Re: [Vo]:Tidal power

[ChemE Stewart]

You missed the part where the tens of thousands of fish died the same week
the turbine was put into operation.

http://thechronicleherald.ca/novascotia/1428745-studies-lacking-in-bay-of-fundy-fish-kill-say-fishermen

That particular model is putting a strong magnetic field (1,200,000 nT)
through the open, conductive saltwater gap, between rotor and stator.
Things corrode very quickly when you put a voltage in seawater.  All of
their sacrificial zincs were gone when they pulled the turbine after a few
months.  While it was connected the first 3 months I calculated it only
supplied enough power to the grid to power a few household treadmills.

I guess it is more environmentally friendly to be killed by green energy.



On Fri, Oct 27, 2017 at 10:25 PM, Jed Rothwell 
wrote:

> The potential energy from tides, waves and the Gulf Stream is immense.
> People have known that for a long time. There have been many attempts to
> tap these sources. They have failed because the ocean environment is so
> challenging. Ships and boats require constant maintenance. My father, who
> grew up among them on Long Island and Bermuda, said that a boat is "a hole
> in the water into which you pour money."
>
> The Bay of Fundy is one of the most promising places for tidal generation.
> A large generator was installed there in 2009. It failed *within days*.
> See:
>
> http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/tidal-power-bay-
> of-fundy-turbine-electricity-emera-hydro-1.3862227
>
> Think about that. Here we are in the 21st century with computer
> simulations, immense knowledge of engineering, materials and so on, yet
> this machinery failed as quickly as the first transatlantic cable did in
> 1858! Because putting things under the ocean is difficult. H. G. Wells was
> a technophile yet in 1901 he said, "my imagination refuses to see any sort
> of submarine doing anything but suffocate its crew and founder at sea."
>
> I am not saying this technology will never work, but the fact that a
> megawatt-scale installation failed within days is telling. It's telling you
> this is a lot harder than it looks.
>
> Tapping a flow of fresh water in a stream or river is a lot easier. People
> have been doing that for ~2,500 years.
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Tidal power

[Jed Rothwell]

The potential energy from tides, waves and the Gulf Stream is immense.
People have known that for a long time. There have been many attempts to
tap these sources. They have failed because the ocean environment is so
challenging. Ships and boats require constant maintenance. My father, who
grew up among them on Long Island and Bermuda, said that a boat is "a hole
in the water into which you pour money."

The Bay of Fundy is one of the most promising places for tidal generation.
A large generator was installed there in 2009. It failed *within days*. See:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/tidal-power-bay-of-fundy-turbine-electricity-emera-hydro-1.3862227

Think about that. Here we are in the 21st century with computer
simulations, immense knowledge of engineering, materials and so on, yet
this machinery failed as quickly as the first transatlantic cable did in
1858! Because putting things under the ocean is difficult. H. G. Wells was
a technophile yet in 1901 he said, "my imagination refuses to see any sort
of submarine doing anything but suffocate its crew and founder at sea."

I am not saying this technology will never work, but the fact that a
megawatt-scale installation failed within days is telling. It's telling you
this is a lot harder than it looks.

Tapping a flow of fresh water in a stream or river is a lot easier. People
have been doing that for ~2,500 years.

Re: [Vo]:Phonon–Nuclear Coupling

[mixent]

In reply to  JonesBeene's message of Fri, 27 Oct 2017 15:09:37 -0700:
Hi,
[snip]
>Hi Robin
>
>The neutron “hopping” modality is indeed one way that gain could happen.
>
>In fact you are probably referring to Hagelstein’s 1993 paper where he 
>introduces this concept wrt palladium.
>
>I do not think he was envisioning iron as the active metal at that time.
>
>Perhaps he will be reminded of this possibility.
>
>I like it but it also demands that the 2.4 MeV gamma is attenuated via the 
>down-conversion aspect – so there are two miracles involved.
[snip]
I'm not sure there would be a gamma. The energy may appear as kinetic energy of
the two new nuclei, where they "push off" against one another, moving in
opposite directions. Because they are massive, there would also be virtually no
bremsstrahlung. 
Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html

[Vo]:AI improvements offer a lesson to cold fusion

[Jed Rothwell]

The other day I posted the message below, describing recent progress in AI.
An aspect of this may be instructive to cold fusion researchers.

This recent progress has various causes. One of the main ones is a dramatic
improvement in the neural network technique. (See
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/14/magazine/the-great-ai-awakening.html and
many other articles.)

The neural network AI technique has been around for decades. It did not
work well in the past because the programs used a single network. Nowadays
they use multiple networks, in layers, where one layer feeds output to
another layer.

Here is the lesson for cold fusion. There may be techniques in cold fusion
that have been abandoned which, with some modification, might work well.
For example, we assume that Pd-D cold fusion has no future because
palladium is so expensive. Perhaps this is not such a limitation. As I
pointed out in the past, thin film Pd is used in catalytic converters,
where it is exposed to a fairly large fraction of all of the heat produced
in the world. If there is enough Pd for this application, perhaps there
would be enough to produce a large fraction of world energy with similar
thin-film Pd.

Many techniques have been described in the literature that worked a few
times spectacularly, but most of the time they do not work. They are
irreproducible. The SuperWave technique once produced, "Excess Power of up
to 34 watts; Average ~20 watts for 17 h." (
http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/DardikIexcessheat.pdf) I have heard that
despite strenuous efforts, it has never done that at U. Missouri. Does that
mean the technique is flawed? Hopelessly irreproducible? Maybe. But perhaps
with a modification or extension it will work, just as the neural network
technique began to work when it was extended to multiple levels. Adding
levels to neural networks was not such a big change, conceptually. In
retrospect, it seems like a natural extension of the technique. It may be
how naturally occurring neural networks in the brain work. There might some
analogous "natural" extension to the SuperWave technique that will
dramatically improve it.

Or there might be something about the earlier, more successful experiments
that has been overlooked, or forgotten. Neural network computing was
denigrated during the long period now called the AI winter, when the
research reached a nadir, around 1990. Techniques that have now been
demonstrated to work were dismissed at that time. Some were not given a
good enough chance. Others may have been ahead of their time, meaning the
could not work without today's massively larger hardware. Along similar
lines, I expect there are many new tools and technologies available now
that would benefit cold fusion, that were not available in the 1990s.

Along the same lines, a technique or a material that cannot work at one
stage in the development of a technology might suddenly come into its own a
short while later. Transistors began with germanium. Silicon would not have
worked at first, because of various limitations. Silicon began to work in
1954 and rapidly replaced germanium.

In aviation, people assume that the propeller is old technology that has
been superseded. That is not true. Modern fan-jet engines incorporate
propellers. Propellers were used for a while, and then put aside, and then
used again. It is a complicated history that I described briefly on p. 2
here:

http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/RothwellJtransistora.pdf

Quoting an aviation historian:

". . . the commercial development of the turbine passed through some
paradoxical stages before arriving at the present big jet era. Contrary to
one standard illusion, modern technology does not advance with breathtaking
speed along a predictable linear track. Progress goes hesitantly much of
the time, sometimes encountering long fallow periods and often doubling
back unpredictably upon its path."


-- Forwarded message --

Progress in AI seems to be accelerating, according to a paper in *Nature*
from the AI people at Google. See:

http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2017/10/18/
google_s_ai_made_some_pretty_huge_leaps_this_week.html

They developed a new version of their go-playing program, called AlphaGo
Zero. Features:

Self-training. No use of existing datasets.

Efficient. It uses only 4 processors. The previous version used 48.

Effective. This one beat the old program in 100 to zero matches. (The old
program beat the world's best go player last year).

Quote:

"This version had taught itself how to play the game. All on its own, given
only the basic rules of the game. (The original, by comparison, learned
from a database of 100,000 Go games.) According to Google’s researchers,
AlphaGo Zero has achieved superhuman-level performance: It won 100–0
against its champion predecessor, AlphaGo."

The same technology is being used to develop software modules. They work
better than human-written modules. Quote:

". . . [R]esearchers announced that Google’s 

RE: [Vo]:Phonon–Nuclear Coupling

[bobcook39...@hotmail.com]

Hagelstein has been working om a coupling between phonic lattice spin energy 
states (thermal energy) and nuclear energy states, including (I believe) 
nuclear spin energy states.  
sonoluminescence testing  has 
been accomplished in the past at PNL by G.  Posakony with the collaborators at 
ONL.  Neutrons and other radiation has been observed as I recall and I believe 
draft papers exist.

The mechanism for the coupling has not been identified to my knowledge,  but it 
seems like the Haelelstein modelling may be pertinent.

The math associated with spin coupling is not well understood, since the Planck 
constant and spin quanta do not have a good conceptual foundation at small 
distances IMHO.   How uncertainty principle applies to spin energy and  
quantized angular momentum is another glitch.

The PNL/ONL work may help understand the mechanism.

It may be that the compression produced in the sonoluminescence experiment,  
involving cavitation bubble collapse in a fluid, produces a coherent system 
with  increasing  phonic temperatures and resonant energy states  which allows 
the coherent system to expel EM x-rays and reach a lower total energy including 
lower  phonic energy.  The similarity to LENR is the existence of a coherent 
system with induced resonant conditions coupling lattice electron spin with 
nuclear spin and probable transition to lower total energy.

Bob Cook








From: JonesBeene
Sent: Friday, October 27, 2017 1:06 PM
To: Vortex List
Subject: [Vo]:Phonon–Nuclear Coupling

Think about this: a process for converting sound into x-rays but not involving 
hydrogen or sonoluminescence….

The conference papers from ICCM/20-Sendai includes an important but overlooked 
paper
“Developing Phonon–Nuclear Coupling Experiments with Vibrating Plates and 
Radiation Detectors”
Florian Metzler, Peter Hagelstein and Siyuan Lu

This was available on the LENR-CANR site but for some reason a proper URL 
citation cannot be found. Also, apparently it has been
updated with further work recently.

Abstract
Excess heat has been reported in cold fusion experiments since 1989; however, 
there is at present no accepted explanation for what
mechanisms are involved. Over the past decades a general theory has been 
developed which seems applicable to excess heat and
other anomalies systematically; but in this case we do not yet have unambiguous 
experimental support for the phonon–nuclear
coupling and enhanced up-conversion and down-conversion mechanism. This has 
motivated experimental studies with which we
hope to develop relevant experimental results from which clear tests of theory 
can be made. A facility has been developed with
which we are able to induce vibrations in metal plates from about 10 kHz up to 
about 10 MHz and then measure the relative
displacement. With a high-power piezo transducer we have driven a steel plate 
at 2.23 MHz to produce a vibrational power of 100W
We are able to detect X-rays… END.

In short they put in sound waves which produce x-rays by upconversion. This 
seems to be related to the Mossbauer effect.

No indication is provided of the power ratio in vs out but anytime upconversion 
is claimed, there is a potential avenue for gain unless
there is a corresponding downconversion to balance the books.

One variation which I would like to see is to irradiate iron (57Fe) with both 
ultrasound and RF at the first sideband absorption line at 34 MHz

The is a surprising history in alternative energy of anomalous energy coming 
from iron.

With MIT/Hagelstein on the case, answers may be forthcoming.

RE: [Vo]:Phonon–Nuclear Coupling

[JonesBeene]

Hi Robin

The neutron “hopping” modality is indeed one way that gain could happen.

In fact you are probably referring to Hagelstein’s 1993 paper where he 
introduces this concept wrt palladium.

I do not think he was envisioning iron as the active metal at that time.

Perhaps he will be reminded of this possibility.

I like it but it also demands that the 2.4 MeV gamma is attenuated via the 
down-conversion aspect – so there are two miracles involved.

… or do you get both miracles for the price of one when you have up and down 
conversion together  ???


In reply to  JonesBeene's message:
Hi,

57Fe+57Fe => 58Fe + 56Fe + 2.399 MeV

>Think about this: a process for converting sound into x-rays but not involving 
>hydrogen or sonoluminescence….
>
>The conference papers from ICCM/20-Sendai includes an important but overlooked 
>paper
>“Developing Phonon–Nuclear Coupling Experiments with Vibrating Plates and 
>Radiation Detectors”
>Florian Metzler, Peter Hagelstein and Siyuan Lu

Re: [Vo]:Phonon–Nuclear Coupling

[mixent]

In reply to  JonesBeene's message of Fri, 27 Oct 2017 13:06:29 -0700:
Hi,

57Fe+57Fe => 58Fe + 56Fe + 2.399 MeV

>Think about this: a process for converting sound into x-rays but not involving 
>hydrogen or sonoluminescence….
>
>The conference papers from ICCM/20-Sendai includes an important but overlooked 
>paper
>“Developing Phonon–Nuclear Coupling Experiments with Vibrating Plates and 
>Radiation Detectors”
>Florian Metzler, Peter Hagelstein and Siyuan Lu
>
>This was available on the LENR-CANR site but for some reason a proper URL 
>citation cannot be found. Also, apparently it has been
>updated with further work recently. 
>
>Abstract
>Excess heat has been reported in cold fusion experiments since 1989; however, 
>there is at present no accepted explanation for what
>mechanisms are involved. Over the past decades a general theory has been 
>developed which seems applicable to excess heat and
>other anomalies systematically; but in this case we do not yet have 
>unambiguous experimental support for the phonon–nuclear
>coupling and enhanced up-conversion and down-conversion mechanism. This has 
>motivated experimental studies with which we
>hope to develop relevant experimental results from which clear tests of theory 
>can be made. A facility has been developed with
>which we are able to induce vibrations in metal plates from about 10 kHz up to 
>about 10 MHz and then measure the relative
>displacement. With a high-power piezo transducer we have driven a steel plate 
>at 2.23 MHz to produce a vibrational power of 100W
>We are able to detect X-rays… END.
>
>In short they put in sound waves which produce x-rays by upconversion. This 
>seems to be related to the Mossbauer effect.
>
>No indication is provided of the power ratio in vs out but anytime 
>upconversion is claimed, there is a potential avenue for gain unless
>there is a corresponding downconversion to balance the books. 
>
>One variation which I would like to see is to irradiate iron (57Fe) with both 
>ultrasound and RF at the first sideband absorption line at 34 MHz
>
>The is a surprising history in alternative energy of anomalous energy coming 
>from iron. 
>
>With MIT/Hagelstein on the case, answers may be forthcoming.
Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html

[Vo]:Phonon–Nuclear Coupling

[JonesBeene]

Think about this: a process for converting sound into x-rays but not involving 
hydrogen or sonoluminescence….

The conference papers from ICCM/20-Sendai includes an important but overlooked 
paper
“Developing Phonon–Nuclear Coupling Experiments with Vibrating Plates and 
Radiation Detectors”
Florian Metzler, Peter Hagelstein and Siyuan Lu

This was available on the LENR-CANR site but for some reason a proper URL 
citation cannot be found. Also, apparently it has been
updated with further work recently. 

Abstract
Excess heat has been reported in cold fusion experiments since 1989; however, 
there is at present no accepted explanation for what
mechanisms are involved. Over the past decades a general theory has been 
developed which seems applicable to excess heat and
other anomalies systematically; but in this case we do not yet have unambiguous 
experimental support for the phonon–nuclear
coupling and enhanced up-conversion and down-conversion mechanism. This has 
motivated experimental studies with which we
hope to develop relevant experimental results from which clear tests of theory 
can be made. A facility has been developed with
which we are able to induce vibrations in metal plates from about 10 kHz up to 
about 10 MHz and then measure the relative
displacement. With a high-power piezo transducer we have driven a steel plate 
at 2.23 MHz to produce a vibrational power of 100W
We are able to detect X-rays… END.

In short they put in sound waves which produce x-rays by upconversion. This 
seems to be related to the Mossbauer effect.

No indication is provided of the power ratio in vs out but anytime upconversion 
is claimed, there is a potential avenue for gain unless
there is a corresponding downconversion to balance the books. 

One variation which I would like to see is to irradiate iron (57Fe) with both 
ultrasound and RF at the first sideband absorption line at 34 MHz

The is a surprising history in alternative energy of anomalous energy coming 
from iron. 

With MIT/Hagelstein on the case, answers may be forthcoming.

[Vo]:Tidal power

[H LV]

​'​
The tide is turning for underwater turbines
​'​


https://horizon-magazine.eu/article/tide-turning-underwater-turbines_en.html

​Harry​