[Vo]:Ring current, Rust, & SPP

[Jones Beene]

“Ring current” on the nanoscale – as it arises in the hexagonal
configuration of the Shell 105 catalyst under laser irradiation - seems to
be another major piece of the Holmlid puzzle … if not opening up a broader
understanding of LENR in general. 

It should be admitted up front that Holmlid does not buy into the SPP
formation hypothesis, at least not yet…. (according to an answer given by
Ólafsson). 

First problem. “Rust” is a poor electrical conductor… in a bulk or linear
sense, as it is a semiconductor but it is photoelectric. At the nanoscale,
“rust never sleeps” and will circulate huge equivalent current in the form
of localized ring current. In terms of amperes per unit of area, large
current is required for SPP formation. This ring current implies local
superconductivity at the nanoscale or extremely low losses in iron oxides
and several other hexagonally arranged semiconductors.
http://newscenter.lbl.gov/2012/09/06/rust-never-sleeps/

To summarize the argument. SPP formation requires photons intersecting with
large electrical current. The electrical current, or lack thereof, was the
issue which seemingly was the hardest to imagine or explain in the context
of ceramic reactors, like the glow tubes. When photons are absorbed on a
photoactive semiconductor – the photoelectric effect provides free
electrons. When these electrons are localized as nearly lossless ring
current, then the problem of SPP formation requiring huge current
(megamp/cm^2 equivalent) has been essentially solved. The beauty of this is
that it could never happen with a good electrical conductor.

Computer simulation indicates that the nanostructure of the iron oxide
catalyst forms the requisite hexagons at nanometer geometry. Regular
hexagons are the key for ring current. There are several images here which
show the hexagonal porosity and the 12 iron atoms which form the ring, with
oxygen. 

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352214315000106

The oxygen atoms which line the ring on its interior diameter are not fully
reduced, and the result is a conductive pathway for ring current reminiscent
of copper oxide HTSC. The pathway appears to be superconductive on the local
scale but low loss is acceptable for this hypotesis. The Casimir geometry of
the ring could explain the low losses or pseudo-superconductivity. 

The SPP magnetic field vortex is then responsible for the densification of
deuterium. All the pieces of the puzzle are fitting together elegantly,
thanks to Holmlid and his openness to completely share relevant information
(unlike Mills or Rossi). Now we need experimental confirmation.

Re: RE [Vo]:Skeptics at Rational Wiki cannot be persuaded with any amount of proof

[Jed Rothwell]

Roarty, Francis X  wrote:


> I just hope they aren’t doing this anomalously, do we know who keeps
> changing it back and who to hold accountable?
>

It seems to be someone named David Gerard, who also added several comments
to the Talk section. The article appears to be his baby. There is no such
thing as accountability in a Wiki. It is just a glorified blog.

I wouldn't worry about this. It generates little traffic to LENR-CANR.org,
so I doubt many people are reading it.

At least they allow the link. Wikipedia bans any link to LENR-CANR.org.

Anonymous Wiki's are an abomination, in my opinion. See:

http://wikipediocracy.com/2015/08/16/a-compendium-of-wikipedia-criticism/

- Jed

RE: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Re: Evidence for ultra-dense deuterium

[Roarty, Francis X]

zero point energy is  what keeps helium from freezing at 0 K, It also causes 
gas atom to have random motion but we are told this energy would require the 
fictional  “Maxwellian Demon” to rectify . Prof Moddel wrote a very plain 
language paper how this can occur “a Demon. A Law, and the quest for virtually 
free 
Energy” 
when DCE [dynamic Casimir Effect] meets ZPE, Random motion of gas is the 
baseline for vacuum engineering that occurs everywhere the same for every 
inertial frame. Vacuum engineering was coined by Hal Puthoff to describe things 
like Casimir effect where vacuum density can be caused to vary without the need 
for relativistic velocities. People like Lyne and Mohler  claimed anomalous 
heat with a theory related to the atomic vs molecular state of hydrogen inside 
their reactor tubes.  IMHO they were on to something but stopped far short.. 
their devices may have produced some thermal anomaly but we are only recently 
approaching the next level where this underlying bootstrap energy can fuel the 
types of reaction Jones and Axil are discussing..  I think the fact that these 
anomalies only occur inside the catalyst or nano powders [inverse catalyst] 
makes a strong case for the catalyst being the rectifier causing hydrogen atoms 
to change inertial state by changing vacuum density when the normally 
unrectifiable random motion of gas causes the gas atoms to move to a different 
size of  confined geometry – unlike cancellation of spatial vectors in 3d,  the 
tapestry inside Casimir geometry doesn’t require a specific direction, any 
motion that causes atoms to move into a less or more confinement qualifies as 
dynamic Casimir effect. IMHO molecular bonds try to prevent the individual 
atoms from contraction and thereby discount the energy needed to 
disassociate…if the molecules are already at a an ambient near the threshold 
temperature this reversible reaction could provide anomalous heat [OU] and 
either be the power source or more likely bootstrap power for any of  the 
multiple theories being discussed in this forum. I guess my point is that 
ultimately the energy has to be derived from the geometry working on something 
and if that something is vacuum density then yes I think it is fair to call the 
source as being derived from ZPE.
Fran

From: David Roberson [mailto:dlrober...@aol.com]
Sent: Friday, November 06, 2015 10:20 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Re: Evidence for ultra-dense deuterium

Fran, are you thinking that this is a form of zero point energy?

Dave



-Original Message-
From: Roarty, Francis X 
mailto:francis.x.roa...@lmco.com>>
To: vortex-l mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com>>
Sent: Fri, Nov 6, 2015 7:21 am
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Re: Evidence for ultra-dense deuterium
I think confusion will continue to reign for as long as researchers continue to 
attribute the energy levels solely to the atom instead of in combination with 
the dynamic Casimir environment through which it is randomly moving. IMHO 
molecular bonds formed in these regions have a non spatial component 
proportional to the inverse of confined spacing ^3  and become spring loaded 
when the molecule moves to a different confinement level which discounts their 
disassociation threshold.
Fran

From: Jones Beene [mailto:jone...@pacbell.net]
Sent: Thursday, November 05, 2015 11:44 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: EXTERNAL: RE: [Vo]:Re: Evidence for ultra-dense deuterium

It’s very difficult to keep the terminology consistent.

I think Holmlid would be wise to ditch the present designations and start over.


From: Mark Jurich
FYI:

All, please take a close look at Fig. 2 of this Holmlid Paper:

http://fuelrfuture.com/science/holm2.pdf

I think it will help explain how Holmlid had viewed/grasped the energy levels 
back in early 2014.  Also keep in mind that H(-1) is now called H(0).  It was 
thought that the apparent Ultra-dense state was Inverted Rydberg Hydrogen (IRH, 
hence the “-1”), but now this state is seen as somewhat different. The “0” 
reflects that the orbital angular momentum of the electrons is zero.  The 
picture in Fig 1 may need some modification to take into account the various 
apparent spin states of H(0).  Winterberg’s earlier description has slightly 
fallen out of favor in regards to more recent data, but I am not sure what the 
latest findings suggest.  Reading more of literature should help clear up the 
current understanding of H(0).

Mark Jurich

RE: [Vo]:Making an active potassium iron oxide catalyst for the Holmlid effect

[Jones Beene]

Bob,

 

I agree 100%.

 

 

From: Bob Cook 

Jones--

 

The high speed ball milling operation may be key to obtaining the desired 
dimensions of the rust.  Cryogenic process using liquid N may provide better 
size control than processes using other solvents making up a slurry.  The N 
coats each and every particle of rust and keeps them from clumping together 
during the ball milling operation.  Such clumping is undesirable when trying to 
maintain particle size in  a reasonable range during milling.  Upon completion 
of the milling operation, the N slurry is brought to room temperature and the N 
evaporates readily, leaving separate, correctly sized particles. 

 

The process is useful for getting homogenous mixtures of various substances, 
since the N maintains a coating on each substance in the ball milling/mixing 
operation until it is complete, and the N is allowed to evaporate.  The 
resulting mixture of substances—reactants, for example,-- with excellent 
homogeneity is the result.  Liquid Argon is another cryogenic liquid slurry 
used in ball milling.  

 

The cryogenic method of milling and mixing is useful for making solid rocket 
propellants, since it provides a heterogeneous and stoichiometric, size 
controlled mixture of reactants with superior energy release upon ignition.  
The process is relatively save compared higher temperature slurry mixing 
processes.  

 

The cryogenic condition prevent the chemical modification—oxidation or 
reduction—of substances being reduced in size.  This may be very important in 
obtaining appropriate catalytic properties for LENR.  

 

The processing described above may be the trade secret that Shell and hence 
BASF use in making their Shell 105 catalyst.  

Bob Cook  

 

From: Jones Beene   

Shell 105 catalyst is no longer in production by Shell, but it can be obtained 
from others … yet what is being sold may be different in the all-important 
parameter: nanostructure. How can we be sure? 

Nanostructure is almost certainly the key to success in trying to replicate the 
dense hydrogen fabrication technique.

BASF apparently bought the rights to this catalyst from Shell, and is the most 
reputable supplier. There are other specialty suppliers. However, the cost is 
obscenely high for what is basically a structured form of “rust.”

Given the high cost, and more importantly - the lack of assurance on the 
nanostructure - the possibility arises for making the catalyst from bulk iron 
oxide and potassium hydroxide. This becomes a more interesting proposition if 
one has access to a high speed ball mill or equivalent and a well-equipped 
chemistry lab.

Anyone considering the strategy of making the nanoporous iron oxide catalyst 
should have a look at this article from Nature, which is current, and very 
interesting. Almost makes one wonder if Nature has not finally seen the light, 
so to speak.

http://www.nature.com/articles/srep09733

There are six different nanostructures shown for iron oxide. I am not sure 
which is best for the Holmlid effect and the formation of ultra-dense hydrogen, 
but there is a clue. 

Notably, in one of the pictured nanostructures (called “porous spheres” figure 
3) a broad absorption edge at 535 nm was observed, which is a bit coincidental, 
no? This light frequency is associated with a double excitation process which 
is is also responsible for the red color of α-Fe2O3 phase. This is the laser 
frequency used by Holmlid.

Note: the absorption frequency of light and the color seen by the human eye are 
not necessarily the same. Thus, a powder which appears red can be absorbent for 
green light (535 nm). 

FWIW: this red iron oxide powder is available on eBay for about $1/pound which 
is about 400 times less expensive than one of the suppliers is asking for their 
version of Shell 105. 

Jones

[Vo]:NOV 6 2015 MORE ABOUT LENR THEORIES, INFO

[Peter Gluck]

http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2015/11/06-nov-2015-theory-taxionomy-start-and.html
This time I need indeed your help, too many theories- so different ones!
Some castles built in the air.

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

Re: [Vo]:Making an active potassium iron oxide catalyst for the Holmlid effect

[Bob Cook]

Making an active potassium iron oxide catalyst for the Holmlid effectJones--

The high speed ball milling operation may be key to obtaining the desired 
dimensions of the rust.  Cryogenic process using liquid N may provide better 
size control than processes using other solvents making up a slurry.  The N 
coats each and every particle of rust and keeps them from clumping together 
during the ball milling operation.  Such clumping is undesirable when trying to 
maintain particle size in  a reasonable range during milling.  Upon completion 
of the milling operation, the N slurry is brought to room temperature and the N 
evaporates readily, leaving separate, correctly sized particles. 

The process is useful for getting homogenous mixtures of various substances, 
since the N maintains a coating on each substance in the ball milling/mixing 
operation until it is complete, and the N is allowed to evaporate.  The 
resulting mixture of substances—reactants, for example,-- with excellent 
homogeneity is the result.  Liquid Argon is another cryogenic liquid slurry 
used in ball milling.  

The cryogenic method of milling and mixing is useful for making solid rocket 
propellants, since it provides a heterogeneous and stoichiometric, size 
controlled mixture of reactants with superior energy release upon ignition.  
The process is relatively save compared higher temperature slurry mixing 
processes.  

The cryogenic condition prevent the chemical modification—oxidation or 
reduction—of substances being reduced in size.  This may be very important in 
obtaining appropriate catalytic properties for LENR.  

The processing described above may be the trade secret that Shell and hence 
BASF use in making their Shell 105 catalyst.  
Bob Cook  
From: Jones Beene 
Sent: Thursday, November 05, 2015 7:24 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com 
Subject: [Vo]:Making an active potassium iron oxide catalyst for the Holmlid 
effect

Shell 105 catalyst is no longer in production by Shell, but it can be obtained 
from others … yet what is being sold may be different in the all-important 
parameter: nanostructure. How can we be sure? 

Nanostructure is almost certainly the key to success in trying to replicate the 
dense hydrogen fabrication technique.

BASF apparently bought the rights to this catalyst from Shell, and is the most 
reputable supplier. There are other specialty suppliers. However, the cost is 
obscenely high for what is basically a structured form of “rust.”

Given the high cost, and more importantly - the lack of assurance on the 
nanostructure - the possibility arises for making the catalyst from bulk iron 
oxide and potassium hydroxide. This becomes a more interesting proposition if 
one has access to a high speed ball mill or equivalent and a well-equipped 
chemistry lab.

Anyone considering the strategy of making the nanoporous iron oxide catalyst 
should have a look at this article from Nature, which is current, and very 
interesting. Almost makes one wonder if Nature has not finally seen the light, 
so to speak.

http://www.nature.com/articles/srep09733


There are six different nanostructures shown for iron oxide. I am not sure 
which is best for the Holmlid effect and the formation of ultra-dense hydrogen, 
but there is a clue. 

Notably, in one of the pictured nanostructures (called “porous spheres” figure 
3) a broad absorption edge at 535 nm was observed, which is a bit coincidental, 
no? This light frequency is associated with a double excitation process which 
is is also responsible for the red color of α-Fe2O3 phase. This is the laser 
frequency used by Holmlid.

Note: the absorption frequency of light and the color seen by the human eye are 
not necessarily the same. Thus, a powder which appears red can be absorbent for 
green light (535 nm). 

FWIW: this red iron oxide powder is available on eBay for about $1/pound which 
is about 400 times less expensive than one of the suppliers is asking for their 
version of Shell 105. 


Jones

RE [Vo]:Skeptics at Rational Wiki cannot be persuaded with any amount of proof

[Roarty, Francis X]

I just hope they aren’t doing this anomalously, do we know who keeps changing 
it back and who to hold accountable?

From: Jed Rothwell [mailto:jedrothw...@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, November 06, 2015 10:07 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:Skeptics at Rational Wiki cannot be persuaded with any 
amount of proof

The so-called rational wiki has a highly inaccurate treatment of cold fusion. 
It came to my attention that this wiki includes a description of me:

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Cold_fusion

http://lenr-canr.org (prop. Jed Rothwell, true-believer in all things 
cold-fusion)

I changed and put a note in the talk section. I noted that I upload skeptical 
papers as well as ones in favor of cold fusion. My revision was reverted back 
to:

http://lenr-canr.org (prop. Jed Rothwell, true-believer in all things 
cold-fusion)

I changed it again, as follows:

http://lenr-canr.org (prop. Jed Rothwell, said to be a "true-believer in all 
things cold-fusion," yet who described cold fusion as mainly "schlock science" 
and "baloney" during a keynote speech at the University of 
Missouri.http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/RothwellJlessonsfro.pdf)

As I expected, it was reverted back.

Here's the thing. This is not a question about physics. It is a matter of fact, 
easily verified, regarding views that I expressed in a keynote speech at a 
major university. Even that is not good enough evidence to convince the editors 
at Rational Wiki. Nothing -- absolutely nothing -- will change their minds, 
even about the most prosaic facts.

- Jed

[Vo]: Re: Evidence for ultra-dense deuterium

[Mark Jurich]

Bob Cook wrote:
Holmlid does not refer to normal molecular hydrogen as H(0) as best I can tell 
from reading his paper.  I would think that normal 
molecular hydrogen could have more than one orbital spin state for its two 
electrons.  Thus, a notation of H(0) would not be correct 
for some normal hydrogen.
Please take a look (for example) at:
Nuclear particle decay in a multi-MeV beam ejected by pulsed-laser impact on 
ultra-dense hydrogen H(0)
Leif Holmlid
International Journal of Modern Physics E, 24:11 (2015) 1550080 (18 pages)
>From the paper:
“Two different forms of ultra-dense hydrogen H(0) exist, namely ultra-dense 
protium
p(0)1 and ultra-dense deuterium D(0).2,3 The names of these materials have
recently been changed from p(−1) and D(−1) to indicate that the orbital angular
momentum of the electrons is zero.3”

Mark Jurich
 

[Vo]:Re: Evidence for ultra-dense deuterium

[Mark Jurich]

I wrote:

  please take a close look at Fig. 2 of this Holmlid Paper:
  http://fuelrfuture.com/science/holm2.pdf
  [along with other stuff including an explanation of the figure]

to which Dave replied:

   I assume that any significant energy release must be due to true fusion 
since the potential energy of both states(H(1) or H(0)) 
are comparable.   Is there some other source of energy release contemplated?  
Does it not seem strange that an effect as significant 
as this one remained hidden from physicists for so long?  I remain skeptical 
since it appears to be too good to be true.  And, the 
extreme density of this compressed hydrogen should have revealed itself.
Dave, these are very good questions.  What do you mean by “true fusion”?  I 
assume you mean hot fusion but I may be wrong.  Even 
that term means different things to different people.  In this particular case, 
I would say that it is unconventional hot fusion, 
since particles such as muons/mesons are apparently seen coming from the 
material (which is yet another (related) topic to debate in 
itself).
With respect to some other source of energy release ... Sure, perhaps with the 
“right” ingredients, LENR (i.e., non-hot fusion) may 
occur, if that’s what you are addressing here.
Yes, it’s very strange that an apparent effect as significant as this seems to 
be “hidden” and I’m not aware (at this time) of any 
good arguments opposing it, other than the usual things like, “this isn’t a 
real scientist” and “if it isn’t published in PRL, it’s 
not worth looking into”.  Are you aware of any data/experiments that refute 
this?  I’d love to see/hear them...
I believe I am as skeptical as you are.  I am open to trying to understand what 
is happening, as I am sure you are...
It is my understanding that milligrams of this “stuff” may be possible to 
create.  Perhaps shining a variable frequency probe laser 
or X-Rays into it may reveal something, I don’t know.  Do you have an ideas how 
we can  possibly prove that it’s happening, 
density-wise?
Please take a look at what looks like Leif’s reply to something along the lines 
of your questions, recently (search in the comments 
for “Leif Holmlid”):
http://hackaday.com/2015/10/05/deuterium-powered-homes-and-the-return-of-cold-fusion-hype/
Let us know what you think!
- Mark
 

[Vo]:Re: Evidence for ultra-dense deuterium

[Bob Cook]

The Holmlid paper is a smoking gun for the mechanism of spin coupling in a 
coherent system that has been sought for some time.  

The paper suggests ultra-dense clusters—small vortex rod like clusters of 
molecular of P, D and T are possible.  Holmlid calls this H(-1)  which can 
exist in 3 spin separate spin states with the spin 2 state being most stable.

Holmlid suggests that the dense state H(-1) can oscillate with the H(1) state 
(a Rydberg hydrogen state) not the same as normal molecular hydrogen, which is 
identified as H2.  Holmlid identifies  normal molecular hydrogen with a nuclear 
separation of 74 pm, compared to the Rydberg state H(1)  with a nuclear 
separation of 150 pm and the ultra dense state H(-1) with a nuclear separation 
of 2.3 pm.  

Holmlid does not refer to normal molecular hydrogen as H(0) as best I can tell 
from reading his paper.  I would think that normal molecular hydrogen could 
have more than one orbital spin state for its two electrons.  Thus, a notation 
of H(0) would not be correct for some normal hydrogen. 

It would seem to be a small step to reach a more stable state than the H(-1), 
say He, with a transfer of energy to the rest of the coherent system via the 
phase transitions and their respective spin energy states.  Holmlid even goes 
so far to suggest that spin may not be conserved in rapid transitions.  (I 
doubt that conjecture.)  

In the case of ultra dense p molecules, D may form before the He finds itself 
possible. 

Bob Cook


From: Jones Beene 
Sent: Thursday, November 05, 2015 8:43 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com 
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Re: Evidence for ultra-dense deuterium

It’s very difficult to keep the terminology consistent.

 

I think Holmlid would be wise to ditch the present designations and start over. 

 

 

From: Mark Juric

FYI:

 

All, please take a close look at Fig. 2 of this Holmlid Paper:

 

http://fuelrfuture.com/science/holm2.pdf

 

I think it will help explain how Holmlid had viewed/grasped the energy levels 
back in early 2014.  Also keep in mind that H(-1) is now called H(0).  It was 
thought that the apparent Ultra-dense state was Inverted Rydberg Hydrogen (IRH, 
hence the “-1”), but now this state is seen as somewhat different. The “0” 
reflects that the orbital angular momentum of the electrons is zero.  The 
picture in Fig 1 may need some modification to take into account the various 
apparent spin states of H(0).  Winterberg’s earlier description has slightly 
fallen out of favor in regards to more recent data, but I am not sure what the 
latest findings suggest.  Reading more of literature should help clear up the 
current understanding of H(0).

 

Mark Jurich

RE: [Vo]:Super strong glass is based on adding alumina

[Stephen Cooke]

I like the idea of Jones Beene's test using light stimulation, it would be 
interesting to see some day, even if it proved negative it would tell us 
something. If positive even better.
I wonder if the Spectrum when its in SSM would be interesting, Would this glass 
also be transparent to UV?
From: jone...@pacbell.net
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Super strong glass is based on adding alumina
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2015 07:13:21 -0800

For anyone interested in translucent alumina tubes for a glow reactor 
experiment, they are available from time to time on eBay (but not now). They 
are alumina and not transparent, but translucent. Of course borosilicate glass 
is also available but alumina could be relevant to gain.  A more translucent 
tube would be advantageous if external photons are to be introduced as a 
reaction trigger, instead of electrical current. Those who believe that SPP are 
responsible for initiating the gain in the glow reactor already see the 
futility of using incandescence (from resistance wiring) to produce photons at 
no more than 3% efficiency, when a proper external lamp can provide 60% 
efficiency - or a factor of 20x more photons per unit of electrical power.  
Imagine increasing COP by an order of magnitude via a simple change in input 
power, and at the same time eliminating the most common cause of tube failure. 
From: Mats Lewan  You might have heard of the Japanese researchers making glass 
almost as strong as steel. Their paper:http://www.nature.com/articles/srep15233 
  
The popular version here:
http://gizmodo.com/japanese-researchers-make-glass-thats-nearly-unbreakabl-1739673940
  What attracted my interest was the role of alumina in this new material.If 
alumina has properties that are important for Rossi’s reactors, and in 
particular since Rossi claims that he’s developing a new reactor called E-Cat X 
which will produce both heat and light, this new alumina based transparent 
glass material could be of interest.  Matswww.animpossibleinvention.com 
  

Re: [Vo]:Re: Evidence for ultra-dense deuterium

[David Roberson]

Fran, are you thinking that this is a form of zero point energy?

Dave

 

 

 

-Original Message-
From: Roarty, Francis X 
To: vortex-l 
Sent: Fri, Nov 6, 2015 7:21 am
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Re: Evidence for ultra-dense deuterium



I think confusion will continue to reign for as long as researchers continue to 
attribute the energy levels solely to the atom instead of in combination with 
the dynamic Casimir environment through which it is randomly moving. IMHO 
molecular bonds formed in these regions have a non spatial component 
proportional to the inverse of confined spacing ^3  and become spring loaded 
when the molecule moves to a different confinement level which discounts their 
disassociation threshold.
Fran
 

From: Jones Beene [mailto:jone...@pacbell.net]
Sent: Thursday, November 05, 2015 11:44 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: EXTERNAL: RE: [Vo]:Re: Evidence for ultra-dense deuterium

 
It’s very difficult to keep the terminology consistent.
 
I think Holmlid would be wise to ditch the present designations and start over.
 
 
From: Mark Jurich


FYI:

 

All, please take a close look at Fig. 2 of this Holmlid Paper:

 

http://fuelrfuture.com/science/holm2.pdf

 

I think it will help explain how Holmlid had viewed/grasped the energy levels 
back in early 2014.  Also keep in mind that H(-1) is now called H(0).  It was 
thought that the apparent Ultra-dense state was Inverted Rydberg Hydrogen (IRH, 
hence the “-1”), but now this state is seen as somewhat different. The “0” 
reflects that the orbital angular momentum of the electrons is zero.  The 
picture in Fig 1 may need some modification to take into account the various 
apparent spin states of H(0).  Winterberg’s earlier description has slightly 
fallen out of favor in regards to more recent data, but I am not sure what the 
latest findings suggest.  Reading more of literature should help clear up the 
current understanding of H(0).

 

Mark Jurich

Re: [Vo]:Super strong glass is based on adding alumina

[David Roberson]

Interested indeed!  I can imagine that this material will become very wide 
spread unless the cost of production can not be reduced to a reasonable level.  
There may also be additional material characteristics that were not mentioned 
which limit applications.

It is going to be interesting to follow this development with regard to Rossi 
as well as other usages.

Dave

 

 

 

-Original Message-
From: Mats Lewan 
To:  
Sent: Fri, Nov 6, 2015 5:46 am
Subject: [Vo]:Super strong glass is based on adding alumina


You might have heard of the Japanese researchers making glass almost as strong 
as steel.
Their paper:
http://www.nature.com/articles/srep15233  
The popular version here:
http://gizmodo.com/japanese-researchers-make-glass-thats-nearly-unbreakabl-1739673940
 


What attracted my interest was the role of alumina in this new material.
If alumina has properties that are important for Rossi’s reactors, and in 
particular since Rossi claims that he’s developing a new reactor called E-Cat X 
which will produce both heat and light, this new alumina based transparent 
glass material could be of interest. 


Mats
www.animpossibleinvention.com

RE: [Vo]:Super strong glass is based on adding alumina

[Jones Beene]

For anyone interested in translucent alumina tubes for a glow reactor 
experiment, they are available from time to time on eBay (but not now). They 
are alumina and not transparent, but translucent. Of course borosilicate glass 
is also available but alumina could be relevant to gain. 

 

A more translucent tube would be advantageous if external photons are to be 
introduced as a reaction trigger, instead of electrical current. Those who 
believe that SPP are responsible for initiating the gain in the glow reactor 
already see the futility of using incandescence (from resistance wiring) to 
produce photons at no more than 3% efficiency, when a proper external lamp can 
provide 60% efficiency - or a factor of 20x more photons per unit of electrical 
power. 

 

Imagine increasing COP by an order of magnitude via a simple change in input 
power, and at the same time eliminating the most common cause of tube failure.

 

From: Mats Lewan 

 

You might have heard of the Japanese researchers making glass almost as strong 
as steel. Their paper:

http://www.nature.com/articles/srep15233 

 

 
The popular version here:
http://gizmodo.com/japanese-researchers-make-glass-thats-nearly-unbreakabl-1739673940
 

 

What attracted my interest was the role of alumina in this new material.

If alumina has properties that are important for Rossi’s reactors, and in 
particular since Rossi claims that he’s developing a new reactor called E-Cat X 
which will produce both heat and light, this new alumina based transparent 
glass material could be of interest. 

 

Mats

www.animpossibleinvention.com

 

 

 

[Vo]:I.H. presentation given in China

[Jed Rothwell]

See:

http://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/index.php/Attachment/421-20140925152226-9375-pdf/?s=d62872f7500919d1a9ea09c6742e8e0e9222a983

This is in English and Chinese. Parts of the Chinese are not translated.
You can Google translate them. I am a little surprised to see how much I
can understand reading it in Japanese. I guess technical terminology is
pretty much the same. It is like "reading" a cold fusion paper in Italian
when you speak only English.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Re: Evidence for ultra-dense deuterium

[David Roberson]

I assume that any significant energy release must be due to true fusion since 
the potential energy of both states(H(1) or H(0)) are comparable.   Is there 
some other source of energy release contemplated?  Does it not seem strange 
that an effect as significant as this one remained hidden from physicists for 
so long?  I remain skeptical since it appears to be too good to be true.  And, 
the extreme density of this compressed hydrogen should have revealed itself.

Dave

 

 

 

-Original Message-
From: Mark Jurich 
To: vortex-l 
Sent: Thu, Nov 5, 2015 10:41 pm
Subject: [Vo]:Re: Evidence for ultra-dense deuterium




FYI:
 
All, please take a close look at Fig. 2 of this Holmlid Paper:
 
http://fuelrfuture.com/science/holm2.pdf
 
I think it will help explain how Holmlid had viewed/grasped the energylevels 
back in early 2014.  Also keep in mind that H(-1) is now calledH(0).  It was 
thought that the apparent Ultra-dense state was InvertedRydberg Hydrogen (IRH, 
hence the “-1”), but now this state is seen as somewhatdifferent. The “0” 
reflects that the orbital angular momentum of the electronsis zero.  The 
picture in Fig 1 may need some modification to take intoaccount the various 
apparent spin states of H(0).  Winterberg’s earlierdescription has slightly 
fallen out of favor in regards to more recent data, butI am not sure what the 
latest findings suggest.  Reading more of literatureshould help clear up the 
current understanding of H(0).
 
Mark Jurich

[Vo]:Skeptics at Rational Wiki cannot be persuaded with any amount of proof

[Jed Rothwell]

The so-called rational wiki has a highly inaccurate treatment of cold
fusion. It came to my attention that this wiki includes a description of me:

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Cold_fusion

http://lenr-canr.org (prop. Jed Rothwell, true-believer in all things
cold-fusion)

I changed and put a note in the talk section. I noted that I upload
skeptical papers as well as ones in favor of cold fusion. My revision was
reverted back to:

http://lenr-canr.org (prop. Jed Rothwell, true-believer in all things
cold-fusion)

I changed it again, as follows:

http://lenr-canr.org (prop. Jed Rothwell, said to be a "true-believer in
all things cold-fusion," yet who described cold fusion as mainly "schlock
science" and "baloney" during a keynote speech at the University of
Missouri.http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/RothwellJlessonsfro.pdf)

As I expected, it was reverted back.

Here's the thing. This is not a question about physics. It is a matter of
fact, easily verified, regarding views that I expressed in a keynote speech
at a major university. Even that is not good enough evidence to convince
the editors at Rational Wiki. Nothing -- absolutely nothing -- will change
their minds, even about the most prosaic facts.

- Jed

RE: [Vo]:Re: Evidence for ultra-dense deuterium

[Roarty, Francis X]

I think confusion will continue to reign for as long as researchers continue to 
attribute the energy levels solely to the atom instead of in combination with 
the dynamic Casimir environment through which it is randomly moving. IMHO 
molecular bonds formed in these regions have a non spatial component 
proportional to the inverse of confined spacing ^3  and become spring loaded 
when the molecule moves to a different confinement level which discounts their 
disassociation threshold.
Fran

From: Jones Beene [mailto:jone...@pacbell.net]
Sent: Thursday, November 05, 2015 11:44 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: EXTERNAL: RE: [Vo]:Re: Evidence for ultra-dense deuterium

It’s very difficult to keep the terminology consistent.

I think Holmlid would be wise to ditch the present designations and start over.


From: Mark Jurich
FYI:

All, please take a close look at Fig. 2 of this Holmlid Paper:

http://fuelrfuture.com/science/holm2.pdf

I think it will help explain how Holmlid had viewed/grasped the energy levels 
back in early 2014.  Also keep in mind that H(-1) is now called H(0).  It was 
thought that the apparent Ultra-dense state was Inverted Rydberg Hydrogen (IRH, 
hence the “-1”), but now this state is seen as somewhat different. The “0” 
reflects that the orbital angular momentum of the electrons is zero.  The 
picture in Fig 1 may need some modification to take into account the various 
apparent spin states of H(0).  Winterberg’s earlier description has slightly 
fallen out of favor in regards to more recent data, but I am not sure what the 
latest findings suggest.  Reading more of literature should help clear up the 
current understanding of H(0).

Mark Jurich

Re: [Vo]: Evidence for ultra-dense deuterium

[Roarty, Francis X]

Bob, I agree with Miley’s assessment [snip] Miley does not believe the 
ultra-dense form of hydrogen is something that forms on a surface or can exist 
in the air. He thinks it is a form that exists interstitially inside a metal or 
metal nanoparticle. [/snip]. I also think some preprocessing occurs on the 
surface when that surface is near contact with other nano particles or shaped 
grains of conductive material such as occurs in bulk nano powdered Ni. The free 
floating hydrogen IS affected by the tapestry of Casimir suppression thru which 
it randomly travels, IMHO this is the “loading mechanism” where the shrinkage 
occurs – my pet theory being a form of Lorentzian contraction where 137 steps 
are based on vacuum density suppression instead of the pythagoran relationship 
of C^2 to V^2 but, using whatever theory you like, I think this allows more but 
shrunken hydrogen molecules to load into the lattice based on  a combination of 
molecular bonding of these shrunken atoms and the reduced vacuum density 
afforded by the lattice.. I could see less shrunken [f/h] at the center of the 
interstitial region while the more shrunken forms arrange themselves in what 
you describe as a snowflake but with what appears to us as nonspatial 
orientation placing themselves in impossibly small confinements in the corners 
of the interstitial confinement.. As always I think Naudt’s nailed it when his 
05 paper concluded that hydrinos are relativistic but no one wants to accept 
Lorentzian contraction without near C dx/dt.  Whenever I see the animation of 
Casimir plates and the shrunken vacuum wavelengths between I think they have it 
wrong .. the longer wavelengths are still present but the reduced vacuum 
density dilates time such that those longer wavelengths appear contracted from 
our stationary perspective outside the cavity. Eventually I hope those 
scientists working on radioactive remediation through catalytic action will be 
able to segregate just those radioactive gas atoms being deeply loaded into the 
lattice to determine a true rate of accelerated decay wrt to atoms “processed”, 
Presently I think the data is deeply diluted by the populations needed to 
pressure the atoms to process/ contract and then load into these interstitial 
regions where from their perspective they age and decay naturally for years 
while from our perspective they are only gone for seconds. BTW, I think this is 
related to catalytic action, not so much any significant dilation but just the 
dynamics of accelerating and decelerating constantly with changes in 
suppression due to surrounding geometry.
Out on MY limb
Fran




From: Bob Higgins [mailto:rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, November 05, 2015 1:56 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]: Evidence for ultra-dense deuterium

From my side of a recent private discussion of Holmlid ... I thought some of it 
would add to this topic:

From what I have seen of Miley's work, Miley does not believe the ultra-dense 
form of hydrogen is something that forms on a surface or can exist in the air. 
He thinks it is a form that exists interstitially inside a metal or metal 
nanoparticle.  Holmlid cites backward to Winterberg about theory for 
ultra-dense hydrogen.  Winterberg believes the ultra-dense form is a vertical 
column of deuterium atoms - completely different from known RM which is planar 
monatomic flake-like molecules.  Miley believes the ultra-dense form can exist 
with either H or D.  Winterberg says the ultra-dense state can only form with 
D.  Miley and Holmlid/Winterberg appear to be describing completely different 
animals.

Interestingly, Winterberg's description sounds more like Ed Storms' linear 
hydroton of atoms.

It is not clear how Winterberg's column-of-atoms matter is something that forms 
from RM.  If I had to speculate, I would say that the columns form as an 
aligned stack of RM flakes.  Then the matter switches from being a planar array 
of columns to being a columnar stack of flakes.

Anderson/Holmlid describe D(-1) as being the lowest energy form of RM.  This 
would imply that the snowflake form of RM, D(1) is higher energy.  Wouldn't 
this mean that there is more potential Coulomb explosion energy from the D(1) 
than there is from the D(-1)?  The authors keep referring to there being only a 
small energy barrier between D(1) and D(-1) and indicate the possibility of 
spontaneous change between the states.  Yet they also seem to be ascribing 
tremendous potential energy to D(-1) [the lowest energy state] compared to D(1) 
[a supposed higher energy state].

I guess I don't understand the idea of Coulomb Explosion (CE).  The authors 
describe how easy it is to remove an electron from RM (true only for a Rydberg 
excited atom) and then the resulting exposed ions just blow apart from Coulomb 
repulsion.  To me this sounds pretty ridiculous.  Otherwise, how could the D(1) 
RM be as stable as it appears to be?

[Vo]:Super strong glass is based on adding alumina

[Mats Lewan]

You might have heard of the Japanese researchers making glass almost as strong 
as steel.
Their paper:
http://www.nature.com/articles/srep15233 
  
The popular version here:
http://gizmodo.com/japanese-researchers-make-glass-thats-nearly-unbreakabl-1739673940
 

 

What attracted my interest was the role of alumina in this new material.
If alumina has properties that are important for Rossi’s reactors, and in 
particular since Rossi claims that he’s developing a new reactor called E-Cat X 
which will produce both heat and light, this new alumina based transparent 
glass material could be of interest. 

Mats
www.animpossibleinvention.com