quite low in relative terms. My two questions for Robin (or anyone else): - Do you have a sense of how tunneling would be affected at the locations that hydrodgen/deuterium pairs are likely to be if a significant population of nickel electrons were excited into Rydberg states? I think we can assume Ron's mechanism is also at play, but perhaps not. (If we get set aside Ron's mechanism, we have gammas to deal with.) - Is there a basic distinction between tunneling and Coulomb penetration, or are they both ultimately reducible to the amount of time that the two nuclei spend in proximity to one another? In the latter case this would presumably be because they approach so close. One interesting point to add -- I am not arguing for the importance of an fcc lattice. I think there are some very interesting things that could happen with this screening phenomenon and Ron's mechanism in cracks, for example (e.g., a dense plasma focus). Eric
[Vo]:ICCF18 archives
The conference archive is here: https://mospace.umsystem.edu/xmlui/ Use search term LENR They have not uploaded many abstracts or posters yet. They should catch up soon. - Jed
RE: [Vo]:Nickel hydride magnetism - was: Defkalion/MFMP implications for electrolysis?
Oops - meant to say - melting point of nickel From: Jones Beene It's been mentioned earlier that in metallurgy, there is a unique metallic form of nickel-hydride which is stable all the way to the melting point of hydrogen.
Re: [Vo]:Kitamura much improved
Comparisons of systems are valuable in understanding what the LENR reaction is doing. As a general principle, phonon driven dipole oscillations of electrons and associated ions (Holes) are the power plant that drives the LENR process. Heat pumps energy into these dipoles so that they vibrate vigorously. There is an energy concentration mechanism that is fed by these dipoles. This concentration mechanism absorbs this dipole energy and saves it with little or no loss in power. As heat is added to the system, thermal power is transferred optically to the energy storage mechanism in the way that a battery stores current chemically or a Cyclotron stores electrons magnetically. There is a limit to this energy transfer mechanism but that limit is a timeframe not a breakout of an energy containment mechanism. The Cravens system uses low quality heat to drive the LENR process. The initiation temperature is low but the thermal power mechanism to energy accumulation is proportionally weak because the weak flow of energy to storage is cut off by the reaction timeframe limitation. In the Ni/H system, the initiation temperature is higher and the thermal power mechanism to energy accumulation is proportionally stronger because the stronger flow of energy to storage is large during the reaction timeframe. So a high initiation temperature makes for a stronger reaction with greater power production. As a example of this concept, if the Creavens system increased the Debye temperature of its material, and the bath used to supply thermal input power were hotter, more power might be produced. If a liquid metal bath could heat the pure nickel reaction powder to high temperatures were to replace the water bath, and nickel was used to replace the palladium alloy, more heat output density might result. Taking this line of thinking to its extreme, the materials with the highest Debye temperatures :( Silicon, 645K), (Beryllium, 1440 K), (Carbon, 2230 K) may provide the most output power density. PS. If NASA is using carbon nanotubes in there process, they will not reach the light off temperatures needed for a carbon based system because that extreme temperature is too high for standard engineering designs. On Sat, Jul 27, 2013 at 10:42 AM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.comwrote: DJ Cravens djcrav...@hotmail.com wrote: sounds like the Les Case system I have now. Tube in a tube. I think it is just a sensor mounted on the outside of a copper tube. The oil flows through the tube. Not having a T will reduce the likelihood of a leak. McKubre and I have some concerns about mixing. Not many concerns, because the calibration looks good. The problem is if you have the delta T too high the properties of the oil (heat cap., viscosity,...) start to confuse things.- at least for me. Yes. They have thought about these issues. blaze spinnaker blazespinna...@gmail.com wrote: I read 195 watts input, up to 20 watts excess. Is that correct? You may be right. I don't have access to the slides or abstract. That's a little weak and seems subject to measurement error. It sounds like a small percent of input but I do not think it is a problem because the input power is direct current resistance heating. It is only needed to bring the cell up to the working temperature. It does not contribute directly to the reaction. It does not control the reaction the way Rossi's heat does, or Defkalion's sparking does. DC power is very stable and easy to measure with high precision. If this were 195 W of electrolysis, sparking or glow discharge the input power would be irregular and somewhat difficult to measure, but 195 W of DC power has to be the easiest thing in experimental science to measure. So the background noise is low. Having said that, from Kitamura's lecture and slides it is a little unclear what the background noise level is. Unclear to me, anyway. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:electron screening, Rydberg states and tunneling
Your concept of electron actions in a collection of micro/nano particles needs to be adjusted. Electrons and holes are oscillating like a large ball and a small ball connected by a spring. This is dipole oscillation. Heat feeds the strength of this oscillation. When the electrons move far enough, they move off the particle boundary and spin in a vortex current. Fit your thinking into this experimentally proven framework. On Sat, Jul 27, 2013 at 11:22 AM, Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.com wrote: I have two questions for Robin (or anyone else who might know). First, some context. In a metal lattice, normally the electrons are highly localized around the lattice sites. In the example of palladium, if you look at a density map of the electron orbitals, they are highly clustered around the palladium atoms, and there is a very low density in the interstitial sites. In relatively unloaded palladium, hydrogen occupies the octahedral sites. I recently read a calculation looking at the electron density, and it suggested that almost none of the electrons were located in the vicinity of the octahedral sites. The implication was that there was little to no shielding. They were arguing against a reduction in the Coulomb barrier for two deuterium nuclei occupying adjacent sites (they might have been considering the highly loaded case, where some tetrahedral sites are also occupied; I don't remember). They found the effect of electrons in the host lattice to be negligible on the tunneling rate, if I understand the calculation. That was a calculation for equilibrium conditions (e.g., not much going on). They thought they could draw conclusions on the basis of it for nonequilibrium conditions as well. In this context I note that the ionization cross section is a function of energy. At higher energies, you're likely to get ionization, and at lower energies you're likely to get an excited (Rydberg) state, but not ionization. When there is no ionization, the electron steps up into an orbital of increased reach -- a Rydberg state. It goes out further. Now imagine a host lattice with a population of Rydberg-excited electrons. The density map of the lattice would look somewhat different. There would still be the tightly bound inner shell electrons clustered around the lattice sites, but in the rest of the lattice, the density would be evened-out somewhat. Perhaps there would be an overall increase in the level of screening, even out in the octahedral sites (note that nickel is also fcc). Presumably, as the energy of the hydrogen population is increased there will be increasing Rydberg excitations of the lattice site electrons, and perhaps this would not necessarily get to the point of ionization because the energy is still quite low in relative terms. My two questions for Robin (or anyone else): - Do you have a sense of how tunneling would be affected at the locations that hydrodgen/deuterium pairs are likely to be if a significant population of nickel electrons were excited into Rydberg states? I think we can assume Ron's mechanism is also at play, but perhaps not. (If we get set aside Ron's mechanism, we have gammas to deal with.) - Is there a basic distinction between tunneling and Coulomb penetration, or are they both ultimately reducible to the amount of time that the two nuclei spend in proximity to one another? In the latter case this would presumably be because they approach so close. One interesting point to add -- I am not arguing for the importance of an fcc lattice. I think there are some very interesting things that could happen with this screening phenomenon and Ron's mechanism in cracks, for example (e.g., a dense plasma focus). Eric
RE: [Vo]:Kitamura much improved
axil - yes. In my younger wilder days I had envisioned just that. (high temps with high temp alloys) Using such things at W in the alloying of Ni or Pd and the use of very high temps with electrically driven deuterium plasma. I even submitted a patent appl. for it (http://www.google.com/patents/WO1990014668A2?cl=en notice that was April '89) Don't laugh too much. I was excited at the time and working on a rocket program at the time. I still think that (high temp) is the way to ultimately go. However, for now I am trying for a standalone demo and that just about requires working at lower temps, if it is to be self heating. The other path would involve energy conversion and much more involved systems. I am content, for now, to just have my sample warmer than the control. Less heat to be sure, but fewer things for people to question. My next step will to get that working temp down nearer to room temp. The problem I am facing on that path is a good variable heat path to balance the rate of heat extraction and maintaining a significant sample temperature. I will not be making direct claims of power yields at NI since that would require lengthy calibration. I will just make the claim that the sample is warmer than the control and leave it at that. But, my Ni demo should be at around 1 watt out with no input (but in a 80C bath) for the 5 days of expo set up. Internal volume 450ml, sample mass of 200 g but that is mostly C with only about 2% being metal. Perhaps someone here would like to figure how long I would need to run a sealed brass sphere to rule out chemistry from 4 g of active material or even 200 grams total material. (note: I have run these for multiple months in the lab- one set has clocked 3 months) D2 Date: Sat, 27 Jul 2013 12:09:08 -0400 Subject: Re: [Vo]:Kitamura much improved From: janap...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Comparisons of systems are valuable in understanding what the LENR reaction is doing. As a general principle, phonon driven dipole oscillations of electrons and associated ions (Holes) are the power plant that drives the LENR process. Heat pumps energy into these dipoles so that they vibrate vigorously. There is an energy concentration mechanism that is fed by these dipoles. This concentration mechanism absorbs this dipole energy and saves it with little or no loss in power. As heat is added to the system, thermal power is transferred optically to the energy storage mechanism in the way that a battery stores current chemically or a Cyclotron stores electrons magnetically. There is a limit to this energy transfer mechanism but that limit is a timeframe not a breakout of an energy containment mechanism. The Cravens system uses low quality heat to drive the LENR process. The initiation temperature is low but the thermal power mechanism to energy accumulation is proportionally weak because the weak flow of energy to storage is cut off by the reaction timeframe limitation. In the Ni/H system, the initiation temperature is higher and the thermal power mechanism to energy accumulation is proportionally stronger because the stronger flow of energy to storage is large during the reaction timeframe. So a high initiation temperature makes for a stronger reaction with greater power production. As a example of this concept, if the Creavens system increased the Debye temperature of its material, and the bath used to supply thermal input power were hotter, more power might be produced. If a liquid metal bath could heat the pure nickel reaction powder to high temperatures were to replace the water bath, and nickel was used to replace the palladium alloy, more heat output density might result. Taking this line of thinking to its extreme, the materials with the highest Debye temperatures :( Silicon, 645K), (Beryllium, 1440 K), (Carbon, 2230 K) may provide the most output power density. PS. If NASA is using carbon nanotubes in there process, they will not reach the light off temperatures needed for a carbon based system because that extreme temperature is too high for standard engineering designs. On Sat, Jul 27, 2013 at 10:42 AM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: DJ Cravens djcrav...@hotmail.com wrote: sounds like the Les Case system I have now. Tube in a tube. I think it is just a sensor mounted on the outside of a copper tube. The oil flows through the tube. Not having a T will reduce the likelihood of a leak. McKubre and I have some concerns about mixing. Not many concerns, because the calibration looks good. The problem is if you have the delta T too high the properties of the oil (heat cap., viscosity,...) start to confuse things.- at least for me. Yes. They have thought about these issues. blaze spinnaker blazespinna...@gmail.com wrote: I read 195 watts input, up to 20 watts excess. Is that correct? You may be right.
[Vo]:More CF/LENR patent applications
Hello group, You might want to watch this page for new ones in the short/medium term: http://www.google.com/patents/sitemap/en/Sitemap/G21/G21B/G21B_3.html Recently added (Publication date: Jul 25, 2013): * * * Yogendra Narain SRIVASTAVA, Allan Widom Nuclear reactor consuming nuclear fuel that contains atoms of elements having a low atomic number and a low mass number (WO 2013108159 A1) http://www.google.com/patents/WO2013108159A1?cl=en * * * Tadahiko Mizuno, Yasuo Ishikawa Method of and apparatus for nuclear transformation (US 20130188763 A1) http://www.google.com/patents/US20130188763 * * * Cheers, S.A.
[Vo]:Youtube warn about watching cold fusion documentary (fire from water)
This is ridiculous. http://www.youtube.com/verify_age?next_url=/watch%3Fv%3DgGJiLrG3fLY%26feature%3Dyoutu.be%26a
Re: [Vo]:Youtube warn about watching cold fusion documentary (fire from water)
Content set as “NO RATING” has not been rated by the uploader. In cases where the uploader has failed to provide a rating for their video, it is automatically Age-gated and not available to viewers younger than 18. --- I write a little. I erase a lot. - Chopin From: David ledin mathematic.analy...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Saturday, July 27, 2013 1:41 PM Subject: [Vo]:Youtube warn about watching cold fusion documentary (fire from water) This is ridiculous. http://www.youtube.com/verify_age?next_url=/watch%3Fv%3DgGJiLrG3fLY%26feature%3Dyoutu.be%26a
RE: [Vo]:MFMP on a possible independent report of DGT's Hyperion
From Blaze: ... In terms of my credentials though, which might be more interesting, I spent about the last 8 years or so on Intrade making buckets of money on making big bets on highly improbable events like this which came true. The opportunities for profit there were incredible. Some examples, I made money on Obama on McCain winning their primaries by making early bets (admittedly though I had hedged a bit, but was over all long on them). Buckets of money. you say. It's obvious to me that it takes a large and well-integrated skill set to make buckets of money betting on improbable events. (On a related note, one of my mutual funds is a contra fund. It often seems to do better than the average fund.) On a related topic, earlier in my life I tried my hand in the commodity markets. I suspect trading commodities shares many similarities with the kind of skill set you have acquired. In a sense, the commodities you bet on are futures. It's anyone's guess whether the types of futures you buy into will ripen or go sour when it comes time to cash in. As for me and my commodity trading adventures, I'll grant you that it was a fun and exciting time for me... while it lasted. Eventually, I lost all the money I had set aside for this adventure. I'm sure I lost it all due to my own lack of having acquired a sufficient collection of skill sets, and the fact that I didn't possess an appropriate psychological propensity for immediate trading, and finally not having timely data in which to make proper assessments on whether to bury or short the commodity. I did manage to eventually rationalize my financial losses as having acquired some valuable experiences in the art of trading futures. It's not for the faint of heart! Of course, while I paid my tuition fees I flunked the course. On cannot pass at everything they dabble in. ;-) In the aftermath I eventually learned that many professional commodity traders manage to stay in business because there's a constant influx of newbies (just like me) who come in with the goal of making money. What typically happens, however, is that the vast majority of these newbies end up transferring bulk of their bank accounts into the accounts of the professionals. An irony that did not escape me was the fact that the only way the professionals tend to stay in business is to constantly sell to naive newbies a manufactured hope that there is money to be made in trading futures. In fact, that's how all forms of professional gambling manage to survive. Granted, an extremely small percentage of brand new newbie traders actually DO end up become good at the skill, but as someone was known to have sed: A sucker is born every minute. In the end I think the biggest [moral] lesson I learned completing this particular course was to ask myself, what kind of a contribution was I actually making to the world? The more I thought about it, not very much. I then asked myself, what if I had become successful? What would I have then been able to put my grave stone? STEVEN VINCENT JOHNSON 1952 - 2031 HIs contribution to the world was that he made a lot of money extracting it from the wallets of others who were also trying to make a lot of money attempting to do the same thing to him. * * * RIP Just as in the fine art of betting, commodity trading works by profiting from the losses of others. Inculcating this realization did not set well with me. In a sense I actually became relieved of the fact that I had lost money. It meant that I had not profited from the financial losses of others. I realize this was a rationalization on my part. Nevertheless, my own losses left me with a clearer conscience. Based on my own memories I will grant you that it probably IS a rush to realize how smart one must be in order to take money (willing so) from others, and to be able to do it in a perfectly legal way! The fact is that a capitalistic economy needs transactional activity of this sort in order for the markets to remain dynamic and liquid. So... in a sense, THATS, the service traders and betters are contributing to the system. Hey! It's just money. ...hopefully, YOUR, money, and not mine. Nothing personal! For some inexplicable reason, I don't think I personally would feel comfortable advertising the acquisition of such a skill set on my gravestone. But by all means, have fun with your buckets of money. Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson svjart.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/newvortex/
RE: [Vo]:MFMP on a possible independent report of DGT's Hyperion
yes, there is market inefficiency due to risk aversion. Black swans exist. D2 From: orionwo...@charter.net To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: [Vo]:MFMP on a possible independent report of DGT's Hyperion Date: Sat, 27 Jul 2013 13:09:49 -0500 From Blaze: ... In terms of my credentials though, which might be more interesting, I spent about the last 8 years or so on Intrade making buckets of money on making big bets on highly improbable events like this which came true. The opportunities for profit there were incredible. Some examples, I made money on Obama on McCain winning their primaries by making early bets (admittedly though I had hedged a bit, but was over all long on them). Buckets of money. you say. It's obvious to me that it takes a large and well-integrated skill set to make buckets of money betting on improbable events. (On a related note, one of my mutual funds is a contra fund. It often seems to do better than the average fund.) On a related topic, earlier in my life I tried my hand in the commodity markets. I suspect trading commodities shares many similarities with the kind of skill set you have acquired. In a sense, the commodities you bet on are futures. It's anyone's guess whether the types of futures you buy into will ripen or go sour when it comes time to cash in. As for me and my commodity trading adventures, I'll grant you that it was a fun and exciting time for me... while it lasted. Eventually, I lost all the money I had set aside for this adventure. I'm sure I lost it all due to my own lack of having acquired a sufficient collection of skill sets, and the fact that I didn't possess an appropriate psychological propensity for immediate trading, and finally not having timely data in which to make proper assessments on whether to bury or short the commodity. I did manage to eventually rationalize my financial losses as having acquired some valuable experiences in the art of trading futures. It’s not for the faint of heart! Of course, while I paid my tuition fees I flunked the course. On cannot pass at everything they dabble in. ;-) In the aftermath I eventually learned that many professional commodity traders manage to stay in business because there's a constant influx of newbies (just like me) who come in with the goal of making money. What typically happens, however, is that the vast majority of these newbies end up transferring bulk of their bank accounts into the accounts of the professionals. An irony that did not escape me was the fact that the only way the professionals tend to stay in business is to constantly sell to naive newbies a manufactured hope that there is money to be made in trading futures. In fact, that's how all forms of professional gambling manage to survive. Granted, an extremely small percentage of brand new newbie traders actually DO end up become good at the skill, but as someone was known to have sed: A sucker is born every minute. In the end I think the biggest [moral] lesson I learned completing this particular course was to ask myself, what kind of a contribution was I actually making to the world? The more I thought about it, not very much. I then asked myself, what if I had become successful? What would I have then been able to put my grave stone? STEVEN VINCENT JOHNSON1952 - 2031 HIs contribution to the world was thathe made a lot of money extracting it from the wallets of otherswho were also trying to make a lot of moneyattempting to do the same thing to him.* * *RIP Just as in the fine art of betting, commodity trading works by profiting from the losses of others. Inculcating this realization did not set well with me. In a sense I actually became relieved of the fact that I had lost money. It meant that I had not profited from the financial losses of others. I realize this was a rationalization on my part. Nevertheless, my own losses left me with a clearer conscience. Based on my own memories I will grant you that it probably IS a rush to realize how smart one must be in order to take money (willing so) from others, and to be able to do it in a perfectly legal way! The fact is that a capitalistic economy needs transactional activity of this sort in order for the markets to remain dynamic and liquid. So... in a sense, THATS, the service traders and betters are contributing to the system. Hey! It's just money. ...hopefully, YOUR, money, and not mine. Nothing personal! For some inexplicable reason, I don’t think I personally would feel comfortable advertising the acquisition of such a skill set on my gravestone. But by all means, have fun with your buckets of money. Regards,Steven Vincent Johnsonsvjart.OrionWorks.comwww.zazzle.com/orionworkstech.groups.yahoo.com/group/newvortex/
Re: [Vo]:Kitamura much improved
From: DJ Cravens djcrav...@hotmail.com Sent: Saturday, July 27, 2013 9:38:07 AM Subject: RE: [Vo]:Kitamura much improved Perhaps someone here would like to figure how long I would need to run a sealed brass sphere to rule out chemistry from 4 g of active material or even 200 grams total material. (note: I have run these for multiple months in the lab- one set has clocked 3 months) My fakes calculator is set up to work with volumes. (I wrote the code with mass too, but I don't have energy density by mass set up for all candidates.) Needs power in (zero), power out, time (not really needed, but makes the report clearer) and volume.
RE: [Vo]:Kitamura much improved
Alen, where can I find your fakes calculator. What have you got as the high for chemistry for a sealed unit (i.e. no O2 access)? with Li batteries, I think you can get up to 4MJ/L (but I don't know how anyone could actually put them inside a sphere with a 1/8npt hole- or how they could survive welding hemispheres). I figure at 450ml that could be 1.8MJ possible or about 500Wh. So I guess I would need about 21 days. or better 2 months. Is that about what you get? D2 Date: Sat, 27 Jul 2013 11:39:59 -0700 From: a...@well.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Kitamura much improved From: DJ Cravens djcrav...@hotmail.com Sent: Saturday, July 27, 2013 9:38:07 AM Subject: RE: [Vo]:Kitamura much improved Perhaps someone here would like to figure how long I would need to run a sealed brass sphere to rule out chemistry from 4 g of active material or even 200 grams total material. (note: I have run these for multiple months in the lab- one set has clocked 3 months) My fakes calculator is set up to work with volumes. (I wrote the code with mass too, but I don't have energy density by mass set up for all candidates.) Needs power in (zero), power out, time (not really needed, but makes the report clearer) and volume.
Re: [Vo]:Kitamura much improved
From: DJ Cravens djcrav...@hotmail.com Sent: Saturday, July 27, 2013 12:10:03 PM Alen, where can I find your fakes calculator. What have you got as the high for chemistry for a sealed unit (i.e. no O2 access)? with Li batteries, I think you can get up to 4MJ/L (but I don't know how anyone could actually put them inside a sphere with a 1/8npt hole- or how they could survive welding hemispheres). I figure at 450ml that could be 1.8MJ possible or about 500Wh. So I guess I would need about 21 days. or better 2 months. Is that about what you get? My Lithium battery number is 3.6MJ/L -- so that's about right. The current version is at http://lenr.qumbu.com/rossi_ecat_proof_frames_v430.php Fixed Energy Fakes starts here. http://lenr.qumbu.com/rossi_ecat_proof_v430.php#fixedenergyfakes This was mostly designed for the Rossi experiments, so a lot of them are X+Air or X+Stored oxygen. Most of the energy density values are from wiki. Note that (despite Jed's objections) my calculation assumes that the entire volume if fakium, so any actual implementation would be way less. (Might be quicker just to do a spreadsheet than plug your values into my fakes calculator. Be a coupla/few hours to get round to it.)
RE: [Vo]:Kitamura much improved
thanks, I know I had seen something like that around here. I guess that I will not be able to convince a diehard skeptic in 5 days of running. But it should give them something to think about. I do have test points so that they can get R's from hand meters and not have to put trust in some computer display alone. Date: Sat, 27 Jul 2013 12:24:14 -0700 From: a...@well.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Kitamura much improved From: DJ Cravens djcrav...@hotmail.com Sent: Saturday, July 27, 2013 12:10:03 PM Alen, where can I find your fakes calculator. What have you got as the high for chemistry for a sealed unit (i.e. no O2 access)? with Li batteries, I think you can get up to 4MJ/L (but I don't know how anyone could actually put them inside a sphere with a 1/8npt hole- or how they could survive welding hemispheres). I figure at 450ml that could be 1.8MJ possible or about 500Wh. So I guess I would need about 21 days. or better 2 months. Is that about what you get? My Lithium battery number is 3.6MJ/L -- so that's about right. The current version is at http://lenr.qumbu.com/rossi_ecat_proof_frames_v430.php Fixed Energy Fakes starts here. http://lenr.qumbu.com/rossi_ecat_proof_v430.php#fixedenergyfakes This was mostly designed for the Rossi experiments, so a lot of them are X+Air or X+Stored oxygen. Most of the energy density values are from wiki. Note that (despite Jed's objections) my calculation assumes that the entire volume if fakium, so any actual implementation would be way less. (Might be quicker just to do a spreadsheet than plug your values into my fakes calculator. Be a coupla/few hours to get round to it.)
Re: [Vo]:Kitamura much improved
DJ Cravens djcrav...@hotmail.com wrote: Perhaps someone here would like to figure how long I would need to run a *sealed *brass sphere to rule out chemistry from 4 g of active material or even 200 grams total material. Simplify! Just use the energy density of gasoline, 42 MJ/kg. No common fuel is better. Only a few exotic fuels are better. If you want to be absolutely sure, double it to 84 MJ/kg. That is very conservative because it does not include the weight of the oxygen in the burned fuel. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Kitamura much improved
From: DJ Cravens djcrav...@hotmail.com Sent: Saturday, July 27, 2013 12:43:44 PM thanks, I know I had seen something like that around here. It's almost set up .. (if not very useful) I just need to plug in the values. Input power : 0 Output power : 1W Inner (active material volume) : 450 ml = 0.450 l Outer (brass sphere) : ??? Or give me the radius
RE: [Vo]:Kitamura much improved
That is silly. There is no way for a viewer to measure the weight of material but the volume is quickly seen. They can see the size but not know the mass of the material inside. How do you expect to burn gasoline inside a sealed brass sphere? You need oxygen for that. Date: Sat, 27 Jul 2013 15:23:00 -0500 Subject: Re: [Vo]:Kitamura much improved From: jedrothw...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com DJ Cravens djcrav...@hotmail.com wrote: Perhaps someone here would like to figure how long I would need to run a sealed brass sphere to rule out chemistry from 4 g of active material or even 200 grams total material. Simplify! Just use the energy density of gasoline, 42 MJ/kg. No common fuel is better. Only a few exotic fuels are better. If you want to be absolutely sure, double it to 84 MJ/kg. That is very conservative because it does not include the weight of the oxygen in the burned fuel. - Jed
RE: [Vo]:Kitamura much improved
Thanks, but based on volume alone, it is clear that 5 days is not enough for a rock solid demo. The volume of the sample is low, but there needs to be a volume of the convection of the H/D in the system. I guess afterwards, I might could saw the device in half. That might help a bit. But it is 1/8inch thick brass. I have to think of how I might could do that on the last day on the floor of the expo. (sawing a sphere is trickier than you might think - it wants to roll away from a blade.) I do have a cut away sample but that might not be enough. I really should cut the one that was in use. D2 Date: Sat, 27 Jul 2013 14:34:26 -0700 From: a...@well.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Kitamura much improved From: DJ Cravens djcrav...@hotmail.com Sent: Saturday, July 27, 2013 12:43:44 PM thanks, I know I had seen something like that around here. It's almost set up .. (if not very useful) I just need to plug in the values. Input power : 0 Output power : 1W Inner (active material volume) : 450 ml = 0.450 l Outer (brass sphere) : ??? Or give me the radius
Re: [Vo]:Kitamura much improved -- fakes
From: DJ Cravens djcrav...@hotmail.com Sent: Saturday, July 27, 2013 2:50:09 PM Thanks, but based on volume alone, it is clear that 5 days is not enough for a rock solid demo. For what it's worth : http://lenr.qumbu.com/rossi_ecat_proof_v430.php#fakesbyvolume For the INNER -- the most plausible (=least implausible) fake is compressed hydrogen burning external air (don't ask how) -- which would run for 700 hours. For 1W output you could possibly use the oxygen dissolved in the bath. The combustion product is water, which just goes back into the bath. The longest-running implausible fake is Boron + External Air = 17225 Hrs Lithium Battery = 450 Hrs
Re: [Vo]:electron screening, Rydberg states and tunneling
In reply to Eric Walker's message of Sat, 27 Jul 2013 08:22:30 -0700: Hi, [snip] My two questions for Robin (or anyone else): - Do you have a sense of how tunneling would be affected at the locations that hydrodgen/deuterium pairs are likely to be if a significant population of nickel electrons were excited into Rydberg states? I think we can assume Ron's mechanism is also at play, but perhaps not. (If we get set aside Ron's mechanism, we have gammas to deal with.) If a significant number were in Rydberg states, I think it could make quite a large difference. As long as at least 1 electron is between two Hydrogen nuclei, they will be attracted to one another (actually to the electron), so the local electron density makes a very large difference to the tunneling probability (same thing as Coulomb barrier penetration[1]). However, if you take into consideration that some percentage of the Pd atoms will have already lost at least one valence electron anyway (gone wandering off through the lattice), then I'm not sure how easy to would be to get at least one of the remaining electrons into Rydberg orbitals. Nevertheless, the concept is very interesting, and does appear to tie together a number of loose ends. If combined with Horace's theory, perhaps as the introductory step to his process, it may also explain the Ni results, though I don't think it would explain why 61Ni is unreactive. BTW the tetrahedral sites are probably much better suited if you want to go down this road. Temperature would play an important role in this model, not just in creating Rydberg states, but also because thermal vibration about an equilibrium point can bring two nuclei closer together, thus reducing the distance that needs to be bridged by tunneling. This could be the link to the Debye temperature. [1] Tunneling probability is affected by both the height and width of the barrier. The barrier height represents the classical energy required to overcome it, so this is directly related to the charges on the respective nuclei. The mass of the nuclei also play a role in determining the height. The barrier width is essentially the separation distance between the two nuclei at the instant of tunneling. BTW2 I suspect that electrons entering Rydberg states would cause the lattice to swell. So it might be worth looking at the temperature dependence of the thermal expansion coefficient, and see if there is knee in the curve at some point. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
Re: [Vo]:Ni 61 does not react. (Ideas why this would be?)
On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 2:59 PM, DJ Cravens djcrav...@hotmail.com wrote: The grounded thick stainless steel container, mu metal, and outer metal insulated box should act as a cage for the Defkalion demo. I expect there was EMI from their HV supply Dr. Cravens, are you saying that you can confirm that mu-metal was used in the construction of the Defkalion reactor?
Re: [Vo]:electron screening, Rydberg states and tunneling
There are many misconceptions that are detrimental to the proper understanding of function that Rydberg matter, clusters, and atom formation in a Ni/H reactor. Nano particles of potassium hydrides will form as the plasma of the heater/spark cools and condenses to form superatoms. Common Forms of Alkali Metals — New Rydberg Matter Clusters of Potassium and Hydrogen Author and institution: Leif Holmlid (Department of chemistry) Posted in: Journal of Cluster Science, 21 (4) pp. 637-653 Publication Type: Article, refereegranskad scientific Year Of Publication: 2010 The Full-text Link: http://www.springerlink.com/content/...8/fulltext.pdf Summary (abstract): Alkali metals can form low-density metallic phases, in their most wellordered form called Rydberg Matter (RM). RM consists mainly of planar metallic clusters, with the number of atoms in each cluster not known that 100 according to experiments. Six-fold symmetric RM clusters in the most stable series K19, K37, K61 and K91 were observed by rotational radio-frequency spectroscopy and shown to be leveled in the point group D6h (Holmlid, J Mol Struct 885: 122, 2008). Here, the RM of clusters formed by K H atoms are studied by time-of-flight neutral after pulsed laser fragmentation of RM formed from K H. The kinetic energy of the fragments is due to laser-initiated Coulomb explosion. Novel RM clusters of the type CN with N = 6, 9, 10, 13 and 15 are ejected from the material. They are necessarily planar due to the RM bonding, with two-or three-fold symmetry axes perpendicular to the plane. Pure hydrogen atom RM clusters HN are observed, demonstrating once more that H indeed is an alkali metal. KMHN Mixed clusters similar to hydrogen clusters where each K replaces an H atom as in KH6 are now also positively identified. These nanoparticles live for up to 6 minutes between creation by spark discharge in the Defkalion reactor and a certain fixed timeframe in the Rossi reactor. These short lived dust particles support the LENR reaction after their creation an gradually are destroyed in dynamic nuclear active environments(NAE) between these particles. I am hopeful that this reality penetrates the general thinking here on vortex as a platform for more complicated ideas which may then be proffered, On Sat, Jul 27, 2013 at 7:09 PM, mix...@bigpond.com wrote: In reply to Eric Walker's message of Sat, 27 Jul 2013 08:22:30 -0700: Hi, [snip] My two questions for Robin (or anyone else): - Do you have a sense of how tunneling would be affected at the locations that hydrodgen/deuterium pairs are likely to be if a significant population of nickel electrons were excited into Rydberg states? I think we can assume Ron's mechanism is also at play, but perhaps not. (If we get set aside Ron's mechanism, we have gammas to deal with.) If a significant number were in Rydberg states, I think it could make quite a large difference. As long as at least 1 electron is between two Hydrogen nuclei, they will be attracted to one another (actually to the electron), so the local electron density makes a very large difference to the tunneling probability (same thing as Coulomb barrier penetration[1]). However, if you take into consideration that some percentage of the Pd atoms will have already lost at least one valence electron anyway (gone wandering off through the lattice), then I'm not sure how easy to would be to get at least one of the remaining electrons into Rydberg orbitals. Nevertheless, the concept is very interesting, and does appear to tie together a number of loose ends. If combined with Horace's theory, perhaps as the introductory step to his process, it may also explain the Ni results, though I don't think it would explain why 61Ni is unreactive. BTW the tetrahedral sites are probably much better suited if you want to go down this road. Temperature would play an important role in this model, not just in creating Rydberg states, but also because thermal vibration about an equilibrium point can bring two nuclei closer together, thus reducing the distance that needs to be bridged by tunneling. This could be the link to the Debye temperature. [1] Tunneling probability is affected by both the height and width of the barrier. The barrier height represents the classical energy required to overcome it, so this is directly related to the charges on the respective nuclei. The mass of the nuclei also play a role in determining the height. The barrier width is essentially the separation distance between the two nuclei at the instant of tunneling. BTW2 I suspect that electrons entering Rydberg states would cause the lattice to swell. So it might be worth looking at the temperature dependence of the thermal expansion coefficient, and see if there is knee in the curve at some point. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
Re: [Vo]:electron screening, Rydberg states and tunneling
Thank you for the details. On Sat, Jul 27, 2013 at 4:09 PM, mix...@bigpond.com wrote: it may also explain the Ni results, though I don't think it would explain why 61Ni is unreactive. Of the different things we've heard over the past few days, I'm inclined as follows: - High temperatures in the nickel/hydrogen system -- important (the higher the better). - Debye temp -- correlation? Coincidence? Something that was specifically observed? - Unreactive 61Ni -- misdirection? Offhand speculation? (I say this in part because I recall reading that it would be very difficult to isolate this isotope from the others in order to examine its properties.) Eric
Re: [Vo]:electron screening, Rydberg states and tunneling
Here are the details of how the anapole magnetic field produced by the hot spot disrupts the nucleus. I have some posts on that aspect of the theory as follows: http://www.talk-polywell.org/bb/viewtopic.php?f=10t=3200start=6030#p102654 this post links to some other posts. Please see all posts. http://www.talk-polywell.org/bb/viewtopic.php?f=10t=3200start=6000#p102568 On Sat, Jul 27, 2013 at 8:31 PM, Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.com wrote: Thank you for the details. On Sat, Jul 27, 2013 at 4:09 PM, mix...@bigpond.com wrote: it may also explain the Ni results, though I don't think it would explain why 61Ni is unreactive. Of the different things we've heard over the past few days, I'm inclined as follows: - High temperatures in the nickel/hydrogen system -- important (the higher the better). - Debye temp -- correlation? Coincidence? Something that was specifically observed? - Unreactive 61Ni -- misdirection? Offhand speculation? (I say this in part because I recall reading that it would be very difficult to isolate this isotope from the others in order to examine its properties.) Eric
Re: [Vo]:Defkalion/MFMP implications for electrolysis?
Axil, perhaps the dipole oscillation that you mention results in the generation of a local magnetic field. Unfortunately, one single source of this type would not generate a large external field of the nature that DGT suggests. The only way this would happen is if an extremely large coordinated combination of individual fields are super imposed. Normally, these individual fields want to be arranged such that the net external field is minimized for the least energy configuration. How do you propose that the coordination is realized? What force aligns the individual tiny fields? This is where I find it difficult to understand. There are numerous missing pieces to the puzzle which need to be found. It has been suggested that a large circulating current of some nature would lead to a large external field and that would follow according to classical physics. But, in that case the source of the large current is unknown. So, either of these cases has difficult questions to answer. It would be most helpful if DGT supplies additional information concerning the alleged field. Dave -Original Message- From: Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Sat, Jul 27, 2013 3:04 am Subject: Re: [Vo]:Defkalion/MFMP implications for electrolysis? Follow vorts When a dipole composed of an oscillation of electron and an ion encounters a boundary cndition,a ring like circulation of current is induced in the motion of the electron. Does that revelation help you understand anything about theproduction of a large magnetic field? Well it should. On Sat, Jul 27, 2013 at 1:21 AM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: My recent way of thinking suggests that heat energy is just random sound. If some way is found to direct the movements of the atoms in a coordinated manner, then that would look very much like a sound wave passing through the medium. I bet we could figure out how much the effective temperature of that wave is by the speed change of the atoms subjected to that signal. Double the instantaneous velocity of the atoms and you multiply the instantaneous energy by a factor of 4. This is like heating up the material a large amount. Since heat is apparently what makes Rossi's ECAT function, then this type of sound wave traveling through it should do something similar. At least that is the concept. Heat appears to equal sound with a random momentum vector that balances out over the entire mass of material while still having energy due to the motion of the atoms. The energy always adds regardless of the direction of the motion, while the momentum is a vector that can balance out. Sound to me is just the condition where momentum is directed by some source. That is why sound travels rapidly through materials while heat slowly spreads out. Give the idea some thought. Dave -Original Message- From: Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Sat, Jul 27, 2013 12:59 am Subject: Re: [Vo]:Defkalion/MFMP implications for electrolysis? On Sat, Jul 27, 2013 at 12:55 AM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: It just might be possible for sound waves alone to do the job. It's not really sound. It's quantized heat energy. When you understand that, you realize that spin up and spin down electrons can mate if only for a brief period.
Re: [Vo]:Defkalion/MFMP implications for electrolysis?
*Bose-Hubbard_model* http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bose-Hubbard_model interacting many-body systemshttp://www.bw-grid.de/en/projects/2011/03/09/complex-dynamics-of-interacting-many-body-systems/ If you are a stickler for detail, the Bose–Hubbard model gives an approximate description of the physics of interacting bosons on a lattice. It is closely related to the Hubbard model which originated in solid-state physics as an approximate description of superconducting systems and the motion of electrons between the atoms of a crystalline solid. The name Bose refers to the fact that the particles in the system are bosonic. Remember that the dipole is a boson with spin 1. This model is the same one that is used for cold atoms confined in an optical lattice (aka cooled by a laser) with appropriate theoretical adjustments. Since dipoles and super cooled atoms follow the same model, they behave alike in important ways; they can both form Bose-Einstein condensates. Let us now roll in another quantum optics model: The Jaynes–Cummings model. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Jaynes-Cummings_model.png http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jaynes%E2%80%93Cummings_model Starting at the very bottom, the most basic underlying model that teaches us how waves/particles can resonate is the Jaynes–Cummings model (JCM). It describes the system of a two-level atom interacting with a quantized mode of an optical cavity, with or without the presence of light (in the form of a bath of electromagnetic radiation that can cause spontaneous emission and absorption). http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/71/Jaynes-Cummings-Hubbard_Model.jpg *Jaynes-Cummings-Hubbard (JCH) model* Next we move on to the Jaynes-Cummings-Hubbard (JCH) model. Because there are millions of these hot-spots covering the combined surfaces of all the micro-particles, the JCH model is a combination of the Jaynes–Cummings model and the coupled cavities. The one-dimensional JCH model consists of a chain of N-coupled single-mode cavities and each cavity contains two-level atoms. The tunneling effect comes from the junction between cavities which are an analogy of the Josephson Effect. The eigenstates of the JCH Hamiltonian in the two-excitation subspace for the N-cavity system are examined in current nano research. This research focuses on the existence of bound states as well as their features. It is interesting to note that two repulsive bosonic atoms can form a bound pair in an optical lattice. By analogy, the same will be true for polaritons. The JCH Hamiltonian also supports two-polariton bound states when the photon-atom interaction is sufficiently strong. In the LENR case, the coupling between photons and dipoles are very strong. In particular, the two polaritons associated with the bound states exhibit a strong correlation such that they stay close to each other in position space. The results discussed have been published in Two-polariton bound states in the Jaynes-Cummings-Hubbard model. http://arxiv.org/pdf/1101.1366v1 If you’re up to it, the analytic solution of the eigenvalues and eigenvectors in the strong coupling regime is also developed in this paper. The time evolution of such a system is also considered for the cases of different initial conditions. *Bose-Einstein condensation* Now that we have justified the development of a generalized condition of Bose-Einstein condensation all over the surfaces of the micro-particles, we can now roll in Kim’s BEC theory of LENR. But unlike the condensate in Kims theory, this BEC is a plexciton condensate. A new state of light-matter emerges upon plexciton condensation, and a coherent radiation field emanates from this quantum phase transition The effective plexciton temperature T and chemical potential μ to be T= 2640 K and μ= -160 meV The fission/fusion probability cross section produced by the ionic BEC is intensified by the screening effects of all the electrons around this ionic condensate in the walls of the NAE. This screening effect is amplified because the electron members of the dipole are coherent and entangled. This large electron composite waveform presents a single screening waveform to the associated mirrored ionic condensate. In Nanoplasmonics, this type of BEC is the so-called spaser (short for surface plasmon(SP) amplification by stimulated emission of radiation) On Sat, Jul 27, 2013 at 8:40 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: Axil, perhaps the dipole oscillation that you mention results in the generation of a local magnetic field. Unfortunately, one single source of this type would not generate a large external field of the nature that DGT suggests. The only way this would happen is if an extremely large coordinated combination of individual fields are super imposed. Normally, these individual fields want to be arranged such that the net external field is minimized for the least energy configuration. How do you
Re: [Vo]:Defkalion/MFMP implications for electrolysis?
Dennis, Very interesting. So far, out of two hundred electrolysis experiments, the only one I find with much promise involves nitinol. Looking at the Debye temp of titanium (~ 107C) I think this makes sense with the thermal triggering that I did. I found that the maximum temperature remained elevated for hours after 10 to 30 second pulses with a joule heater in the cell. I replicated it once in the past, but it may be time for me to revisit this. Jack On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 11:14 AM, DJ Cravens djcrav...@hotmail.com wrote: notice you only need the 179 figure to get above the Debye temp. You can get around that by alloying the Ni with Cu and even annealing. http://books.google.com/books/about/The_Debye_Temperature_and_Hardness_of_Co.html?id=Rhd5NwAACAAJ http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/pssa.2210090108/abstract I personally use both copper and gold in Ni to drop both the Debye temp and the energy of vacancy formation. A rough rule of thumb is that adding a softer lower melting point material to Ni or Pd is good. So far, I have to keep my metals fcc. Notice also that you can drop the energy of vacancy formation also by having finer materials. If they are small enough (somewhere around 10nm) the becomes little difference between the Ef for bulk and surface. (normally, the surface Ef is lower than the bulk) so.. I say all that to let you know that you can have systems that work below 179 C. My demo at NI week will be operating at 80C. D2 note: the Cu added to Ni (also Pt) helps in the dissociation of the H -- Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2013 10:24:12 -0500 From: jcol...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]:Defkalion/MFMP implications for electrolysis? With the recent corresponding findings of both Defkalion and MFMP suggesting the temperature needs to be 179C to initiate the reaction, I am wondering if this may also have implications for electrolysis with nickel. Obviously, it would be difficult to run electrolysis at a power level high enough to heat the cathode to that temperature for very long (the water would boil off). A pressurized electrolytic cell would seem to be an option. Another option would be lateral cathode pulses of high power and relatively brief duration to bring the cathode temp above 179C, but avoid boiling off the water. The trouble with this method may come in if the nickel needs to remain at 179C. This also has me wondering about two other things. 1) Brillouin Energy's method of electrolysis would seem likely to elevate the cathode temperature 179C. Could this be a factor in Godes' success? 2) Electrolytic plasma experiments with tungsten -- is the cathode temperature a key element rather than the plasma? Best regards, Jack
[Vo]:Bosenova
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bosenova -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com
[Vo]:LENR space shilding
A significant difficulty for manned missions outside of the Earth's magnetosphere, including Mars missions, asteroid exploration, and space-based mining and manufacturing, is the hazard of crew exposure to particulate radiation. With the recent resurgence of interest in manned Mars missions, crew radiation shielding has again become an active problem for investigation One solution to the problem of shielding crew from particulate radiation in space is to use active electromagnetic shielding. Practical types of shield include the magnetic shield, in which a strong magnetic field diverts charged particles from the crew region, and the magnetic/electrostatic plasma shield, in which an electrostatic field shields the crew from positively charged particles, while a magnetic field confines electrons from the space plasma to provide charge neutrality. Advances in technology might include high temperature LENR based superconductivity in Bose Einstein condensation. Since the dangerous particles involved are charged, an alternative solution to the problem of shielding is the use of active electromagnetic shields. The simplest such device is the magnetic dipole shield. The magnetic field of the Earth is a good example of a magnetic shield, and is responsible for the relatively benign radiation environment on Earth. A magnetic shield makes use of the fact that a charge particle's trajectory in a magnetic field is curved. As a particle enters the region of high magnetic field, its trajectory will curve away from the region to be protected. In essence, the principle is exactly the reverse of that involved in a magnetic bottle; in this case the intent is to trap the particles outside the region of interest, instead of inside. The advantages of a magnetic shield to crew safety and health are obvious. A crew bound for Mars could be placed inside a liquid metal cooled hollow ellipsoid LENR Ni/H reaction chamber that provides propulsion for the Mars craft. The LENR reaction will divert the positive particle radiation and neutralize it in strong electrostatic electron concentrations. LENR could open the door to safe space transportation and habitation in a hazardous radiation environment.
[Vo]:coupling processes of pseudo hydrogen atom (Rydberge state) inside a supercavity.
Interesting paper coupling processes of pseudo hydrogen atom (Rydberge state) inside a supercavity. http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/AminiFthestudyof.pdf
RE: [Vo]:Kitamura much improved
Here is the mech specs for the spheres I will be using: http://www.shopwagnerb2c.com/UserFiles/Documents/Product/4156.pdf They are polished and lightly plated with gold. 4 inch OD D2 Date: Sat, 27 Jul 2013 14:34:26 -0700 From: a...@well.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Kitamura much improved From: DJ Cravens djcrav...@hotmail.com Sent: Saturday, July 27, 2013 12:43:44 PM thanks, I know I had seen something like that around here. It's almost set up .. (if not very useful) I just need to plug in the values. Input power : 0 Output power : 1W Inner (active material volume) : 450 ml = 0.450 l Outer (brass sphere) : ??? Or give me the radius
RE: [Vo]:Kitamura much improved -- fakes
my bath is not water but Lab Armor AL beads. http://www.labarmor.com/lab-armor-beads-for-lab-water-baths/ I did not want scolding hot water at the expo. Liability issues. Also at home in the lab it lets me take things up higher than 95C (note: I am at 9000 feet elevation) I think the most direct approach for this expo is just to cut it open on the last day. D2 Date: Sat, 27 Jul 2013 15:24:54 -0700 From: a...@well.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Kitamura much improved -- fakes From: DJ Cravens djcrav...@hotmail.com Sent: Saturday, July 27, 2013 2:50:09 PM Thanks, but based on volume alone, it is clear that 5 days is not enough for a rock solid demo. For what it's worth : http://lenr.qumbu.com/rossi_ecat_proof_v430.php#fakesbyvolume For the INNER -- the most plausible (=least implausible) fake is compressed hydrogen burning external air (don't ask how) -- which would run for 700 hours. For 1W output you could possibly use the oxygen dissolved in the bath. The combustion product is water, which just goes back into the bath. The longest-running implausible fake is Boron + External Air = 17225 Hrs Lithium Battery = 450 Hrs
[Vo]:[Vo) anyone here going to NI Week?
Anyone here on Vortex going to NI week (specifically the last day Aug 8)? Perhaps there is someone that would want to be there as a “fair judge” to “witness” if I cut the spheres open on the last day. Not much use in taking something to cut it if no one will be there to view it. I have test points on all my wiring and someone should be able to check just a VOM. (measure thermister R values……) I don’t plan on cutting open the Seebeck or the tea pot but the spheres- yes. Nothing spectacular planed but perhaps someone here might be interested.
