Re: [Vo]:Re: Rossi/Parkhomov reaction and the hydrogen anion

2015-03-04 Thread Bob Higgins
Ryan Hunt would better to ask this question.  I believe the reactor tube in
the Bang! experiment was from CoorsTek.  The other dogbone alumina tubes
were also from CoorsTek.  They have an online store.

It is the dogbone Lugano HotCat replica that has the heater coil wrapped
around a second alumina heater tube and then overmolded with the finned
convection surface.  The design called for a heater tube ID of 7.95mm and a
reactor tube OD of 6.35mm.  I don't know what the actual tube measurements
were.

However, the Bang! experiment did not use the dogbone as the tube furnace
for the experiment.  Bob Greenyer had gotten some sample SiC tube heaters
that could go to very high temperature.  They tried molding one into a
dogbone, but it was too fragile and just shattered during the molding
process.  The closed-one-end reactor tube was slipped into the SiC tube
heater with no convection surface other than the bare SiC heater tube.  I
don't know what the clearance was for the SiC heater tube, but it was
probably about 4-5mm in diameter.  The SiC heater could go easily to 1500C,
so there was no problem in getting the reactor tube as hot as they wanted.
It would have been difficult to measure a real COP for that experiment.
The thermocouple was attached to the reactor tube and it was also measured
using the Williamson pyrometer.  When the alumina tube exploded in the
Bang! experiment, it completely shattered the SiC heater tube around it and
that was the last sample.  Future experiments will likely be in the dogbone.

On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 8:16 AM, Mark Jurich jur...@hotmail.com wrote:

   Bob, what was the Free Tolerance between the Reaction Tube OD
 and the Heater Tube ID in the MFMP Bang! Experiment?

 Who was the manufacturer of the alumina tubes?

 Thanks,
 Mark Jurich




Re: [Vo]:Investigative journalism rewarded

2015-03-04 Thread Lennart Thornros
Hei Mats,
I will applaud your efforts. I know you are fighting the establishment and
they are powerful.
The only thing I might have another opinion about is how the Swedish
scientist have handled their PR.
I think they would have had a better response if they have been totally
honest and been in constant communication instead of the 'leaking' way to
publish.
As a Swede I notice that the unique Swedish law the JANTE law still is in
effect. (The Jante law is a Swedish cultural thing that means that you must
not promote yourself - because you are nothing. Living in the US and making
a comparison it is the opposite to how we handle our children's evaluation
in school and sports; it is always fantastic result - even if it is below
standard.)

Best Regards ,
Lennart Thornros

www.StrategicLeadershipSac.com
lenn...@thornros.com
+1 916 436 1899
202 Granite Park Court, Lincoln CA 95648

“Productivity is never an accident. It is always the result of a commitment
to excellence, intelligent planning, and focused effort.” PJM

On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 1:09 AM, Lewan Mats mats.le...@nyteknik.se wrote:

  The scientific news team at Swedish National Radio, SR, received a
 honorary mention a few days ago at the Swedish Rewards for investigative
 journalism, The Golden Spade, for its four part reportage on Swedish
 researchers' (those who made the Lugano measurements) collaboration with
 the fraudster Andrea Rossi (and where also I was a main target).

 sverigesradio.se/sida/artikel.aspx?programid=406artikel=6106378

  It will take som time and impressive proof before any other Swedish
 media will dare to touch the topic.

  This was my comment on the reportage when it was broadcasted (before the
 Lugano report):

 animpossibleinvention.com/2014/05/31/swedish-national-radio-paints-it-black


  Mats
 www.animpossibleinvention.com





[Vo]:how to decrease the death rate of ot Cat reactors

2015-03-04 Thread Peter Gluck
Dear Friends

I hope many ideas will add to this:

http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2015/03/drastically-decreasing-death-rate-of.html

We need reactors so viable in hellish conditions as the one tested at
Lugano.

Peter

-- 
Dr. Peter Gluck
Cluj, Romania
http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com


Re: [Vo]: Rossi/Parkhomov reaction and the hydrogen anion

2015-03-04 Thread Bob Cook
The added silica in the Parkhomov experiment is consistent with improving the 
fracture toughness of the tube.  The silica addition acts to blunt the defects 
in the alumina and make the cracks that start at such a defect arrest before a 
significant crack propagation occurs.  This is good old engineering of brittle 
materials--alumina--to, in effect, give them more ductility.  If the 
temperature gets to high however, even silica loses strength and the beneficial 
effects of checking crack growth are lost.  Other higher temperature materials 
to add to the alumina fabrication process may work better.  A ductile metal 
might be better for example. 

Bob
  - Original Message - 
  From: Bob Higgins 
  To: vortex-l@eskimo.com 
  Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2015 6:43 AM
  Subject: Re: [Vo]: Rossi/Parkhomov reaction and the hydrogen anion


  We are all grateful to Ed Storms and Kiva Labs for analyzing the sintered Ni 
ash of the MFMP Bang! experiment.  Those images are from the sintered Ni, 
molded int o a rod by the ID of the reaction tube.  There is woefully 
insufficient evidence that the Bang! experiment produced any LENR.  However, 
when it exploded, it was in the right temperature range to begin seeing LENR, 
so the ash per se is really just a sample of the conditions at the 
temperature and pressure where Parkhomov (and Lugano) began to see LENR occur.  


  Perhaps LENR would have been observed if the explosion had not occurred.  The 
tube used was substantially weaker than what is used by Parkhomov because it is 
hard to find the closed-one-end tubes having a thick alumina wall.  Bang! was 
just a first experiment.  It will be run again, perhaps with a smaller charge 
of LiAlH4 to reduce the pressure somewhat.


  We have also determined that the Parkhomov tubes are probably mullite which 
is only about 50% alumina (and the rest are metal silicates).  This may be the 
reason that his cement formulation worked OK on his tubes and didn't work well 
at all on the high alumina (99.5% alumina) tubes used by Alan Goldwater who 
attempted so seal some with Parkhomov's formula.



  On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 11:43 PM, Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.com wrote:

On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 6:30 AM, Bob Higgins rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com 
wrote:


  Since the SEM images of the fuel


  
https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0B5Pc25a4cOM2fllFSWpFNVJoUlIxbERhRTE2M2FTY0s3TU9sZ2FsVG5wMGdodlE2ZW1JMVEusp=sharing


Thank you, Bob.  (And thanks to Ed Storms.)


Am I correct in understanding that these images were provided by Ed in 
connection with the MFMP Bang! experiment?


I have not been following the details of the Bang! experiment closely.  I 
gather there is a question that there might have been something anomalous that 
happened.  Am I correct in understanding that this question goes back primarily 
to the GM counter clicks that were observed?


Eric





Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Questions Raised by Parkhomov Experiment Failure

2015-03-04 Thread Bob Cook
To improve the internal heat transfer look for an inert gas--He for example.  
He is a good and rapid heat transfer agent and would act to maintain a more 
even temperature within the reactor.  It could even improve the alumina itself 
if sufficient porosity is incorporated into its structure.  Also an inner 
cooling/heating tube might be desirable to better control the reactor 
temperature.  

Bob Cook


  - Original Message - 
  From: Roarty, Francis X 
  To: vortex-l@eskimo.com 
  Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2015 6:28 AM
  Subject: RE: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Questions Raised by Parkhomov Experiment 
Failure


  Bob, very nice design [I downloaded from home] and realized the gas/plasma 
inside the tube is a far superior transfer medium. I understand your purpose of 
only transferring heat in case of temp increase when the drive is removed for 
calorimetry BUT would you also consider dual use  as part of the control loop 
instead of just for calorimetry.. this would be an additional [luxury] test 
where instead of only on to dampen temperature rise it is always on at mid 
speed requiring much more heat from your drives to reach threshold.  This would 
be the “isometric” situation I mentioned where the cooling fan is fighting the 
work of the drivers.  IMHO this environment would be more robust at exhibiting 
the anomaly if it is present because you have dual controls allowing the drives 
to be reduced more as the load is modulated instead to keep the device at the 
same duty factor of runaway before being pulled back by increased air flow 
[push pull of air flow above and below an average level instead of just on 
off].. if nothing else it may provide finer control of the system via 
combinations of drive pw and dynamic cooling.

  Fran

   

   

   

   

  From: Bob Higgins [mailto:rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com] 
  Sent: Monday, March 02, 2015 1:58 PM
  To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
  Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Questions Raised by Parkhomov Experiment Failure

   

  Yes, this is why I was worried about Alexander's new design that puts an air 
gap and another ceramic around the reactor core - increasing its thermal 
resistance to the lower temperature air around it and/or the water in the 
calorimeter.  He already showed that if he put alumina powder insulating the 
reactor (to lower the input power to get it high temp) that it failed 
catastrophically.

   

  I am working on a large water volume calorimeter in which to test my 
Parkhomov-like reactors.  It will include a variable convection fan to change 
the thermal resistance between the reactor tube and the cool water in the 
surrounds.  This convection will only be activated if the heater coil power is 
turned off and the temperature of the reactor continues to rise.  The intent in 
this design is for the water to never reach boiling.  Also, the calorimeter 
will be a good shield for any explosive shrapnel (primarily alumina shards).  
The calorimeter also provides a port to measure radiations with low mass 
density between the reactor core and the sensor. Here are 2 links to diagrams 
of the calorimeter I am building:

   

 https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B5Pc25a4cOM2R1RYemRlTEdZSEEauthuser=0  

 https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B5Pc25a4cOM2dWh5VXJFSU1uT1Uauthuser=0

   

  Here is the link to my planned ZDV plumbing that will allow me to measure the 
pressure, sample the gas product, and vent the system before opening the 
reactor post-experiment.

   

 https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B5Pc25a4cOM2WU9MR3hyQ2NIWkEauthuser=0 

   

  As Bob Greenyer likes to do, he has dubbed this system in ASCII as {Garbage 
Can}.

   

  Bob

   

  On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 11:40 AM, Roarty, Francis X 
francis.x.roa...@lmco.com wrote:

  Thanks Bob, that is great information but I still have a nagging concern that 
thermal loading is more important than anyone is currently aware and that XH 
needs an environment that is robustly subtracting heat away from an otherwise 
self destructing cell to rise above the noise. IMHO researchers need to perform 
something equivalent to an isometric where they are vigorusly fighting their 
own heating effort via thermal loading and then repeatedly push the drive thru 
the threshold temp while slowly increasing the load..and …with luck..decreasing 
the drive [I think this what Rossi has been doing]. The stories about life 
after death, evaporating water and explosions where reactors were left leaning 
in a bucket of water may have created a thermal gradient centered about the 
waterline that eventually favored a particular area within the tube and powders 
with just the right properties to run away…. Shot gunning by accident.

  Fran


Re: [Vo]:Investigative journalism rewarded

2015-03-04 Thread Alain Sepeda
Peace Nobel committee draw the way by firing it's chairman, for bad choices.

Who have to be fired in that affair ?
beside the journalist I mean ?

It is important to prove that following the groupthink despite evidence is
dangerous for your career.

today it is the LENR supporter who risk their career.
It have to change, or the next revolution will take 25 more years to happen.



2015-03-04 10:09 GMT+01:00 Lewan Mats mats.le...@nyteknik.se:

  The scientific news team at Swedish National Radio, SR, received a
 honorary mention a few days ago at the Swedish Rewards for investigative
 journalism, The Golden Spade, for its four part reportage on Swedish
 researchers' (those who made the Lugano measurements) collaboration with
 the fraudster Andrea Rossi (and where also I was a main target).

 sverigesradio.se/sida/artikel.aspx?programid=406artikel=6106378

  It will take som time and impressive proof before any other Swedish
 media will dare to touch the topic.

  This was my comment on the reportage when it was broadcasted (before the
 Lugano report):

 animpossibleinvention.com/2014/05/31/swedish-national-radio-paints-it-black


  Mats
 www.animpossibleinvention.com





Re: [Vo]:Investigative journalism rewarded

2015-03-04 Thread Bob Cook
Mats--

I second Bob Higgins comment.  

If you are at ICCF-19, I hope to shake your hand.

I once was a reporter of sorts and ran into problems with folks that did not 
like to hear the reality of things around them, nor its distribution to a large 
audience.  Such wide spread knowledge of reality jeopardized their goose that 
laid golden eggs. 

Bob Cook
  - Original Message - 
  From: Bob Higgins 
  To: vortex-l@eskimo.com 
  Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2015 6:49 AM
  Subject: Re: [Vo]:Investigative journalism rewarded


  Mats, you are a brave and insightful journalist.  I believe you will one day 
be rewarded for capturing the birth of a critical new technology for the future 
of our planet and its people.  


  [If not, you will still have gained the experiences needed to become a blues 
musician.]


  Bob Higgins



  On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 2:09 AM, Lewan Mats mats.le...@nyteknik.se wrote:

The scientific news team at Swedish National Radio, SR, received a honorary 
mention a few days ago at the Swedish Rewards for investigative journalism, The 
Golden Spade, for its four part reportage on Swedish researchers' (those who 
made the Lugano measurements) collaboration with the fraudster Andrea Rossi 
(and where also I was a main target).  
sverigesradio.se/sida/artikel.aspx?programid=406artikel=6106378



It will take som time and impressive proof before any other Swedish media 
will dare to touch the topic. 


This was my comment on the reportage when it was broadcasted (before the 
Lugano report):
animpossibleinvention.com/2014/05/31/swedish-national-radio-paints-it-black




Mats
www.animpossibleinvention.com







[Vo]:Re: Rossi/Parkhomov reaction and the hydrogen anion

2015-03-04 Thread Mark Jurich
Thanks for the info, Bob.

For the last week, I have been concerned about the Elastic Expansion of the 
Reactor Tube due to the approximately 5000 psi pressure change that could 
occur.  A back-of-the-envelope calculation revealed a 0.010” expansion.  This 
is about an order of magnitude greater than the thermal expansion (If both 
tubes were the same Alumina Material, the thermal expansion would “track” each 
other and essentially cancel, but not the elastic expansion of the Reactor Tube 
due to the pressure.).  If there wasn’t enough Free Tolerance for the Reactor 
Tube to “breathe” it would jam against the alumina heater tube surrounding it, 
creating small pressure points, possibly cracking both tubes.

... I’ll pass this note on to Ryan and perhaps he can rest my fears on this.

- Mark Jurich


From: Bob Higgins 
Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2015 7:39 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com 
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Re: Rossi/Parkhomov reaction and the hydrogen anion

Ryan Hunt would better to ask this question.  I believe the reactor tube in the 
Bang! experiment was from CoorsTek.  The other dogbone alumina tubes were also 
from CoorsTek.  They have an online store. 

It is the dogbone Lugano HotCat replica that has the heater coil wrapped around 
a second alumina heater tube and then overmolded with the finned convection 
surface.  The design called for a heater tube ID of 7.95mm and a reactor tube 
OD of 6.35mm.  I don't know what the actual tube measurements were.  

However, the Bang! experiment did not use the dogbone as the tube furnace for 
the experiment.  Bob Greenyer had gotten some sample SiC tube heaters that 
could go to very high temperature.  They tried molding one into a dogbone, but 
it was too fragile and just shattered during the molding process.  The 
closed-one-end reactor tube was slipped into the SiC tube heater with no 
convection surface other than the bare SiC heater tube.  I don't know what the 
clearance was for the SiC heater tube, but it was probably about 4-5mm in 
diameter.  The SiC heater could go easily to 1500C, so there was no problem in 
getting the reactor tube as hot as they wanted.  It would have been difficult 
to measure a real COP for that experiment.  The thermocouple was attached to 
the reactor tube and it was also measured using the Williamson pyrometer.  When 
the alumina tube exploded in the Bang! experiment, it completely shattered the 
SiC heater tube around it and that was the last sample.  Future experiments 
will likely be in the dogbone.


On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 8:16 AM, Mark Jurich jur...@hotmail.com wrote:

  Bob, what was the Free Tolerance between the Reaction Tube OD
  and the Heater Tube ID in the MFMP Bang! Experiment?

  Who was the manufacturer of the alumina tubes?

  Thanks,
  Mark Jurich



Re: [Vo]:Investigative journalism rewarded

2015-03-04 Thread Eric Walker
On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 1:09 AM, Lewan Mats mats.le...@nyteknik.se wrote:

The scientific news team at Swedish National Radio, SR, received a honorary
 mention a few days ago at the Swedish Rewards for investigative journalism,
 The Golden Spade, for its four part reportage on Swedish researchers'
 (those who made the Lugano measurements) collaboration with the fraudster
 Andrea Rossi (and where also I was a main target).


There is no good deed that goes unpunished.

Eric


Re: [Vo]:Investigative journalism rewarded

2015-03-04 Thread Peter Gluck
conclusions
a)investigative journaism is analogous to bravos- paid killers; our friend
Steve Krivit is quite efficient in it , Gary Wright is  very hard working;

b) the passive and inactive behavior of the 4 Swedish scientists is perhaps
not the most rational- it is quite a complicity of the victims have they
helped Parkhomov? Where is their much expected additional report? They knew
well what they risk supporting Rossi.

c) the great action of replicating Lugano Parkhomov is still not really
started- and must be massive. Just for example why are the Lugano testers
noy participating? Are they not free to do what they must do?
Surely you are exposed to risks too but you are counterattacking- the
unique solution.
Corragio!
Peter

On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 11:09 AM, Lewan Mats mats.le...@nyteknik.se wrote:

  The scientific news team at Swedish National Radio, SR, received a
 honorary mention a few days ago at the Swedish Rewards for investigative
 journalism, The Golden Spade, for its four part reportage on Swedish
 researchers' (those who made the Lugano measurements) collaboration with
 the fraudster Andrea Rossi (and where also I was a main target).

 sverigesradio.se/sida/artikel.aspx?programid=406artikel=6106378

  It will take som time and impressive proof before any other Swedish
 media will dare to touch the topic.

  This was my comment on the reportage when it was broadcasted (before the
 Lugano report):

 animpossibleinvention.com/2014/05/31/swedish-national-radio-paints-it-black


  Mats
 www.animpossibleinvention.com





-- 
Dr. Peter Gluck
Cluj, Romania
http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com


Re: [Vo]:Investigative journalism rewarded

2015-03-04 Thread Lewan Mats
Peter,
I know that the Swedish researchers are still working on the update, doing 
additional calibration measurements.

They have also stated that they intend to continue investigating the LENR 
phenomenon. That could include some kind of replication, but since they prefer 
to work in silence (maybe due to the negative Swedish media attention -- and 
that might in turn be a good or a bad strategy, difficult to know), we'll have 
to wait and see.

Mats
www.animpossibleinvention.comhttp://www.animpossibleinvention.com

4 mar 2015 kl. 10:50 skrev Peter Gluck 
peter.gl...@gmail.commailto:peter.gl...@gmail.com:

conclusions
a)investigative journaism is analogous to bravos- paid killers; our friend 
Steve Krivit is quite efficient in it , Gary Wright is  very hard working;

b) the passive and inactive behavior of the 4 Swedish scientists is perhaps not 
the most rational- it is quite a complicity of the victims have they helped 
Parkhomov? Where is their much expected additional report? They knew well what 
they risk supporting Rossi.

c) the great action of replicating Lugano Parkhomov is still not really 
started- and must be massive. Just for example why are the Lugano testers noy 
participating? Are they not free to do what they must do?
Surely you are exposed to risks too but you are counterattacking- the unique 
solution.
Corragio!
Peter

On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 11:09 AM, Lewan Mats 
mats.le...@nyteknik.semailto:mats.le...@nyteknik.se wrote:
The scientific news team at Swedish National Radio, SR, received a honorary 
mention a few days ago at the Swedish Rewards for investigative journalism, The 
Golden Spade, for its four part reportage on Swedish researchers' (those who 
made the Lugano measurements) collaboration with the fraudster Andrea Rossi 
(and where also I was a main target).

sverigesradio.se/sida/artikel.aspx?programid=406artikel=6106378http://sverigesradio.se/sida/artikel.aspx?programid=406artikel=6106378

It will take som time and impressive proof before any other Swedish media will 
dare to touch the topic.

This was my comment on the reportage when it was broadcasted (before the Lugano 
report):

animpossibleinvention.com/2014/05/31/swedish-national-radio-paints-it-blackhttp://animpossibleinvention.com/2014/05/31/swedish-national-radio-paints-it-black


Mats
www.animpossibleinvention.comhttp://www.animpossibleinvention.com





--
Dr. Peter Gluck
Cluj, Romania
http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com


[Vo]:Investigative journalism rewarded

2015-03-04 Thread Lewan Mats
The scientific news team at Swedish National Radio, SR, received a honorary 
mention a few days ago at the Swedish Rewards for investigative journalism, The 
Golden Spade, for its four part reportage on Swedish researchers' (those who 
made the Lugano measurements) collaboration with the fraudster Andrea Rossi 
(and where also I was a main target).

sverigesradio.se/sida/artikel.aspx?programid=406artikel=6106378http://sverigesradio.se/sida/artikel.aspx?programid=406artikel=6106378

It will take som time and impressive proof before any other Swedish media will 
dare to touch the topic.

This was my comment on the reportage when it was broadcasted (before the Lugano 
report):

animpossibleinvention.com/2014/05/31/swedish-national-radio-paints-it-blackhttp://animpossibleinvention.com/2014/05/31/swedish-national-radio-paints-it-black


Mats
www.animpossibleinvention.comhttp://www.animpossibleinvention.com




Re: [Vo]: Rossi/Parkhomov reaction and the hydrogen anion

2015-03-04 Thread Bob Higgins
We are all grateful to Ed Storms and Kiva Labs for analyzing the sintered
Ni ash of the MFMP Bang! experiment.  Those images are from the sintered
Ni, molded int o a rod by the ID of the reaction tube.  There is woefully
insufficient evidence that the Bang! experiment produced any LENR.
However, when it exploded, it was in the right temperature range to begin
seeing LENR, so the ash per se is really just a sample of the conditions
at the temperature and pressure where Parkhomov (and Lugano) began to see
LENR occur.

Perhaps LENR would have been observed if the explosion had not occurred.
The tube used was substantially weaker than what is used by Parkhomov
because it is hard to find the closed-one-end tubes having a thick alumina
wall.  Bang! was just a first experiment.  It will be run again, perhaps
with a smaller charge of LiAlH4 to reduce the pressure somewhat.

We have also determined that the Parkhomov tubes are probably mullite which
is only about 50% alumina (and the rest are metal silicates).  This may be
the reason that his cement formulation worked OK on his tubes and didn't
work well at all on the high alumina (99.5% alumina) tubes used by Alan
Goldwater who attempted so seal some with Parkhomov's formula.

On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 11:43 PM, Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.com wrote:

 On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 6:30 AM, Bob Higgins rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com
 wrote:

 Since the SEM images of the fuel


 https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0B5Pc25a4cOM2fllFSWpFNVJoUlIxbERhRTE2M2FTY0s3TU9sZ2FsVG5wMGdodlE2ZW1JMVEusp=sharing


 Thank you, Bob.  (And thanks to Ed Storms.)

 Am I correct in understanding that these images were provided by Ed in
 connection with the MFMP Bang! experiment?

 I have not been following the details of the Bang! experiment closely.  I
 gather there is a question that there might have been something anomalous
 that happened.  Am I correct in understanding that this question goes back
 primarily to the GM counter clicks that were observed?

 Eric




Re: [Vo]:diversity, one of the 6 pillars of LENR

2015-03-04 Thread Bob Higgins
What you say is absolutely true, Bob.  I don't believe that LENR occurred
in the MFMP Bang! experiment.  However the conditions were very similar to
the Lugano experiment at that temperature and with the fuel that MFMP
used.  Check the Lugano SEM images of their Ni ash and compare to the SEM
images of the MFMP Ni ash.  The images are almost identical. What I am
saying is that the conditions for LENR were likely pretty close to the same.

We would love to test some Parkhomov ash from an experiment that has shown
notable (outside error bar) excess heat.  If we don't see that from
Parkhomov, hopefully we will see it reported from someone else among the
many replicators of Parkhomov.

Since we are unlikely to get any ash from Rossi's HotCat, it is incumbent
on the replicators to do long runs and have isotopic analysis done on their
fuel and their ash.

On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 10:59 PM, Bob Cook frobertc...@hotmail.com wrote:

  Axil and Bob--

 You both seem to ignore the statement from the Lugano experiment that the
 Ni isotopic concentrations changed during the reaction.  It would be nice
 to get an isotopic analysis of the MFMP and the Parkhomov experiment's Ni
 powder available after the experiment to see if there are changes
 from normal Ni.

 I am not sure either the Parkhomov nor the MFMP test have good evidence of
 a nuclear reaction with a change in nuclear species or total mass of the
 the system.  Without an evident mass-to-energy conversion, what is the
 source of the explosive energy release in the two experiments?

 I do not consider either experiment has sufficient time producing XH to be
 indicative of LENR.  That is not to say the two experimental set-ups
 have no potential for producing excess heat, if properly controlled. ( I
 would agree that there seemed to be a start of an excess heat reaction
 prior to the bangs, however the extent of this production of excess heat
 was not very long. )



 Bob



 - Original Message -
 *From:* Bob Higgins rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com
 *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com
 *Sent:* Tuesday, March 03, 2015 9:23 PM
 *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:diversity, one of the 6 pillars of LENR

 See inline ...

 On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 8:05 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote:


  A sign that the nickel power is not working is the explosions that
 are occurring when the LENR reactions begin in the nano particles produced
 by lithium and hydrogen plasma as it cools from the high temperatures over
 1100C.

 There is no hydrogen plasma or lithium vapor for that matter.  Lithium at
 that pressure will not boil at the temperatures being used.  If you read
 Langmuir's work, you will see that it takes over 2500C for any significant
 hydrogen molecule dissociation, and it would be much hotter still to get a
 hydrogen plasma.


 Rossi says that his nickel is 5 9s pure.

5 9's pure has no bearing on whether the Ni was dissolving.  The
 Ni has been seen in EDX (Ed Storms' analysis of MFMP ash) the Li-Al-Ni-H
   solidified metal encasing the sintered Ni web.  It is now known that
 the Ni dissolves in the liquid Li-Al-H.


 There was a hydrogen fire that occurred after the alumina core raptured.
 Much the nickel melted because of the extra heat added to the 1057C
 temperature where the core failure took place. The fuel was sintered into a
 solid block by high heat.


 This is completely wrong.  The micrographs of the Ni ash in the MFMP
 experiment were the same as the Lugano Ni ash.  There was no explosion in
 the Lugano experiment.  Also, from personal experience, when Ni is heated
 in H2, it is fully oxide free by 250C and by 300C the sintering of the
 particles begins.  This happens long before there was ever an explosion.
 Not only that, but after the explosion, the Ni core was a completely intact
 molded rod of sintered material.  If you look at the micrographs, it would
 be impossible to create the sintered 3D web structure found by melting of
 the Ni.



 If the small features of the Ni are not complicit in the LENR, then it
 is not clear that size of the starting particles mean very much.


 Where is reference to this?

The reference is the Lugano report and Ed Storms' micrographs of
 the MFMP ash.  They show the Ni sintered into a 3D web with much larger
 dimensions.  I have personally seen this sintering in my experiments
 with Ni powder in H2 at much lower pressure.  I published a paper showing
 this.  In the gas phase experiments, much of the fine features on the
 carbonyl Ni particles are maintained, sintering at touching edges.


 Thanks for this info. I have always thought that placing the fuel in a
 pile was a bad idea. The DGT idea of spreading the fuel out in three
 dimensions in a scaffold of nickel nanofoam would keep the nickel particles
 apart so that they would not sinter together.


 In my experience, once you coat your carbonyl Ni particles with a
 nano-catalyst, the catalyst can prevent substantial sintering into a solid
 and help leave the Ni porous.  

Re: [Vo]:diversity, one of the 6 pillars of LENR

2015-03-04 Thread Bob Higgins
This is not true.  There are many physical and chemical thing happening
that set the stage for LENR, and just because the stage has been set, it
doesn't mean the show started.  The chemical changes are the dissociation
of the LiAlH4 and the dissolving of the Ni (at higher temperatures).  The
physical changes include the low temperature sintering of the cleaned Ni
into a 3D web.  Hydrogen cleaning of the Ni and the alumina surfaces
allowed the molten metal to wet which is a chemical reaction in a sense
because it involves monatomic hydrogen attachment to the surface oxide in
the case of the alumina and stripping of the oxide to water vapor in the
case of the Ni.  Lots going on before LENR occurs.

On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 11:17 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote:

 This is completely wrong.  The micrographs of the Ni ash in the MFMP
 experiment were the same as the Lugano Ni ash.  There was no explosion in
 the Lugano experiment.  Also, from personal experience, when Ni is heated
 in H2, it is fully oxide free by 250C and by 300C the sintering of the
 particles begins.  This happens long before there was ever an explosion.
 Not only that, but after the explosion, the Ni core was a completely intact
 molded rod of sintered material.  If you look at the micrographs, it would
 be impossible to create the sintered 3D web structure found by melting of
 the Ni.

 Thanks for your first hand observation. Doesn't your observation mean that
 the MFMP BANG was a LENR event since the fuel residue between Lagano and
 the bang are affected in the same way? Without the bang, the fuel is
 unchanged. I believe that I had seen that fuel difference reported on
 facebook or ECat news.




Re: [Vo]:Investigative journalism rewarded

2015-03-04 Thread Bob Higgins
Mats, you are a brave and insightful journalist.  I believe you will one
day be rewarded for capturing the birth of a critical new technology for
the future of our planet and its people.

[If not, you will still have gained the experiences needed to become a
blues musician.]

Bob Higgins

On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 2:09 AM, Lewan Mats mats.le...@nyteknik.se wrote:

  The scientific news team at Swedish National Radio, SR, received a
 honorary mention a few days ago at the Swedish Rewards for investigative
 journalism, The Golden Spade, for its four part reportage on Swedish
 researchers' (those who made the Lugano measurements) collaboration with
 the fraudster Andrea Rossi (and where also I was a main target).

 sverigesradio.se/sida/artikel.aspx?programid=406artikel=6106378

  It will take som time and impressive proof before any other Swedish
 media will dare to touch the topic.

  This was my comment on the reportage when it was broadcasted (before the
 Lugano report):

 animpossibleinvention.com/2014/05/31/swedish-national-radio-paints-it-black


  Mats
 www.animpossibleinvention.com





Re: [Vo]:diversity, one of the 6 pillars of LENR

2015-03-04 Thread Bob Higgins
This is a wonderful video, so thanks for pointing us to watch it.  However,
the molten Li-Al is not in a super-critical phase, but as he said, it
doesn't have to be supercritical - just hot and high pressure.  He also
demonstrated a chemical mixing that produced nanoparticles as a
precipitate.  That kind of chemical mixing is not taking place in the
Parkhomov/Rossi reactor as near as I am able to identify.

That having been said, and as I posted before, the Li-Al-Ni-H alloy becomes
saturated with Ni.  It may be possible to cycle the temperature (up to
dissolve and down to precipitate) and get the Ni to precipitate on the
surface of the remaining solid Ni like a co-deposition - taking H- anions
with it into the Ni surface at an accelerated rate.

Dennis Cravens pointed me to a very interesting paper that has many
similarities to this process:
http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/LiawBYelevatedte.pdf
See the paper by Liaw.

On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 10:57 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote:


 There is no hydrogen plasma or lithium vapor for that matter.  Lithium at
 that pressure will not boil at the temperatures being used.  If you read
 Langmuir's work, you will see that it takes over 2500C for any significant
 hydrogen molecule dissociation, and it would be much hotter still to get a
 hydrogen plasma.


 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6zurHSq4CB4

 This video shows how a super critical medium produces nanoparticles from
 dissolved ionic substances when there is a super critical phase transition
 caused by cooling the super critical medium so that the dissolved solids
 nucleate and form nanoparticles. Both dissolved Lithium,
 aluminum, and hydrides will nucleate and form nanoparticle in a cooled
 region of the supercritical hydrogen gas.



RE: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Questions Raised by Parkhomov Experiment Failure

2015-03-04 Thread Roarty, Francis X
Bob, very nice design [I downloaded from home] and realized the gas/plasma 
inside the tube is a far superior transfer medium. I understand your purpose of 
only transferring heat in case of temp increase when the drive is removed for 
calorimetry BUT would you also consider dual use  as part of the control loop 
instead of just for calorimetry.. this would be an additional [luxury] test 
where instead of only on to dampen temperature rise it is always on at mid 
speed requiring much more heat from your drives to reach threshold.  This would 
be the “isometric” situation I mentioned where the cooling fan is fighting the 
work of the drivers.  IMHO this environment would be more robust at exhibiting 
the anomaly if it is present because you have dual controls allowing the drives 
to be reduced more as the load is modulated instead to keep the device at the 
same duty factor of runaway before being pulled back by increased air flow 
[push pull of air flow above and below an average level instead of just on 
off].. if nothing else it may provide finer control of the system via 
combinations of drive pw and dynamic cooling.
Fran




From: Bob Higgins [mailto:rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, March 02, 2015 1:58 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Questions Raised by Parkhomov Experiment Failure

Yes, this is why I was worried about Alexander's new design that puts an air 
gap and another ceramic around the reactor core - increasing its thermal 
resistance to the lower temperature air around it and/or the water in the 
calorimeter.  He already showed that if he put alumina powder insulating the 
reactor (to lower the input power to get it high temp) that it failed 
catastrophically.

I am working on a large water volume calorimeter in which to test my 
Parkhomov-like reactors.  It will include a variable convection fan to change 
the thermal resistance between the reactor tube and the cool water in the 
surrounds.  This convection will only be activated if the heater coil power is 
turned off and the temperature of the reactor continues to rise.  The intent in 
this design is for the water to never reach boiling.  Also, the calorimeter 
will be a good shield for any explosive shrapnel (primarily alumina shards).  
The calorimeter also provides a port to measure radiations with low mass 
density between the reactor core and the sensor. Here are 2 links to diagrams 
of the calorimeter I am building:

   https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B5Pc25a4cOM2R1RYemRlTEdZSEEauthuser=0
   https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B5Pc25a4cOM2dWh5VXJFSU1uT1Uauthuser=0

Here is the link to my planned ZDV plumbing that will allow me to measure the 
pressure, sample the gas product, and vent the system before opening the 
reactor post-experiment.

   https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B5Pc25a4cOM2WU9MR3hyQ2NIWkEauthuser=0

As Bob Greenyer likes to do, he has dubbed this system in ASCII as {Garbage 
Can}.

Bob

On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 11:40 AM, Roarty, Francis X 
francis.x.roa...@lmco.commailto:francis.x.roa...@lmco.com wrote:
Thanks Bob, that is great information but I still have a nagging concern that 
thermal loading is more important than anyone is currently aware and that XH 
needs an environment that is robustly subtracting heat away from an otherwise 
self destructing cell to rise above the noise. IMHO researchers need to perform 
something equivalent to an isometric where they are vigorusly fighting their 
own heating effort via thermal loading and then repeatedly push the drive thru 
the threshold temp while slowly increasing the load..and …with luck..decreasing 
the drive [I think this what Rossi has been doing]. The stories about life 
after death, evaporating water and explosions where reactors were left leaning 
in a bucket of water may have created a thermal gradient centered about the 
waterline that eventually favored a particular area within the tube and powders 
with just the right properties to run away…. Shot gunning by accident.
Fran


Re: [Vo]:diversity, one of the 6 pillars of LENR

2015-03-04 Thread Bob Higgins
One of the things not sampled in the Lugano experiment is the product gas
or gas ash.  This may have very important clues to the nature of the
reaction.  In my replication (under construction), I intend to be able to
collect the product gas for analysis off-site.  We could find enhanced
deuterium, tritium, and helium as a result of the process.  The HotCat was
not outfitted to be able to collect this gas - when they opened it, they
just had to let it go woosh into the air.

On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 11:07 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote:

 I believe that the reactor would need to run for some time like it did at
 Lagano for nuclear changes to show up. Maybe the Russian experiment that
 produced XP ran long enough to show changes.

 On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 12:59 AM, Bob Cook frobertc...@hotmail.com wrote:

  Axil and Bob--

 You both seem to ignore the statement from the Lugano experiment that the
 Ni isotopic concentrations changed during the reaction.  It would be nice
 to get an isotopic analysis of the MFMP and the Parkhomov experiment's Ni
 powder available after the experiment to see if there are changes
 from normal Ni.

 I am not sure either the Parkhomov nor the MFMP test have good evidence
 of a nuclear reaction with a change in nuclear species or total mass of
 the the system.  Without an evident mass-to-energy conversion, what is the
 source of the explosive energy release in the two experiments?

 I do not consider either experiment has sufficient time producing XH to
 be indicative of LENR.  That is not to say the two experimental set-ups
 have no potential for producing excess heat, if properly controlled. ( I
 would agree that there seemed to be a start of an excess heat reaction
 prior to the bangs, however the extent of this production of excess heat
 was not very long. )

 Bob




Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Questions Raised by Parkhomov Experiment Failure

2015-03-04 Thread Bob Higgins
Thanks Fran.  I would love to be able to just see the XH to start.  It
would be a happy circumstance to then go on to evolve the software control
to regulate temperature by modulating the thermal load.

I am most of the way through making the small pieces for the convection
system (it will have 4 ball bearing mounts).  All of this needs to be
capable of working at fairly high air temperature (but the drive motor will
be outside the box at ambient temperature).  In the DAQ that I use (Omega
DAQ-56), I have 4 counter inputs.  I am using 2 of these for radiation
counts, and I could use one for tachometer pulse counting from the fan
drive shaft.  Then I could use 4 of the digital outputs of the DAQ to
provide fan motor speed control - so it wouldn't have to be 1 bit on/off.

On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 7:28 AM, Roarty, Francis X francis.x.roa...@lmco.com
 wrote:

  Bob, very nice design [I downloaded from home] and realized the
 gas/plasma inside the tube is a far superior transfer medium. I understand
 your purpose of only transferring heat in case of temp increase when the
 drive is removed for calorimetry BUT would you also consider dual use  as
 part of the control loop instead of just for calorimetry.. this would be an
 additional [luxury] test where instead of only on to dampen temperature
 rise it is always on at mid speed requiring much more heat from your drives
 to reach threshold.  This would be the “isometric” situation I mentioned
 where the cooling fan is fighting the work of the drivers.  IMHO this
 environment would be more robust at exhibiting the anomaly if it is present
 because you have dual controls allowing the drives to be reduced more as
 the load is modulated instead to keep the device at the same duty factor of
 runaway before being pulled back by increased air flow [push pull of air
 flow above and below an average level instead of just on off].. if nothing
 else it may provide finer control of the system via combinations of drive
 pw and dynamic cooling.

 Fran



[Vo]:Re: Rossi/Parkhomov reaction and the hydrogen anion

2015-03-04 Thread Mark Jurich
Bob, what was the Free Tolerance between the Reaction Tube OD
and the Heater Tube ID in the MFMP Bang! Experiment?

Who was the manufacturer of the alumina tubes?

Thanks,
Mark Jurich