RE: [Vo]:New LENR patent application from STMicroelectronics
You might notice that Pharis' theory that the patent was based on uses the neo-coulombic potential. Some observant person might notice that the name of my booth at NI Week was Neo- Coulombic- named after that potential. The same person might notice that I wrote the preface for Pharis' book ( The Dynamic Theory - A New View of Space-Time-Matter: The thermodynamic foundations of a five dimensional universe ) I normally shy away from theory in public and stick to experiments . But this theory and Letts' empirical fitted values have helped guide my experiments. No, they are not perfect but even the light from a small candle is good in total darkness. It is an obscure theory- to say the least. It is based on a 5 dim relativistic theory developed from thermodynamics using mass density as a physically real dimension. (avoids the cylindrical restrictions of KK theories) It predicts a softer nuclear potential (and non singular). It also gives a max mass to energy conversion rate (like 4D did for a physical speed). It predicts the nuclear binding energy closer than the standard models and reaction speeds within nuclear explosives. I like the theory since it derives EM and relativity starting from thermo instead of trying the other way around. I don't agree with all the theory states but it is an interesting and unique approach to GR and QM. I will warn others that the theory does things like allow for variations in G and h similar to Dirac's large number hypothesis and it seems to exclude neutrinos with mass. D2 Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2013 13:26:25 -0400 Subject: RE: [Vo]:New LENR patent application from STMicroelectronics From: pagnu...@htdconnect.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com *** Resend of last partial email *** Jones, By a nonsingular potential, he means that the 1/r term must be incorrect as r -- 0. I have not read his theory so I have no opinion. The De Haas-van Alphen effect is a new one for me. Interesting. I need to research it. Whether it relates to Williams' theory may be a question you can ask him. His website - 'www.nmt.edu/~pharis/' lists his email address 'pha...@emrtc.nmt.edu' Another one of his interviews is at 'The Space Show' website - http://thespaceshow.wordpress.com/2011/06/10/pharis-williams-friday-6-10-11/ I do not know whether his theories have been put through rigorous experimental tests. -- Lou Pagnucco Jones Beene wrote: -Original Message- From: pagnu...@htdconnect.com BTW, a recently published cold D+D fusion patent application is - Deuterium Reactor -- US 20130235963 A1 ABSTRACT The Deuterium Reactor is a fusion reactor whose design is based upon a non-singular electrostatic required by the quantization of electric charge. This potential allows for a significant reduction in the fusion barrier of deuterium nuclei when these nuclei are held in close proximity, as within a crystal, and preconditioned using a magnetic field. Lou, interesting find, in a way. At first this application seemed nutty, but the inventor was funded by a small grant from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Head_Naval_Surface_Warfare_Center Whether that adds any credibility to the application is debatable. One might reasonably ask: what is a non-singular electrostatic required by the quantization of electric charge. Sounds cranky. Given the Quantum Hall Effect, it is hard to imagine what the inventor is talking about - unless he is invoking Mills' f/H or redundant ground states - from another perspective, or else Landau quantization. In regard to the later, the De Haas-van Alphen effect may indeed have a place in a hypothesis for nanomagnetism in LENR ... in the way that Ahern and others are suggesting, yet I do not remember seeing this effect mentioned before now. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_Haas%E2%80%93van_Alphen_effect Jones
RE: [Vo]:Cravens report on NI Week demo
again, be sure to see Letts' IE issue #112 article next month. I don't really know about a catalyst. However, I do find the use of addition of alloys that lower the energy of vacancy of formation are useful. examples: Cu in Ni, Au in Pd, Sn in Ti,... I know that some are opposed to the concept of vacancies being relevant- However, lowering the energy for their formation seem useful. I envision it as allowing for ease of H or D flux through the material and allowing more rapid shifts from equilibrium. The other useful additive is ammonia or CO to help remove oxide covers of Ni powders. However, I prefer to reduce the metal in situ and avoid oxide complications. D2 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Cravens report on NI Week demo From: dlrober...@aol.com Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2013 20:41:11 -0400 Eric, Rossi has done an excellent job of hiding the details of his catalyst. The facts will come out before long if production begins in earnest on his system. Do you have any idea what function is performed by his catalyst? My first thoughts are that it facilitates the breaking up of the hydrogen molecules into individual atoms somewhat like what happens when a spark passes though the low energy gas. This is just a guess since DGT appears to achieve the same goal with their system. Dave -Original Message- From: Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Fri, Sep 20, 2013 6:39 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Cravens report on NI Week demo On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 3:32 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: I have begged Rossi to produce a curve of energy generated versus temperature applied to his material to no avail. With that type of information one can begin to actually engineer a device that functions on demand provided the material is not too inconsistent. Btw, I've come to the working hypothesis that Rossi really does have a catalyst (just as he has always claimed). The catalyst in this instance would either be heat activated or possibly activated from electrical stimulation (I assume there is not much difference in the resulting behavior). When the catalyst kicks in, at the right threshold or level of electrical stimulation, one would see more of an heat effect. I suppose this might or might not be accompanied with runaway, but the two are not necessarily the same -- increased activity, on one hand, and runaway, above and beyond such an increase, on the other. It would be interesting to see the results of your model with the effect of a catalyst added in. I assume in Rossi's case the catalyst is temperature activated (e.g., a thermionic beta emitter). Eric
[VO]: air flow systems
Does anyone here have experience with an air flow calorimeter? Any suggestions, experience? I am about to try to make a room heater.
[VO]: Kinetic furnace
Does anyone here know what happened to the “kinetic furnace”. Rothwell and Mallove tested it back in ’89 (Infinite Energy #19) and found it reproducible, reliable and with a COP1. I cannot find out what happened to it, and it doesn’t seem like Jed would have for the betterment of mankind just let such a device go.
RE: [VO]: Kinetic furnace
thanks, I thought as much, but I could not find the follow up testing. I am trying to look at air flow heat measures - and it looks like a bear. It looks like the humidity control is the critical component. I am trying to find something that people could feel. D2 Date: Sat, 21 Sep 2013 21:17:00 -0400 Subject: Re: [VO]: Kinetic furnace From: jedrothw...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com We did additional tests that proved it was not working. It was an error in calorimetry. I don't recall when or whether these results were published. I.E. should remove this article, since we now know it was a mistake. Most claims of this nature are a mistake, but it often takes a lot of effort to track the mistake down. Ask Terry about magnetic motor claims. - Jed
RE: [Vo]:Cravens report on NI Week demo
E vs. temp was not done at the demo. However below are some typical (average) values from some old lab runs. I did not calibrate at the demo. I only showed that the sample was warmer than the control. That was the only point that was attempted there so there was no claim of amount of energy but it was around 4 watts. I did not want to confuse things and there was no time to calibrate. Just one sphere was hotter than its environment- that was it. The important point is that excess increases with temperature. You may want wait till the next issue of IE comes out to see some empirical models (Letts, in #112) for better data. Letts has fitted hundreds of data sets. temp C excess W 292 0.2 312 0.6 332 1.2 352 3.9 372 6.2 397 7.1 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Cravens report on NI Week demo From: dlrober...@aol.com Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2013 16:00:27 -0400 It is not clear how any form of energy gain is associated with this experiment. The demonstration appears to generate LENR energy, but the input function is not present. It would be educational to have a plot of energy generation versus temperature. Dave -Original Message- From: Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Fri, Sep 20, 2013 3:53 pm Subject: RE: [Vo]:Cravens report on NI Week demo -Original Message- From: Terry Blanton Jed Rothwell wrote: http://www.infinite-energy.com/images/pdfs/NIWeekCravens.pdf Such a simple, magnificent demonstration. Can you make me a charger for my Tesla car? Charming. Indeed it is - and understated since the hot sphere transfers heat to the bed and to the control - so the actual gain is more than it appears. ... hey, Terry - are you the proud owner of a Tesla (or just wishing you were)?
RE: [Vo]:Cravens report on NI Week demo
oops you are right K I convert them over as I was doing some kinetic fits. Sorry From: arnaud.kod...@lakoco.be To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: [Vo]:Cravens report on NI Week demo Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2013 23:51:13 +0200 Aren’t the temperatures below in K instead °C? I’m pretty sure the water bath wasn’t at 397°C … neither 292°C From: DJ Cravens [mailto:djcrav...@hotmail.com] Sent: vendredi 20 septembre 2013 23:14 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: [Vo]:Cravens report on NI Week demo E vs. temp was not done at the demo. However below are some typical (average) values from some old lab runs. I did not calibrate at the demo. I only showed that the sample was warmer than the control. That was the only point that was attempted there so there was no claim of amount of energy but it was around 4 watts. I did not want to confuse things and there was no time to calibrate. Just one sphere was hotter than its environment- that was it. The important point is that excess increases with temperature. You may want wait till the next issue of IE comes out to see some empirical models (Letts, in #112) for better data. Letts has fitted hundreds of data sets. temp C excess W 292 0.2 312 0.6 332 1.2 352 3.9 372 6.2 397 7.1 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Cravens report on NI Week demo From: dlrober...@aol.com Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2013 16:00:27 -0400 It is not clear how any form of energy gain is associated with this experiment. The demonstration appears to generate LENR energy, but the input function is not present. It would be educational to have a plot of energy generation versus temperature. Dave -Original Message- From: Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Fri, Sep 20, 2013 3:53 pm Subject: RE: [Vo]:Cravens report on NI Week demo -Original Message-From: Terry Blanton Jed Rothwell wrote: http://www.infinite-energy.com/images/pdfs/NIWeekCravens.pdf Such a simple, magnificent demonstration. Can you make me a chargerfor my Tesla car? Charming. Indeed it is - and understated since the hot sphere transfers heat to thebed and to the control - so the actual gain is more than it appears. ... hey, Terry - are you the proud owner of a Tesla (or just wishing youwere)?
RE: [Vo]:Cravens report on NI Week demo
the costs is fairly significant.(pd, chemicals, specialized C...) The main cost is opportunity costs. It takes a LOT of time in material preparations that would detract me from my existing efforts which seem much more useful and practical. You get much better results at elevated temperatures with electrical stimulation. I will say that several people are attempting replication. I would say wait a while until the replications are completed. I have been at this long enough to know that a one off is not that significant. Replication is very important. However, I feel that is only good when done by independent third parties.It should be noted that the chemical preps are not easy and require some finesse and risk taking. Although, if someone is really interested, I would say just start with Case's material and then heat it-- being sure that there is a volume for convections, a temperature gradient across the material, and a non trivial B field. If you recall, the He-4 measures made at SRI was with commercially available Pd in C in a sphere having a thermal gradient. Measuring exact power levels is tricky with thermal gradients. You will want to read Letts' empirical model next month. Basically, the excess goes about exp. with temp and energy of vacancy of formation, a linear with mass, and B field. Again, I have made some material, but would not recommend the time, expense, and risk for someone just starting. Start with the commercial Pd/C materials (alfa aesar, 5%- replace water with D2O a few times) D2 Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2013 16:42:37 -0500 Subject: Re: [Vo]:Cravens report on NI Week demo From: jabow...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com How much does it cost to get the NI demo device duplicated? On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 4:14 PM, DJ Cravens djcrav...@hotmail.com wrote: E vs. temp was not done at the demo. However below are some typical (average) values from some old lab runs. I did not calibrate at the demo. I only showed that the sample was warmer than the control. That was the only point that was attempted there so there was no claim of amount of energy but it was around 4 watts. I did not want to confuse things and there was no time to calibrate. Just one sphere was hotter than its environment- that was it. The important point is that excess increases with temperature. You may want wait till the next issue of IE comes out to see some empirical models (Letts, in #112) for better data. Letts has fitted hundreds of data sets. temp C excess W 292 0.2 312 0.6 332 1.2 352 3.9 372 6.2 397 7.1 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Cravens report on NI Week demo From: dlrober...@aol.com Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2013 16:00:27 -0400 It is not clear how any form of energy gain is associated with this experiment. The demonstration appears to generate LENR energy, but the input function is not present. It would be educational to have a plot of energy generation versus temperature. Dave -Original Message- From: Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Fri, Sep 20, 2013 3:53 pm Subject: RE: [Vo]:Cravens report on NI Week demo -Original Message- From: Terry Blanton Jed Rothwell wrote: http://www.infinite-energy.com/images/pdfs/NIWeekCravens.pdf Such a simple, magnificent demonstration. Can you make me a charger for my Tesla car? Charming. Indeed it is - and understated since the hot sphere transfers heat to the bed and to the control - so the actual gain is more than it appears. ... hey, Terry - are you the proud owner of a Tesla (or just wishing you were)?
RE: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Cravens report on NI Week demo
the guy that said that was an owner of a Tesla and had billions. I have his card and he said call him when I have a charger. :) I wish. He said he wanted the first fusion car. I told him he could have the second one. :) I have one ready to just charge as soon as I start getting net electrical energy. I was excited and thought last year I was ready. But it now looks years away. D2 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hohlr...@gmail.com Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2013 18:12:35 -0400 Subject: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Cravens report on NI Week demo Not yet. Just a quote from the IE article. Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE Fartphone - Reply message - From: Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]:Cravens report on NI Week demo Date: Fri, Sep 20, 2013 3:53 PM -Original Message- From: Terry Blanton Jed Rothwell wrote: http://www.infinite-energy.com/images/pdfs/NIWeekCravens.pdf Such a simple, magnificent demonstration. Can you make me a charger for my Tesla car? Charming. Indeed it is - and understated since the hot sphere transfers heat to the bed and to the control - so the actual gain is more than it appears. ... hey, Terry - are you the proud owner of a Tesla (or just wishing you were)?
RE: [Vo]:Cravens report on NI Week demo
again, watch for Lett's IE article next month. There is a least that model that helps suggests some operational conditions. ..heat and alloying to drop that energy of vacancy of formation are the keys. D2 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Cravens report on NI Week demo From: dlrober...@aol.com Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2013 18:32:11 -0400 I agree Jed. My comment was made to point out that the energy is being produced internally as a result of elevated temperature. This is an ideal indication of LENR activity. No input as such is required! Of course, the best possible proof to those who fail to listen would be to witness a thermal run away with no wires attached. I have begged Rossi to produce a curve of energy generated versus temperature applied to his material to no avail. With that type of information one can begin to actually engineer a device that functions on demand provided the material is not too inconsistent. The process reminds me of the work that was done during WWII toward determining the amount of material needed for a critical mass. In this case it would be the critical mass required to reach thermal run away under controlled conditions. Dave
RE: [Vo]:Cravens report on NI Week demo
I was using Sm Co based magnetic powder. Curie point around 700C but it is only useable up to about 250C. (I expect some degradation of the material in hot H/D gas. Remember the old parking lot demo at ICCF-4 with the Samarium cobalt? I can't remember the couple's name at the moment. I am not sure about the thermal runaway. I have never been over 150C with it. (limits of my calorimeter and plastic parts). I would think that the Al bead bath would be a fairly good heat sink. Remember the transfer to the sink goes up with temp differentials. One of the replicators has made their own hot bead bath and will be trying at elevated temperatures. My first inclination was to submerge the whole thing into aerogel and a dewar. But, as Les Case found out, you have to have a thermal gradient or you have to circulate the gas through the powder or, as I am doing now, use some external stimulation for non-equilibrium hydrogen/deuterium. I am seeing a better results with a little D in with the H for Ni systems. D2 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Cravens report on NI Week demo From: dlrober...@aol.com Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2013 18:19:13 -0400 Thanks for clearing that up. I was wondering how to compare this list of numbers with the observation at the conference. This result makes me curious as to whether or not the device reaches thermal run away at some drive temperature. Perhaps the components you have chosen tend to fall apart before the required drive temperature is achieved. This demonstration should make an impact upon those who witness it provided they believe that it runs for the extended time you mention. Is there any chance that you can construct one that hold together thermally until run away begins? I suspect that the magnetic source powder would fail before that temperature is reached. In that case, would a large external field perform the required task? Dave -Original Message- From: DJ Cravens djcrav...@hotmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Fri, Sep 20, 2013 5:55 pm Subject: RE: [Vo]:Cravens report on NI Week demo oops you are right K I convert them over as I was doing some kinetic fits. Sorry From: arnaud.kod...@lakoco.be To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: [Vo]:Cravens report on NI Week demo Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2013 23:51:13 +0200 Aren’t the temperatures below in K instead °C? I’m pretty sure the water bath wasn’t at 397°C … neither 292°C From: DJ Cravens [mailto:djcrav...@hotmail.com] Sent: vendredi 20 septembre 2013 23:14 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: [Vo]:Cravens report on NI Week demo E vs. temp was not done at the demo. However below are some typical (average) values from some old lab runs. I did not calibrate at the demo. I only showed that the sample was warmer than the control. That was the only point that was attempted there so there was no claim of amount of energy but it was around 4 watts. I did not want to confuse things and there was no time to calibrate. Just one sphere was hotter than its environment- that was it. The important point is that excess increases with temperature. You may want wait till the next issue of IE comes out to see some empirical models (Letts, in #112) for better data. Letts has fitted hundreds of data sets. temp C excess W 292 0.2 312 0.6 332 1.2 352 3.9 372 6.2 397 7.1 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Cravens report on NI Week demo From: dlrober...@aol.com Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2013 16:00:27 -0400 It is not clear how any form of energy gain is associated with this experiment. The demonstration appears to generate LENR energy, but the input function is not present. It would be educational to have a plot of energy generation versus temperature. Dave -Original Message- From: Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Fri, Sep 20, 2013 3:53 pm Subject: RE: [Vo]:Cravens report on NI Week demo -Original Message-From: Terry Blanton Jed Rothwell wrote: http://www.infinite-energy.com/images/pdfs/NIWeekCravens.pdf Such a simple, magnificent demonstration. Can you make me a chargerfor my Tesla car? Charming. Indeed it is - and understated since the hot sphere transfers heat to thebed and to the control - so the actual gain is more than it appears. ... hey, Terry - are you the proud owner of a Tesla (or just wishing youwere)?
RE: [Vo]:Dennis Cravens' LENR demonstration at NI Week
yes, I opened it on Thurs. There will be an article in Infinite Energy in the next month or two. I think they also plan on having the article on there web site. It has been written, edited and scheduled for publication. Yes the sample was hotter than the control. But the really important point is that it was hotter than the bath it was in by about 4C. Dennis PS you can see a little about it via E cat world, and Cold fusion now sites. Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2013 09:52:12 -0400 From: a.ashfi...@verizon.net To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]:Dennis Cravens' LENR demonstration at NI Week You know, the two spheres, one running hotter than the other. He said come back Thursday to see what's inside. I have not seen anything written about this. Did he open it up?
RE: [Vo]:Dennis Cravens' LENR demonstration at NI Week
yes, but the demo is over now and the sphere has been cut open. I do not plan on presueing this approach. It was just a one shot because I make a promise to a friend. D2 Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2013 14:59:09 -0500 Subject: Re: [Vo]:Dennis Cravens' LENR demonstration at NI Week From: jabow...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com You had written: I have some stainless steel ones that have been slightly warm (0.5 C) since last Nov. Realize the spheres are just one of many things I am working on. You need to operate with excitation and higher temps for more power. The spheres are just a stepping stone on a much longer path – a slight diversion on the way to my real goal. With a slight modification to your demo, you may break through the cold fusion public relations problem: Simply heat the bath in which both balls sit. The importance of this cannot be overemphasized as it will dramatically decrease the duration of the demonstration required to rule out internal energy storage, and these public relations demos invariably have a short attention span. On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 1:17 PM, DJ Cravens djcrav...@hotmail.com wrote: yes, I opened it on Thurs. There will be an article in Infinite Energy in the next month or two. I think they also plan on having the article on there web site. It has been written, edited and scheduled for publication. Yes the sample was hotter than the control. But the really important point is that it was hotter than the bath it was in by about 4C. Dennis PS you can see a little about it via E cat world, and Cold fusion now sites. Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2013 09:52:12 -0400 From: a.ashfi...@verizon.net To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]:Dennis Cravens' LENR demonstration at NI Week You know, the two spheres, one running hotter than the other. He said come back Thursday to see what's inside. I have not seen anything written about this. Did he open it up?
RE: [Vo]:Dennis Cravens' LENR demonstration at NI Week
you will need to wait and read the report. Those questions are answered in the up coming IE. Or you could just read what I have already written here. D2 CC: stor...@ix.netcom.com From: stor...@ix.netcom.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Dennis Cravens' LENR demonstration at NI Week Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2013 14:05:04 -0600 Dennis, can you tell us what difference existed between the two balls? What was in the active ball compared to the control? Why is one hotter than the other one? Where did you have the balls constructed? Ed On Aug 23, 2013, at 1:59 PM, James Bowery wrote:You had written: I have some stainless steel ones that have been slightly warm (0.5 C) since last Nov. Realize the spheres are just one of many things I am working on. You need to operate with excitation and higher temps for more power. The spheres are just a stepping stone on a much longer path – a slight diversion on the way to my real goal. With a slight modification to your demo, you may break through the cold fusion public relations problem:Simply heat the bath in which both balls sit. The importance of this cannot be overemphasized as it will dramatically decrease the duration of the demonstration required to rule out internal energy storage, and these public relations demos invariably have a short attention span. On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 1:17 PM, DJ Cravens djcrav...@hotmail.com wrote: yes, I opened it on Thurs. There will be an article in Infinite Energy in the next month or two. I think they also plan on having the article on there web site. It has been written, edited and scheduled for publication. Yes the sample was hotter than the control. But the really important point is that it was hotter than the bath it was in by about 4C. Dennis PS you can see a little about it via E cat world, and Cold fusion now sites. Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2013 09:52:12 -0400 From: a.ashfi...@verizon.net To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]:Dennis Cravens' LENR demonstration at NI Week You know, the two spheres, one running hotter than the other. He said come back Thursday to see what's inside. I have not seen anything written about this. Did he open it up?
RE: [Vo]:LENR N.A.E new non-episode
I remember trying to use an old razor blade for such a set (instead of a crystal) and a coil around an Oatmeal box. You could also just use a tree and some nails for a good ground. oh the good old days. Dennis Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2013 20:10:44 -0400 Subject: Re: [Vo]:LENR N.A.E new non-episode From: janap...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com The state of LENR Pd/D technology is reminiscent of the state of radio back at the turn of the 20th century. At that time, a crystal radio receiver, also called a crystal set or cat's whisker receiver, was a very simple radio receiver, popular in the early days of radio. It needs no battery or power source and runs on the power received from radio waves by a long wire antenna. It gets its name from its most important component, known as a crystal detector, originally made with a piece of crystalline mineral such as galena. This component is now called a diode. As a youngster, I can remember spending many frustrating hours moving the cat’s whisker to and fro endlessly across the face of the crystal hoping to get some sound from the air. It was so long ago, I do not remember if I ever succeeded. The pain of the search has clung to my soul as a original sin of stubbornness. I just remember endless frustration of constant trial and error inspired and confident that some other amazing people had gotten that dammed thing to work. If they did it, by golly I was going to do it too no matter how long it took or what the price paid in suffering.
RE: [Vo]:the future of PdD LENR is not technological
VERY good work from Violante. I hope they look at the Ag and Y alloy with Pd. Yes, you don't have to be in the kW to have very important work. In fact, levels past about 250W start to get complicated and hard to use. I have never seen anything over 250W where I felt comfortable about the all measurements. There was always a lot of question marks. 50-200 mW is Ok. 1 to 100 W is great to work with - easy to control dumping heat, controlling input temps, having multiple checks on measurements,... And if you ever try to play the convert heat to electricity game- you just about have to be either in the 10 to 250 W range or the 4kW thermal range for existing off the shelf conversion. D2 Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2013 10:09:21 -0400 Subject: Re: [Vo]:the future of PdD LENR is not technological From: jedrothw...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com wrote: I have just published:http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2013/08/why-pd-d-lenr-will-never-work.html I think you are making distinctions that do not exist in nature. Cold fusion is cold fusion. The smallest Pd-D effect is probably the same as what Rossi observes. Research into milliwatt-level effects is just as likely to answer important questions and reveal the mechanism as Rossi's kilowatt-level reactions are. The history of science bears this out. The only reason kilowatt-level reactions are better is because they encourage people to think the reaction might become a practical source of energy, so they attract funding. Here is an example of materials science done with the small reactions. This could eventually be as fruitful as anything Rossi is doing: https://mospace.umsystem.edu/xmlui/bitstream/handle/10355/36833/ExcessPowerDuringElectrochemical.pdf - Jed
RE: [Vo]:My ICCF18 presentation
thanks for your kind words in the talk. I like it. And yes materials are very important. 23% Ag, 2% Ce (or 2% Y) always gave me the best overall performance. But you do have to treat it nice. Using a model builders sand blaster with cerium oxide was a quick easy way to clean up the metal. D2 for those that like check diffusion rates of alloyed Pd The Y or Ce in it seemed to work its charm at higher temps for those working with pressurized electrochem cells. http://www.google.com/url?sa=trct=jq=esrc=sfrm=1source=webcd=1cad=rjaved=0CDQQFjAAurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.platinummetalsreview.com%2Fpdf%2Fpmr-v21-i2-044-050.pdfei=P2gNUsz3MKKoiQLV5oHgBgusg=AFQjCNFblsRSsaa6RKn2wDKeCd2SVk70Cwsig2=FDnhE-4_ieg1Ai-O7Hsuzgbvm=bv.50768961,d.cGE Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2013 17:09:37 -0400 From: jedrothw...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]:My ICCF18 presentation Here is the script for my ICCF18 Luncheon Talk. This was well received. It has cute illustrations. http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/RothwellJlessonsfro.pdf I have to write an oh-so-serious version for the Proceedings, in academese. This one is more fun. I am also trying to squeeze Mizuno's paper down to the 6-page limit of the Proceedings. That is difficult. - Jed
RE: [Vo]:Suggestions for a more effective demonstration
The reason I have a spa in a box is because of its size. You need a fairly large volume to rule out internal chemical storage. Here are ROUGH order of magnitude numbers. My point is you need something 100 gallons or so for a typical system. Yes, I have 2 digit metric numbers but I don't want the point to get lost in the numbers. I am using mixed units since gallons are more easily understood by the public at large. The spa in a box holds 300 gallons (or about 1000 l of water). It takes about 1 kW hour to heat it a little slower than 1 degree C. (about 75% eff around room temp with lid). A typical car lead acid battery holds about 1 kw hour - a lithium battery about 2 to 3 times that. My present system is a glow discharge through a gas/powder fluidized bed. It has a volume about the size of a car battery (not counting HV source and pumps). That means that to be about an order of magnitude above chemical storage, I need dump into that 300 gallons for a working day. A small beverage cooler will just not work to rule out chemical storage. 1000 liters is about right. filling to 200 gallons is very do-able and would shorten your times. notice that 1kW is about right for a typical house hold plug (perhaps 1.5 but D2 PS... you got to have fun. I keep imagining a PR demo with two spas - one with CF heating and one with R heating at the same input power. Then have models in the warm one. :)I think it would quickly get the point across. OK, In my dreams. Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2013 15:41:50 -0400 Subject: Re: [Vo]:Suggestions for a more effective demonstration From: jedrothw...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com DJ Cravens djcrav...@hotmail.com wrote: You would not need to go to 90C. I agree. The concept of heating a volume of water is very valid. Of course. The questions are: how much water, in what kind of container, to what temperature, over what duration? I have no doubt that a spa is a heck of a lot better than a 10,000 gallon tank truck! It is more practical, far cheaper, easier to insulate, easier for the observers to measure, and it has many other advantages. I think a large insulated container such as a plastic beverage cooler would be fine. I don't see the need for a spa. Of course the cooler reaches the terminal temperature sooner than a spa, but I don't see a problem with that. Dump the water and heat a new batch if want to make the test go longer. - Jed
RE: [Vo]:Suggestions for a more effective demonstration
Yes, yes, yes, Yes, this is what I would suggest as well.. (although I would just use a smaller inflatable spa you can set those up on any cement floor). That was my suggestion a few years back when they were asking about an X prize type of event. People will talk about heat loss and so on. But with some floating bubble wrap that could be kept down. If they are really getting 4 to one, it should be easy to see with something like the heat a tub of water approach. You wouldn't have all the flow measurement questions. No water/steam problems, no EMF interference with your temperature sensors. You would need to mix it from time to time with a paddle or something. I also would like to see a fuse in their input power line to show that at no time the current exceed some set value. Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2013 14:40:19 -0400 Subject: Re: [Vo]:Suggestions for a more effective demonstration From: janap...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Keep it simple. Fill a 10,000 gallon insolated tank truck with 20C water, and run it in a loop to the Ni/H reactor. When the temperature of the water in the truck gets to 90C, the case is proven. On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 2:24 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: Defkalion's demonstration wasn't bad. Any demonstration is tough. Something always goes wrong. It wasn't bad, but it could have been better. I have done demonstrations and I have taught and given lectures so let me offer a few suggestions based on this experience. Practice, practice, practice. Rehearse beforehand. Be sure you can comfortably complete the presentation in the time allotted. This was their biggest failing. Set up your props beforehand. As I explain below, in this case I would have put a black drop cloth on the wall and brought in a meter stick, a weight scale, and a bucket of water with a thermometer in it. Make yourself clear. Get to the point and stick to it. You need not write out every word, but it is a good idea to write down your talking points in the order you intend to present them. Here is the sort of thing I would have said: . . . The inlet temperature is 21°C, the outlet is 115°C. Here on the screen we are computing enthalpy by the heat capacity of water. We ignore the heat of vaporization. However, at this outlet temperature we know the water has vaporized. Let's prove that. Let's take the outlet tube from the sink and hold it up next to this black drop cloth. [Holding meter stick next to plume.] As you see the plume of steam is around 80 cm long. The first 20 cm are invisible, which means the steam is dry. Now let us show that our flowmeter is correct and the water is flowing at 500 mL per minute. We will also show that the steam has about 1130 kJ of enthalpy per minute. We have placed this bucket on the weight scale. As you see it has 20 kg of water in it, and the water temperature is 21°C. Now were going to submerge the hose under the water for about a minute and see how much water condenses and how much the entire mass of water heats up. Starting NOW. [Splash! 'Buku buku buku' as bubbles say in Japanese] [A minute later] Okay we removed the hose after one minute three seconds. The weight of water has increased by 460 g. Some of the steam escaped from the water but most of it condensed. We see that the temperature has risen to 31°C . . . And so forth. Prepare your tables and spreadsheets beforehand so you can describe results smoothly without stopping to do a lot of arithmetic. You need not state that the heat of vaporization is 2260 kJ per kilogram. The viewer can look that up later on. You need not explain that the bucket when empty weighs 820 g. The viewer knows about how much a plastic bucket weighs, and can see you have taken that into account. Skip the details; get to the point. As I said before, you demonstrate every key point twice, by two different methods. Ideally, one method relies upon precision instruments and the second method depends on first principles that are easily understood and easily measured, even if they are somewhat crude. The two methods must be completely different so that a single artifact cannot cause both to be wrong. People sometimes say that in a lecture you should tell the audience what you're going to say; tell them what you have to say; and then tell them what you just told them. I think this is going too far, but it does not hurt to repeat your key points at least once. I assume the people at Defkalion are doing similar demonstrations for potential customers and investors. So I think they should polish up the presentation and make it more convincing. - Jed
RE: [Vo]:just published -with permission- a paper about DEFKALION
did they check the flow while it was under steam pressure? I worry that since they are using water mains, there could be back pressure from the steam that slowed the flow. I haven't heard this discussed, but then I have been away. D2 Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2013 16:10:31 -0300 Subject: Re: [Vo]:just published -with permission- a paper about DEFKALION From: danieldi...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com But they did demonstrate it was correct. If you doubt that. You can doubt anything. 2013/8/12 Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com wrote: I suppose they did not need to include that enthalpy in the computation shown on the screen, but they should have demonstrated that the outlet temperature was correct and the flow rate was correct, as I described in my Suggestions for a more effective demonstration. These are key parameters. They need to be confirmed. - Jed -- Daniel Rocha - rjdanieldi...@gmail.com
RE: [Vo]:Suggestions for a more effective demonstration
You would not need to go to 90C. The concept of heating a volume of water is very valid. Also if you use one of those portable spas (example Spa in a Box for less than $1k- google the pictures), it goes together fast and could be easily checked for hidden items since it is just insulation panels and vinyl. You could also place it on a predetermined concrete slab at some third party site. My spa in a box goes up about 1F/hour with the top insulation in place. (in put at 1kW) It is easy to fill and measure water as it goes in. It went together from the box in less than an hour. You can also very easily calculate the volume by a simple octagonal prism calculation. Try it and you will see how easy it really is. I figure anything over 1.5 will stick out like a sore thumb even with heat loss. You could have your answer within a few hours. D2 PS they come with a circulator that you could run for a minute to mix if you wish. (you just don't want to turn the bubbles on since it really dumps the heat into the air.) Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2013 14:45:54 -0400 Subject: Re: [Vo]:Suggestions for a more effective demonstration From: jedrothw...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: Keep it simple. Fill a 10,000 gallon insolated tank truck with 20C water, and run it in a loop to the Ni/H reactor. That is not simple at all. Also, this would not work. When the temperature of the water in the truck gets to 90C, the case is proven. This would not happen, unless the tank was extremely well insulated. An ordinary tank truck for water is not insulated. If it were extremely well insulated it would impossible for the viewer to determine the volume of the container. It would also be easy to hide a heater inside it. This would take a long time, and the viewer would not have the gumption to keep watching hour after hour. That is why I said this is not simple. - Jed
RE: [Vo]:Suggestions for a more effective demonstration
I think the filters were to protect the flow meter. I think the water was just out of the taps and who knows what Greek water is like. I have been struggling with making some variable heat conductor for similar problems. I started with segmented disks that you turn to change contact area. I then used adjustment of ferrofluids to change contact. I am now using a sliding tube in a tube with heat pipes by raising lowering my heat take off. For them, it should be easy enough to change the number of loops of water tubing around the cell to get in the right ballpark. D2 Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2013 15:51:26 -0400 Subject: Re: [Vo]:Suggestions for a more effective demonstration From: jedrothw...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com DJ Cravens djcrav...@hotmail.com wrote: You would not need to go to 90C. The concept of heating a volume of water is very valid. In this thread, I was assuming that Defkalion DID have to go above 90°C. For some reason. Otherwise, why didn't they speed up the flow? That would simplify the calorimetry, and it would capture all the heat with their on-screen computation, which would make the results a lot more impressive. I have no idea why they might have needed such high outlet temperatures. To keep the machine at a critical operating temperature? They could fix that problem by insulating the cooling water pipe. Someone said they could not speed up the flow because there were filters on the water pipe that restricted the flow. This makes no sense to me. Why do you need to filter cooling water? It isn't going into any sensitive part of the reactor. It cannot contaminate anything. Contamination from ordinary city water does not affect the heat capacity measurably. Questions like this cannot be adequately addressed in a demo. You need a real test. You need a team of experts who spend days or weeks on site, wringing out the machine. - Jed
RE: [Vo]:Suggestions for a more effective demonstration
yes, I often use an FMI metering pump. They have good control. D2 CC: stor...@ix.netcom.com From: stor...@ix.netcom.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Suggestions for a more effective demonstration Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2013 14:50:03 -0600 Jed, a better method is to use a constant rate pump. These are available and are very reliable and accurate. The rate is not affected by back pressure, within reason and can be adjusted to achieve the required delta T. Ed On Aug 12, 2013, at 2:37 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:DJ Cravens djcrav...@hotmail.com wrote: I think the filters were to protect the flow meter. I think the water was just out of the taps and who knows what Greek water is like. This was in Italy. But okay, that makes sense. I would use a less sensitive flow meter. Granted, those things are ornery and often get plugged up or broken. The kind used in your house to bill for your water is robust but maybe not sensitive enough. On the other hand, if they boost the flow rate up to 4 L/min it should do. That would be fast enough to prevent boiling, I think. - Jed
RE: [Vo]:A paper about my LENR work with carbonyl Ni
got it- thanks, looks very good at first pass. I would however caution you about the health issues of carbonyl. It can sneak up on you. And yes, I think most all of the enabling issues are already out in the public. Perhaps that is why we see no DGT patents floating around. D2 Date: Sat, 3 Aug 2013 10:02:43 -0400 Subject: Re: [Vo]:A paper about my LENR work with carbonyl Ni From: rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Some have been successful, and others unsuccessful. I don't know why. When I click on the link below, it brings up the paper. David Nygren indicated that he added the paper to his LENR News blog: http://www.lenrnews.eu/?p=1370preview=true . Perhaps that is another way to get it. I can't post it to Vortex-L, it is too big. I can send it to you directly, but it doesn't solve the problems for the other Vorts. On Sat, Aug 3, 2013 at 9:55 AM, torulf.gr...@bredband.net wrote: I can not download this PDF. How das I do? On Fri, 2 Aug 2013 20:10:31 -0400, Bob Higgins rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com wrote: Greetings fellow Vorts, While at ICCF, I expressed my feelings that there would be no controlling patent on the material that makes LENR work. There has been so much open speculation that has now all become part of prior art. Additionally, without a theory, you will not be able to identify the workarounds and any claims are likely to be easily worked around in the end. I expect the valuable patents to be on the apparatus that follows - the devices that do the work and meet peoples needs. To help make that a self-fulfilling prophesy, I decided some time ago to openly share what I am doing in Ni-H materials. At ICCF I had the opportunity to show slides of my Ni-H LENR work to many people. A common request was for something written about my work. So while traveling home I put together a paper describing my work. It is not peer reviewed and I would be happy to get comments back. The paper is on my Google drive at: https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B5Pc25a4cOM2Qzl0WC1ldW1MMUU/edit?usp=sharing Please let me know if this doesn't work. I learned a number of lessons in this phase and I am currently working on the next pass of improvements to my test system in particular. Regards, Bob Higgins -- Regards, Bob Higgins
RE: [Vo]:A paper about my LENR work with carbonyl Ni
Zirc oxide is a proton conductor. (especially with a little Y in it and with some H2O vapor in the system) Fe oxide is useful in H dissociation - as well as Ti oxides. From: jone...@pacbell.net To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: [Vo]:A paper about my LENR work with carbonyl Ni Date: Sat, 3 Aug 2013 08:15:24 -0700 Nicely done Bob! Easy to download (google link) and worth further study. I hope you will test other materials against this one. Specifically zirconia and nickel instead of iron oxide and nickel. Something about the combination has been successful in dozens of experiments. Ahern in his EPRI paper noticed a strong correlation between pulverization time and thermal gain. IIRC his best material had been tumbled for over 100 hours in a ball mill (converted rock tumbler). From: Bob Higgins Some have been successful, and others unsuccessful. I don't know why. When I click on the link below, it brings up the paper. David Nygren indicated that he added the paper to his LENR News blog: http://www.lenrnews.eu/?p=1370preview=true . Perhaps that is another way to get it. I can't post it to Vortex-L, it is too big. I can send it to you directly, but it doesn't solve the problems for the other Vorts. On Sat, Aug 3, 2013 at 9:55 AM, torulf.gr...@bredband.net wrote: I can not download this PDF. How das I do? On Fri, 2 Aug 2013 20:10:31 -0400, Bob Higgins rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com wrote: Greetings fellow Vorts, While at ICCF, I expressed my feelings that there would be no controlling patent on the material that makes LENR work. There has been so much open speculation that has now all become part of prior art. Additionally, without a theory, you will not be able to identify the workarounds and any claims are likely to be easily worked around in the end. I expect the valuable patents to be on the apparatus that follows - the devices that do the work and meet peoples needs. To help make that a self-fulfilling prophesy, I decided some time ago to openly share what I am doing in Ni-H materials. At ICCF I had the opportunity to show slides of my Ni-H LENR work to many people. A common request was for something written about my work. So while traveling home I put together a paper describing my work. It is not peer reviewed and I would be happy to get comments back. The paper is on my Google drive at: https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B5Pc25a4cOM2Qzl0WC1ldW1MMUU/edit?usp=sharing Please let me know if this doesn't work. I learned a number of lessons in this phase and I am currently working on the next pass of improvements to my test system in particular. Regards, Bob Higgins -- Regards, Bob Higgins
RE: [Vo]:A paper about my LENR work with carbonyl Ni
I think that people are mistaken about the spark plugs. Most people think about them as sparking like an auto plug (they are but ..) across some gap. I think they are using them just as HV feed throughs. Notice they have 2 of them on each end. I think they are not sparking on each end but through the sample. Date: Sat, 3 Aug 2013 13:34:38 -0400 Subject: Re: [Vo]:A paper about my LENR work with carbonyl Ni From: rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sorry Axil, I don't suspend my particles in a separate matrix as does Defkalion. My technique is more like that of Rossi. The spark plugs are not required to see the LENR. Neither Rossi's original eCat nor his latest HotCats have any sparkplugs or RF excitation. Reports suggest that they are not required for the effect. I do not believe DGT's sparkplugs are causing plasma effects that extend into the powder. The mean free path of monatomic H in high pressure H2 is only microns. DGT does not appear to apply enough power to the sparkplugs to totally ionize the H2 contents. There could be excitation of their reactor as an RF cavity, but it is not strongly excited. The sparkplug could also be operating as an acoustic transducer driving an acoustic resonance in DGT's reactor. It will be important for DGT to determine what about their sparks is causing the enhanced LENR so that they can maximize the benefits. If it is RF cavity resonance, then there is no need for the spark - just drive with RF at the right frequency matched into the cavity. Do you know this about the nanowires from your own experiments? I think this is bunk. The nanowires would melt pretty quickly at the temperatures we are talking about and particularly with the local heating at the NAE. I noted in my paper that there are Ni dendrites on my powder, but I don't believe they are the NAEs. At best, they may be useful for H2 cracking. It was just noted. What do you mean, surrounded by spark production? Again, is this a report of your first hand experience? Please stop saying things as if they are certain unless you have first hand evidence that they are. Bob On Sat, Aug 3, 2013 at 1:18 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: From a very quick look, I do not see nanowires on the surface of the particles. I do not see the suspension of the particles on a matrix to expose all the particle surface areas to the clusters produced by the spark plug(s). The particles should be maximum of 5 microns in diameter with 2 microns of nanowire covering. The majority of the particles should be 5 microns total including the nanowire covering. The particles should be surrounded by spark production. Can these changes be made?
RE: [Vo]:A paper about my LENR work with carbonyl Ni
yes, that is one result of Les Case sphere type system (the one people point to for He4 numbers). He needed a gradient across the sphere. ... or later he use a little mixer inside his dewer and then later deuterium flow through the sample. D2 Date: Sat, 3 Aug 2013 15:00:31 -0400 Subject: Re: [Vo]:A paper about my LENR work with carbonyl Ni From: franco.tal...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Terry, Dennis, This makes a lot of sense. Especially since I believe that DGT had stated that a temperature gradient across the reactor is needed, presumably to establish hydrogen flow through the active material. On Sat, Aug 3, 2013 at 2:31 PM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Aug 3, 2013 at 1:55 PM, DJ Cravens djcrav...@hotmail.com wrote: I think that people are mistaken about the spark plugs. Most people think about them as sparking like an auto plug (they are but ..) across some gap. I think they are using them just as HV feed throughs. Notice they have 2 of them on each end. I think they are not sparking on each end but through the sample. I agree with this observation, Dennis.
RE: [Vo]:The WIPO Pekka Soininen Patent from May 2013
Yes, this forum is available to the public without subscription. Things posted here are part of the public record. Notice their priority date of Nov 2011. I know there are other applications that are moving slowly through the PTO that have priority dates earlier than this and some in continuations. It will be an interesting battle in which only the lawyers will profit. I find it interesting that they do not mention the role of Deuterium. So p+d and d+d systems might be outside of their claims if it is required. D2 Date: Fri, 2 Aug 2013 13:50:51 -0400 Subject: Re: [Vo]:The WIPO Pekka Soininen Patent from May 2013 From: janap...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com We here at vortex have publically disclosed and discussed many of these concepts (i.e. Rydberg matter, inverted Rydberg matter and clustering) as applied to LENR that have been reveled in this patent back as early as 2010 and 2011. To my knowledge we were the first do so. Does that effect prior art as pursuant to the newly defined US patent law? On Fri, Aug 2, 2013 at 1:16 PM, Chuck Sites cbsit...@gmail.com wrote: First a warning, , If your trying to build an cold fusion device for profit via patents you may want to skip this article. Otherwise you will have first hand knowledge of prior art. If you curious like me and just want to understand how things work, then this is probably an interesting read. I stumbled on this link from some chain of discussion that was occurring when the Defkalion demonstration was running, and someone mentioned that there was a patent already on the device. This is a international patent issued by WIPO to Pekka Soininen for a device described as a THERMAL-ENERGY PRODUCING SYSTEM AND METHOD. It looks exactly like the Defkalion reactor, down to the spark plugs, the metal hydrides and the Rydberg atoms. International Publication Number WO 2013/076378 A2. http://www.roxit.ax/FinsktLENRpatent.pdf I would think that if Rosi and Defkalion are not currently holding patents on their technology, this could be very disruptive towards their business plans. Also, does any know who Pekka Soininen is. He seems to be a new name in the LENR field (at least to me). Best regards
RE: [Vo]:Some comments by me at Mats Lewan blog
I doubt that isotopically enriched material (other than perhaps H 2) is needed. In the real world, you just make your sample larger. I personally think that the addition of alloying materials and the presence of material to help dissociate the hydrogen are more important. Dennis To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Some comments by me at Mats Lewan blog From: dlrober...@aol.com Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2013 17:19:11 -0400 Jed, is it possible that you found the cost of laboratory pure nickel isotopes instead of industrial grade? I suspect it would be easier to do a modest enrichment with some form of chemical and centrifuge separation process instead of the more sophisticated techniques. The difference in weight of the nickel isotopes seems rather large at first glance. Perhaps a business can be started to do this type of thing if it is important enough. First, you would need to find a liquid containing nickel that can be put into a centrifuge for separation. I know little of these techniques, but there may be some guys monitoring vortex that are familiar with these types of systems who might offer suggestions. At the costs you quoted, I would bet there are alternatives that good engineers or scientists can develop. This seems like a good challenge. DGT may have already found such a technique or a company that offers the materials. The density of the separated portion of the input liquid is an indication of the amount of an isotope present. That is the way you might be able to test your separation efficiency. Since you know how much of each isotope is in the raw material, you know what per cent of the liquid to draw off initially at the heavy end or light end. We need to keep an open mind when we discuss what can or can not be done. It might cost a small fortune to obtain special isotopes, but who can be sure unless they have the direct knowledge. Just a guess seeking a solution, Dave
RE: [Vo]:NiH NAE Synopsis?
Notice 3000 mesh carbon is typically 5 microns, however it can have pore sizes to contain metals at around 9 nm. 3000 mesh is about the finest you normally come across for such things. It is what I tend to use. (note lambda around 580) I think there is a trade off between nano scale metal and IR reception/transmission. I also think that there must be on the order of 10EE6 to receive the Mev energy and spread it around to avoid destruction of the chemical bonding (order of few ev's) Dennis Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2013 18:46:52 -0400 Subject: Re: [Vo]:NiH NAE Synopsis? From: janap...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com In physics, Planck's law describes the amount of energy emitted by a black body in radiation of a certain wavelength (i.e. the spectral radiance of a black body). The law is named after Max Planck, who originally proposed it in 1900. The law was the first to accurately describe black body radiation, and resolved the ultraviolet catastrophe. It is a pioneer result of modern physics and quantum theory. For a given black body temperature, the wavelength at the peak of the Planck curve is called maximum lambda. This value gives a fell for the minimum relative size that an radiating object must be to optimally support photons associated with a give temperature. Like and antenna, a particle of nickel will best support the photons at a given temperature if the particle size is the adjusted to the ideal size. For a temperature of 700k or about 400C, the Lambda(max) must be 4.14 microns. This is why Rossi uses very large micro sized nickel particles in his reactor. Nano sized particles will not properly support the ideal photon wavelength needed to force protons into quantum mechanical coherence. Rossi undoubtedly found this optimal size through trial and error but science is easier. For a Planck function Infrared Radiance Calculator see the following: https://www.sensiac.org/external/resources/calculators/infrared_radiance_calculator.jsf%3bjsessionid=D08873244D6904EE654DBCDF0391F95E 137C = 410.15 Kelvins. Putting this number into the temperature field of the calculator, we get a resonance particle size of 7.07 um. If the raw particle size is 5 um, if we add a nanowire cover with wires about 1 micron in length, then we are at the blackbody resonance particle size. This is the maximum size of all the nickel micro powder. As the temperature of the nickel powder increases, the smaller particles will reach blackbody resonance. To start the Ni/H reactor up, we need some very big micro powder to get it going. PS: I will bet you that a Ni/H reactor that contains only Nano powder will not work well.
RE: [Vo]:Hot nanoparticles stick together.
yes, they not only stick together, but they usually melt together when I try to use them. That is why I had to move to nano material held in C or silica. I ended up with just a blob of metal that eventually quite working. at least for me. D2 Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2013 12:49:17 -0400 From: janap...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]:Hot nanoparticles stick together. Hot nanoparticles stick together. Hot nanoparticles exist in a dark mode electromagnetically. They absorb heat and transform that radiation into dipole oscillations. This charge separation of positive and negative charge in a dipole will attract nanoparticles like lint sticks to your outfit. This buildup in charge separation causes a “stark effect” The underlying basis of the attractive force has actually been known for at least half a century: blackbody radiation shifts the atomic energy levels of nearby atoms, molecules, and nanoparticles. In these Stark shifts, the ground states of the atom or atomic aggregates are shifted to a lower energy by an amount that is roughly proportional to the fourth power of the blackbody's temperature. That is, the hotter the blackbody, the larger the dipole oscillations become, and the charge separation that is associated with the dipoles. While this much has been theoretically known, however, the potential repercussions on nano-systems of these energy shifts have been overlooked until recently. In a new study, scientists have for the first time shown that the Stark shifts induced by blackbody radiation can combine to generate an attractive optical force that dominates the blackbody's own repulsive radiation pressure. This means that, despite its outgoing radioactive energy flow, a hot nano-sized atomic cluster actually attracts rather than repels neutral atoms and molecules, under most conditions. This cluster attraction occurs because other atoms and clusters whose ground states are shifted to lower energy levels are drawn toward regions of higher radiation intensity—in the case of Ni/H reactors, nano and micro particle blackbodies. The strength of the attractive force decays with the third power of the distance from the blackbody. Second, the force is stronger for smaller objects. Third, the force is stronger for hotter objects, up to a point. At above a few thousand degrees Kelvin, the force changes from attraction to repulsion, What does this say about what goes on inside a Ni/H reactor core? When nanoparticles are produced by spark discharge or heating elements in an Ni/H reactor, these clusters are strongly attracted to each other if the hydrogen is hot enough. The hydrogen and/or potassium nano-clusters produced by plasma condensation will rapidly migrate over to the Ni micro particles. The Ni micro particles are permanent particles that a not created or destroyed during Ni/H reactor operations. Ni particles are specially prepared using a vender specific proprietary process in an offline setting. This process may include isotope enhancement as well as the formation of nano sized nanowires on the surface of each micro dimensioned nickel particle. The nanoparticles in the Ni/H reaction are dynamically produced particles that are generated during every plasma excitation cycle and are gradually destroyed by LENR reaction activity between plasma excitation cycles. After these dynamic nanoparticles are created and made clingy by dipole charge separation, these newly born dust particles rush to join up with the Ni micro-particles. These small clusters will coat these permanent nickel particles and their nanowire surfaces in the same way that snow clings to the branches of an evergreen tree in a snowstorm. As nuclear activity produces energy, the dynamic particles are blown off the surface of nickel particles but these dynamic particles are strongly attracted back to the areas of nuclear activity As the LENR reaction proceeds between plasma excitation cycles, these dynamic nanoparticle gradually melt like snow in a springtime hot spell until they are rebuild by the next plasma excitation activation. Reference: http://phys.org/news/2013-07-blackbody-stronger-gravity.html Blackbody radiation induces attractive force stronger than gravity
RE: [Vo]:Hot nanoparticles stick together.
yes, zirc oxide works- I am well aware of that - notice my patent using that: http://www.google.com/patents/US8303865 with Pd and Ni sub 1 micron in size. However, I like my carbon based material better. I can throw more current through it and it makes the size of metal particles right about where I want them (normally 9 nm for mesopore C). D2 Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2013 15:48:02 -0400 Subject: Re: [Vo]:Hot nanoparticles stick together. From: jedrothw...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com DJ Cravens djcrav...@hotmail.com wrote: yes, they not only stick together, but they usually melt together when I try to use them. That is why Arata put them in a structure of non-reacting Zr. To hold the particles apart, you might say. Takahashi says they are not melting. Hydrogen reactions are causing them to glom together. I wouldn't know, but that is what he says. He points out that the temperature is sometimes lower with an active cold fusion run than with a control run. Yes, but I wonder if the local temperature in the nanopowder is not higher. - Jed
RE: [Vo]:Hot nanoparticles stick together.
With Pd I can just heat it up. But you have to have room for convection. The main reason I went with metal into pores is that I had health problems with the nano nickel. (some people-me now- are allergic to nickel and I had lung reactions- the really fine stuff, few nm stay suspended in air for some time and leak through valves, mess up vacuum pumps,...) In some systems I use electrical stimulation, or RF. I also use Sm Co powders to supply the B fields. Empirically, it seems that the XP goes linear with B, mass and exponentially with Energy of vacancy formation and temperature. Pd seems to work at lower temps than Ni work. (lower Ef). By dropping the Ef by alloying you can overcome some of the high temp requirements. Perhaps not good for commercial use but better for what I have to work with. Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2013 23:16:56 +0200 Subject: Re: [Vo]:Hot nanoparticles stick together. From: robbiehobbiesh...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Dr. Cravens, what is the trigger mechanism you apply to your reactor(s)? (High) voltage, like Defkalion?By applying carbon materials I presume nano/micro pieze/thermalelectric materials are out of scope? On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 10:42 PM, DJ Cravens djcrav...@hotmail.com wrote: yes, zirc oxide works- I am well aware of that - notice my patent using that: http://www.google.com/patents/US8303865 with Pd and Ni sub 1 micron in size. However, I like my carbon based material better. I can throw more current through it and it makes the size of metal particles right about where I want them (normally 9 nm for mesopore C). D2 Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2013 15:48:02 -0400 Subject: Re: [Vo]:Hot nanoparticles stick together. From: jedrothw...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com DJ Cravens djcrav...@hotmail.com wrote: yes, they not only stick together, but they usually melt together when I try to use them. That is why Arata put them in a structure of non-reacting Zr. To hold the particles apart, you might say. Takahashi says they are not melting. Hydrogen reactions are causing them to glom together. I wouldn't know, but that is what he says. He points out that the temperature is sometimes lower with an active cold fusion run than with a control run. Yes, but I wonder if the local temperature in the nanopowder is not higher. - Jed
RE: [Vo]:Hot nanoparticles stick together.
It (alloying to reduce the E of vac. form.) may be the reason why codep systems don't work well plated directly onto Cu but do well on Au. As you may can tell, I am very much pushing the idea of controlled alloying to help turn on. D2 Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2013 20:01:38 -0400 Subject: Re: [Vo]:Hot nanoparticles stick together. From: jedrothw...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com DJ Cravens djcrav...@hotmail.com wrote: Pd seems to work at lower temps than Ni work. (lower Ef). Many people have observed that lately. It is important. It may explain why most early attempts to replicate Mills failed. It would explain why an electrochemical Ni experiment will probably not work. - Jed
RE: [Vo]:Hot nanoparticles stick together.
I have a feeling that Mills got his to work because his Ni had surface contamination of something like Cu or Sn which would drop the Debye temp and Ef. D2 Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2013 20:38:20 -0400 Subject: Re: [Vo]:Hot nanoparticles stick together. From: jedrothw...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Craig cchayniepub...@gmail.com wrote: Mills had a light water - nickel electrochemical cell in 1991. http://newenergytimes.com/v2/news/2011/36/3620review.shtml They were reported as: (a) they have very short initiation times, i.e., the excess power, if present, appears within the first day of electrolysis and (b) the . . . I know. Many people such as Srinivasan tried to replicate this, but they failed. That does not mean it did not work, but it was a lot harder than Mills thought. Or than he described. Heating it up makes it work better, I think. You can't easily heat an electrochem system. - Jed
RE: [Vo]:The recent ICCF18 (Defkcalion Demo)
20% Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2013 22:34:12 -0400 Subject: Re: [Vo]:The recent ICCF18 (Defkcalion Demo) From: cbsit...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com If I heard right during the demonstration, the spark was 11 pulses per minute, but I didn't hear a duty cycle mentioned. On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 10:30 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: The spark (plasma activation mechanism) lasts for 12 seconds. The reaction is then active for about 6 minutes. This cannot be a hot fusion mechanism. The spark produces nanoparticles that are gradually consumed, It is LENR for sure. On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 10:21 PM, Chuck Sites cbsit...@gmail.com wrote: Very interesting discussions. Thanks Axil for the two links in your earlier note.. I saw the video, but I wasn't aware of the paper presentation that described the isotopic shifts. So far, it looks like a very convincing experiment that looks to have nuclear origins. There are so many interesting points to bring up. For example the high voltage pulses from the modified spark plugs. That''s all secret IP, but at 10Kv pulsed, that has to be creating a plasma of hot H ions, and then assuming the Ni is the ground, it shouldn't surprise anyone that H ions are being accelerated into the NI nano powder. 10Kv is enough to circumvent the Coulomb barrier when you consider the screening potential of the metal's valence electrons. If that is the case, then this is more of a hot fusion processes, a controlled bombardment of the Ni/H lattice. You can almost thing of the Ni as forming a scaffolding to hold in place the H ions, and as spark plugs pulse, wave after wave of hot H ions would be bombarding the Ni. The fact that the cross section for a fusion event seems broad is unusual, but there may be more Ni + p reactions than p + p. Do you need Rydberg atoms to do that? I would really like to read the Kim paper before dumping on the Rydberg concept, but to me, this is an unnecessarily complex physics state to achieve in a solid state (or nano structure), when a simple hot fusion explanation might work. So I'm kind of with Jed in my hesitation about accepting the whole presentation by Defkcalion. Let me point out what is odd; The stainless steel container that has heat transfer coil around it. If you look at the diagrams, that should be pumped with hydrogen. Shouldn't there be an electrically insulating barrier between the hydrogen (plasma) and the stainless steel? If not then why isn't the H plasma interacting with the casing? Anyway, more food for thought.Best Regards folks. On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 6:10 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: Arnaud Kodeck arnaud.kod...@lakoco.be wrote: As said before by Jed, this is a full list of theoretical speculations put one after another one. There no experiments that confirm their speculations. This list is an informal discussion. There is no harm in saying anything here. I am referring to a paper published by Defkalion in a physics conference proceedings. That is a very different thing. The standards of rigor should be higher for that. Did they make any measurements about Rydberg hydrogen? The EM field that they are claiming should have been measured with precision. Or are they hiding the proof? I sure hope they did. Otherwise they should not mention it. But it isn't enough to just measure things. You have to list the sources in parenthesis and footnotes. For example, when Defkalion claimed that they used a variety of nickel isotopes, they should have listed the mass and the source of the isotopes. Isotopically pure samples are rare so you should list where you got them and how pure they are, so that other people can judge your results. This rule of thumb only applies to exotic materials. If it was some material that you can get from any supply house, such as nickel wire, there is no need to list the source. In the case of palladium you should always list the source, such as Johnson Matthey. The source makes a big difference. The Defkalion theory might be right to explain the excess heat of the hyperion. But it might be as well something else that produces the extra energy. Perhaps. They claim they know the source of the heat. They should make a careful, rigorous case in a paper to back this up. I hope the realtime spectrometer they are building with R6 reactor will open our eyes to what’s going on inside. I hope so. (Question: Will it work for elements other than hydrogen and helium? I have seen some light-element-only on-line spectrometers.) I don’t blame Defkalion. They have made tremendous steps in the right direction, and given a lot of hints to the public. I think the presentation at ICCF17 and 18 were a little slack by the standards of academic physics. There are many slack presentations at these conferences. I think we should cut back on them, and relegate more of them to
RE: [Vo]:Kitamura much improved
axil - yes. In my younger wilder days I had envisioned just that. (high temps with high temp alloys) Using such things at W in the alloying of Ni or Pd and the use of very high temps with electrically driven deuterium plasma. I even submitted a patent appl. for it (http://www.google.com/patents/WO1990014668A2?cl=en notice that was April '89) Don't laugh too much. I was excited at the time and working on a rocket program at the time. I still think that (high temp) is the way to ultimately go. However, for now I am trying for a standalone demo and that just about requires working at lower temps, if it is to be self heating. The other path would involve energy conversion and much more involved systems. I am content, for now, to just have my sample warmer than the control. Less heat to be sure, but fewer things for people to question. My next step will to get that working temp down nearer to room temp. The problem I am facing on that path is a good variable heat path to balance the rate of heat extraction and maintaining a significant sample temperature. I will not be making direct claims of power yields at NI since that would require lengthy calibration. I will just make the claim that the sample is warmer than the control and leave it at that. But, my Ni demo should be at around 1 watt out with no input (but in a 80C bath) for the 5 days of expo set up. Internal volume 450ml, sample mass of 200 g but that is mostly C with only about 2% being metal. Perhaps someone here would like to figure how long I would need to run a sealed brass sphere to rule out chemistry from 4 g of active material or even 200 grams total material. (note: I have run these for multiple months in the lab- one set has clocked 3 months) D2 Date: Sat, 27 Jul 2013 12:09:08 -0400 Subject: Re: [Vo]:Kitamura much improved From: janap...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Comparisons of systems are valuable in understanding what the LENR reaction is doing. As a general principle, phonon driven dipole oscillations of electrons and associated ions (Holes) are the power plant that drives the LENR process. Heat pumps energy into these dipoles so that they vibrate vigorously. There is an energy concentration mechanism that is fed by these dipoles. This concentration mechanism absorbs this dipole energy and saves it with little or no loss in power. As heat is added to the system, thermal power is transferred optically to the energy storage mechanism in the way that a battery stores current chemically or a Cyclotron stores electrons magnetically. There is a limit to this energy transfer mechanism but that limit is a timeframe not a breakout of an energy containment mechanism. The Cravens system uses low quality heat to drive the LENR process. The initiation temperature is low but the thermal power mechanism to energy accumulation is proportionally weak because the weak flow of energy to storage is cut off by the reaction timeframe limitation. In the Ni/H system, the initiation temperature is higher and the thermal power mechanism to energy accumulation is proportionally stronger because the stronger flow of energy to storage is large during the reaction timeframe. So a high initiation temperature makes for a stronger reaction with greater power production. As a example of this concept, if the Creavens system increased the Debye temperature of its material, and the bath used to supply thermal input power were hotter, more power might be produced. If a liquid metal bath could heat the pure nickel reaction powder to high temperatures were to replace the water bath, and nickel was used to replace the palladium alloy, more heat output density might result. Taking this line of thinking to its extreme, the materials with the highest Debye temperatures :( Silicon, 645K), (Beryllium, 1440 K), (Carbon, 2230 K) may provide the most output power density. PS. If NASA is using carbon nanotubes in there process, they will not reach the light off temperatures needed for a carbon based system because that extreme temperature is too high for standard engineering designs. On Sat, Jul 27, 2013 at 10:42 AM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: DJ Cravens djcrav...@hotmail.com wrote: sounds like the Les Case system I have now. Tube in a tube. I think it is just a sensor mounted on the outside of a copper tube. The oil flows through the tube. Not having a T will reduce the likelihood of a leak. McKubre and I have some concerns about mixing. Not many concerns, because the calibration looks good. The problem is if you have the delta T too high the properties of the oil (heat cap., viscosity,...) start to confuse things.- at least for me. Yes. They have thought about these issues. blaze spinnaker blazespinna...@gmail.com wrote: I read 195 watts input, up to 20 watts excess. Is that correct? You may be right
RE: [Vo]:MFMP on a possible independent report of DGT's Hyperion
yes, there is market inefficiency due to risk aversion. Black swans exist. D2 From: orionwo...@charter.net To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: [Vo]:MFMP on a possible independent report of DGT's Hyperion Date: Sat, 27 Jul 2013 13:09:49 -0500 From Blaze: ... In terms of my credentials though, which might be more interesting, I spent about the last 8 years or so on Intrade making buckets of money on making big bets on highly improbable events like this which came true. The opportunities for profit there were incredible. Some examples, I made money on Obama on McCain winning their primaries by making early bets (admittedly though I had hedged a bit, but was over all long on them). Buckets of money. you say. It's obvious to me that it takes a large and well-integrated skill set to make buckets of money betting on improbable events. (On a related note, one of my mutual funds is a contra fund. It often seems to do better than the average fund.) On a related topic, earlier in my life I tried my hand in the commodity markets. I suspect trading commodities shares many similarities with the kind of skill set you have acquired. In a sense, the commodities you bet on are futures. It's anyone's guess whether the types of futures you buy into will ripen or go sour when it comes time to cash in. As for me and my commodity trading adventures, I'll grant you that it was a fun and exciting time for me... while it lasted. Eventually, I lost all the money I had set aside for this adventure. I'm sure I lost it all due to my own lack of having acquired a sufficient collection of skill sets, and the fact that I didn't possess an appropriate psychological propensity for immediate trading, and finally not having timely data in which to make proper assessments on whether to bury or short the commodity. I did manage to eventually rationalize my financial losses as having acquired some valuable experiences in the art of trading futures. It’s not for the faint of heart! Of course, while I paid my tuition fees I flunked the course. On cannot pass at everything they dabble in. ;-) In the aftermath I eventually learned that many professional commodity traders manage to stay in business because there's a constant influx of newbies (just like me) who come in with the goal of making money. What typically happens, however, is that the vast majority of these newbies end up transferring bulk of their bank accounts into the accounts of the professionals. An irony that did not escape me was the fact that the only way the professionals tend to stay in business is to constantly sell to naive newbies a manufactured hope that there is money to be made in trading futures. In fact, that's how all forms of professional gambling manage to survive. Granted, an extremely small percentage of brand new newbie traders actually DO end up become good at the skill, but as someone was known to have sed: A sucker is born every minute. In the end I think the biggest [moral] lesson I learned completing this particular course was to ask myself, what kind of a contribution was I actually making to the world? The more I thought about it, not very much. I then asked myself, what if I had become successful? What would I have then been able to put my grave stone? STEVEN VINCENT JOHNSON1952 - 2031 HIs contribution to the world was thathe made a lot of money extracting it from the wallets of otherswho were also trying to make a lot of moneyattempting to do the same thing to him.* * *RIP Just as in the fine art of betting, commodity trading works by profiting from the losses of others. Inculcating this realization did not set well with me. In a sense I actually became relieved of the fact that I had lost money. It meant that I had not profited from the financial losses of others. I realize this was a rationalization on my part. Nevertheless, my own losses left me with a clearer conscience. Based on my own memories I will grant you that it probably IS a rush to realize how smart one must be in order to take money (willing so) from others, and to be able to do it in a perfectly legal way! The fact is that a capitalistic economy needs transactional activity of this sort in order for the markets to remain dynamic and liquid. So... in a sense, THATS, the service traders and betters are contributing to the system. Hey! It's just money. ...hopefully, YOUR, money, and not mine. Nothing personal! For some inexplicable reason, I don’t think I personally would feel comfortable advertising the acquisition of such a skill set on my gravestone. But by all means, have fun with your buckets of money. Regards,Steven Vincent Johnsonsvjart.OrionWorks.comwww.zazzle.com/orionworkstech.groups.yahoo.com/group/newvortex/
RE: [Vo]:Kitamura much improved
Alen, where can I find your fakes calculator. What have you got as the high for chemistry for a sealed unit (i.e. no O2 access)? with Li batteries, I think you can get up to 4MJ/L (but I don't know how anyone could actually put them inside a sphere with a 1/8npt hole- or how they could survive welding hemispheres). I figure at 450ml that could be 1.8MJ possible or about 500Wh. So I guess I would need about 21 days. or better 2 months. Is that about what you get? D2 Date: Sat, 27 Jul 2013 11:39:59 -0700 From: a...@well.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Kitamura much improved From: DJ Cravens djcrav...@hotmail.com Sent: Saturday, July 27, 2013 9:38:07 AM Subject: RE: [Vo]:Kitamura much improved Perhaps someone here would like to figure how long I would need to run a sealed brass sphere to rule out chemistry from 4 g of active material or even 200 grams total material. (note: I have run these for multiple months in the lab- one set has clocked 3 months) My fakes calculator is set up to work with volumes. (I wrote the code with mass too, but I don't have energy density by mass set up for all candidates.) Needs power in (zero), power out, time (not really needed, but makes the report clearer) and volume.
RE: [Vo]:Kitamura much improved
thanks, I know I had seen something like that around here. I guess that I will not be able to convince a diehard skeptic in 5 days of running. But it should give them something to think about. I do have test points so that they can get R's from hand meters and not have to put trust in some computer display alone. Date: Sat, 27 Jul 2013 12:24:14 -0700 From: a...@well.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Kitamura much improved From: DJ Cravens djcrav...@hotmail.com Sent: Saturday, July 27, 2013 12:10:03 PM Alen, where can I find your fakes calculator. What have you got as the high for chemistry for a sealed unit (i.e. no O2 access)? with Li batteries, I think you can get up to 4MJ/L (but I don't know how anyone could actually put them inside a sphere with a 1/8npt hole- or how they could survive welding hemispheres). I figure at 450ml that could be 1.8MJ possible or about 500Wh. So I guess I would need about 21 days. or better 2 months. Is that about what you get? My Lithium battery number is 3.6MJ/L -- so that's about right. The current version is at http://lenr.qumbu.com/rossi_ecat_proof_frames_v430.php Fixed Energy Fakes starts here. http://lenr.qumbu.com/rossi_ecat_proof_v430.php#fixedenergyfakes This was mostly designed for the Rossi experiments, so a lot of them are X+Air or X+Stored oxygen. Most of the energy density values are from wiki. Note that (despite Jed's objections) my calculation assumes that the entire volume if fakium, so any actual implementation would be way less. (Might be quicker just to do a spreadsheet than plug your values into my fakes calculator. Be a coupla/few hours to get round to it.)
RE: [Vo]:Kitamura much improved
That is silly. There is no way for a viewer to measure the weight of material but the volume is quickly seen. They can see the size but not know the mass of the material inside. How do you expect to burn gasoline inside a sealed brass sphere? You need oxygen for that. Date: Sat, 27 Jul 2013 15:23:00 -0500 Subject: Re: [Vo]:Kitamura much improved From: jedrothw...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com DJ Cravens djcrav...@hotmail.com wrote: Perhaps someone here would like to figure how long I would need to run a sealed brass sphere to rule out chemistry from 4 g of active material or even 200 grams total material. Simplify! Just use the energy density of gasoline, 42 MJ/kg. No common fuel is better. Only a few exotic fuels are better. If you want to be absolutely sure, double it to 84 MJ/kg. That is very conservative because it does not include the weight of the oxygen in the burned fuel. - Jed
RE: [Vo]:Kitamura much improved
Thanks, but based on volume alone, it is clear that 5 days is not enough for a rock solid demo. The volume of the sample is low, but there needs to be a volume of the convection of the H/D in the system. I guess afterwards, I might could saw the device in half. That might help a bit. But it is 1/8inch thick brass. I have to think of how I might could do that on the last day on the floor of the expo. (sawing a sphere is trickier than you might think - it wants to roll away from a blade.) I do have a cut away sample but that might not be enough. I really should cut the one that was in use. D2 Date: Sat, 27 Jul 2013 14:34:26 -0700 From: a...@well.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Kitamura much improved From: DJ Cravens djcrav...@hotmail.com Sent: Saturday, July 27, 2013 12:43:44 PM thanks, I know I had seen something like that around here. It's almost set up .. (if not very useful) I just need to plug in the values. Input power : 0 Output power : 1W Inner (active material volume) : 450 ml = 0.450 l Outer (brass sphere) : ??? Or give me the radius
RE: [Vo]:Kitamura much improved
Here is the mech specs for the spheres I will be using: http://www.shopwagnerb2c.com/UserFiles/Documents/Product/4156.pdf They are polished and lightly plated with gold. 4 inch OD D2 Date: Sat, 27 Jul 2013 14:34:26 -0700 From: a...@well.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Kitamura much improved From: DJ Cravens djcrav...@hotmail.com Sent: Saturday, July 27, 2013 12:43:44 PM thanks, I know I had seen something like that around here. It's almost set up .. (if not very useful) I just need to plug in the values. Input power : 0 Output power : 1W Inner (active material volume) : 450 ml = 0.450 l Outer (brass sphere) : ??? Or give me the radius
RE: [Vo]:Kitamura much improved -- fakes
my bath is not water but Lab Armor AL beads. http://www.labarmor.com/lab-armor-beads-for-lab-water-baths/ I did not want scolding hot water at the expo. Liability issues. Also at home in the lab it lets me take things up higher than 95C (note: I am at 9000 feet elevation) I think the most direct approach for this expo is just to cut it open on the last day. D2 Date: Sat, 27 Jul 2013 15:24:54 -0700 From: a...@well.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Kitamura much improved -- fakes From: DJ Cravens djcrav...@hotmail.com Sent: Saturday, July 27, 2013 2:50:09 PM Thanks, but based on volume alone, it is clear that 5 days is not enough for a rock solid demo. For what it's worth : http://lenr.qumbu.com/rossi_ecat_proof_v430.php#fakesbyvolume For the INNER -- the most plausible (=least implausible) fake is compressed hydrogen burning external air (don't ask how) -- which would run for 700 hours. For 1W output you could possibly use the oxygen dissolved in the bath. The combustion product is water, which just goes back into the bath. The longest-running implausible fake is Boron + External Air = 17225 Hrs Lithium Battery = 450 Hrs
[Vo]:[Vo) anyone here going to NI Week?
Anyone here on Vortex going to NI week (specifically the last day Aug 8)? Perhaps there is someone that would want to be there as a “fair judge” to “witness” if I cut the spheres open on the last day. Not much use in taking something to cut it if no one will be there to view it. I have test points on all my wiring and someone should be able to check just a VOM. (measure thermister R values……) I don’t plan on cutting open the Seebeck or the tea pot but the spheres- yes. Nothing spectacular planed but perhaps someone here might be interested.
RE: [Vo]:Kitamura much improved
sounds like the Les Case system I have now. Tube in a tube. It can get messy (and costly- fluid costs) if you develop leak somewhere. When I was running it, I needed to run at a bout 60ml/ min to keep the delta T DOWN. The problem is if you have the delta T too high the properties of the oil (heat cap., viscosity,...) start to confuse things.- at least for me. In the Case system, you had H (or D) flowing through the smaller sample tube at the center. But it was fairly robust and had about 200 ml of sample in the inner tube. (Note: Case reduced/produced the material in situ from an metal organic) It looks like he was running at around 200-300 C) D2 Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2013 21:57:16 -0500 From: jedrothw...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]:Kitamura much improved Kitamura et al. have been working on gas loaded Pd and Ni for some time, originally in a replication of Arata's Zr+Pd alloy. Kitamura's experiment looks much better to me than it did last year. They finally made a precision flowmeter. It holds a much larger sample of powder. It is about time they scaled up the sample size. It can be run at high temperature with reasonable accuracy. I think they are now getting more heat from the Ni alloys than Pd. They get 20 to 30 W from Ni. It only works at high temperatures, as I recall around 300 deg C. One lesson from the last few years is that if you want to make Ni work, you need a high temperature. I have a few concerns about the calorimetry, but that is probably because I am unfamiliar with some aspects of it, to wit: They are using oil instead of water as the working fluid. It is a good choice for such high temperatures, but I have not used it myself so I can't judge. I am a little concerned about a curve they showed from the manufacturer of heat capacity and viscosity at different temperatures. It varies a great deal. You have to trust the manufacturer on this. The flow rate is only 20 ml/min. That would be too slow with water. I don't know about oil. They measure the temperature on the outside of a small copper pipe. I guess that should work but I don't see why they did not use a T. Again . . . maybe that is not a good idea with oil? I have heard the stuff leaks out of seals, pumps and Ts. On the plus side: They used several other temperature sensors on the cell wall. They were well calibrated and they all agree on the power levels. The recovery rate is 88% as I recall. That's high. The whole thing is insulated in a vacuum jacket (like a giant Dewar). The calibration seems rock steady, and the calibration curve is linear. These people have been dealing with this for a while so they have probably answered all concerns. McKubre asked Kitamura to estimate the error as a percent of input but Kitamura could not. Perhaps he misunderstood the question. McKubre said it was a good job despite this. U. Missouri intends to upload the slides from this conference, with permission from the authors. I expect Kitamura will grant permission. This is one you should look at. - Jed
RE: [Vo]:Defkalion/MFMP implications for electrolysis?
notice you only need the 179 figure to get above the Debye temp. You can get around that by alloying the Ni with Cu and even annealing. http://books.google.com/books/about/The_Debye_Temperature_and_Hardness_of_Co.html?id=Rhd5NwAACAAJ http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/pssa.2210090108/abstract I personally use both copper and gold in Ni to drop both the Debye temp and the energy of vacancy formation. A rough rule of thumb is that adding a softer lower melting point material to Ni or Pd is good. So far, I have to keep my metals fcc. Notice also that you can drop the energy of vacancy formation also by having finer materials. If they are small enough (somewhere around 10nm) the becomes little difference between the Ef for bulk and surface. (normally, the surface Ef is lower than the bulk) so.. I say all that to let you know that you can have systems that work below 179 C. My demo at NI week will be operating at 80C. D2 note: the Cu added to Ni (also Pt) helps in the dissociation of the H Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2013 10:24:12 -0500 From: jcol...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]:Defkalion/MFMP implications for electrolysis? With the recent corresponding findings of both Defkalion and MFMP suggesting the temperature needs to be 179C to initiate the reaction, I am wondering if this may also have implications for electrolysis with nickel. Obviously, it would be difficult to run electrolysis at a power level high enough to heat the cathode to that temperature for very long (the water would boil off). A pressurized electrolytic cell would seem to be an option. Another option would be lateral cathode pulses of high power and relatively brief duration to bring the cathode temp above 179C, but avoid boiling off the water. The trouble with this method may come in if the nickel needs to remain at 179C. This also has me wondering about two other things. 1) Brillouin Energy's method of electrolysis would seem likely to elevate the cathode temperature 179C. Could this be a factor in Godes' success? 2) Electrolytic plasma experiments with tungsten -- is the cathode temperature a key element rather than the plasma? Best regards,Jack
RE: [Vo]:Defkalion/MFMP implications for electrolysis?
the magnetic field from a dipole falls of as the inverse cube of the distance. it falls off quickly. I am not sure what it would be outside a mu metal shielded device, but I would expect not much would be available for tools across the room. Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2013 13:45:17 -0300 Subject: Re: [Vo]:Defkalion/MFMP implications for electrolysis? From: danieldi...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Also, this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neodymium_magnet_toys 2013/7/26 Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com It is a strong field. But it falls fast, specially if the magnetized object is tiny: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neodymium_magnet 2013/7/26 Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net That kind of field at 20 cm from the device (their claim) would be pulling tools from across the room. Jones -- Daniel Rocha - rjdanieldi...@gmail.com -- Daniel Rocha - rjdanieldi...@gmail.com
RE: [Vo]:Defkalion/MFMP implications for electrolysis?
the B field of an orbiting 1s electron about a H nucleus is about 12T at the nucleus. Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2013 12:46:09 -0400 Subject: Re: [Vo]:Defkalion/MFMP implications for electrolysis? From: cheme...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Jones, Where was that claim made? did they mean uT? Stewart On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 12:39 PM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: From: Jack Cole 1) Brillouin Energy's method of electrolysis would seem likely to elevate the cathode temperature 179C. Could this be a factor in Godes' success? It is looking like there is nothing there with Brillouin. Months ago, they received a very large grant for testing at SRI. It’s a pretty good bet that if anything had turned up in that testing (and it should have turned up weeks ago if it was there) –some news would have surfaced at ICCF, formally or informally. In fact, the local rumors are that there has been no glimmer of success at all. The most surprising detail to come out of the whole conference IMHO - if it can be believed - is the report of the very high magnetic field of DGT. Other prior experiments which showed a well-define trigger temperature, such as Ahern’s - showed much higher trigger than ~180C, but he had no significant magnetic field at all. That low trigger temp could be related to the high field – if DGT are to be believed. In fact, the fact that this kind of field strength is easy to document - but was not documented - casts significant doubt on the entire DGT presentation. Many of us who were bullish on that demo a few days ago have shifted 180 degrees and are not skeptical simply because of this claim of 1.6 Tesla. It is almost preposterous. That kind of field at 20 cm from the device (their claim) would be pulling tools from across the room. Jones
RE: [Vo]:Defkalion/MFMP implications for electrolysis?
for my lower temp demo, I now will be using mixed Ni+ Cu + Au alloy (reduced from a mixed solution held in C mesopores). I am not sure what it's final Debye temp is, but I expect it is much less than 0C. D2 Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2013 12:52:38 -0400 Subject: Re: [Vo]:Defkalion/MFMP implications for electrolysis? From: hveeder...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Here is some complementary information. This abstract says the Debye temperature is higher when defects are present.http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/pssa.2210090108/abstract harry On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 12:14 PM, DJ Cravens djcrav...@hotmail.com wrote: notice you only need the 179 figure to get above the Debye temp. You can get around that by alloying the Ni with Cu and even annealing. http://books.google.com/books/about/The_Debye_Temperature_and_Hardness_of_Co.html?id=Rhd5NwAACAAJ http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/pssa.2210090108/abstract I personally use both copper and gold in Ni to drop both the Debye temp and the energy of vacancy formation. A rough rule of thumb is that adding a softer lower melting point material to Ni or Pd is good. So far, I have to keep my metals fcc. Notice also that you can drop the energy of vacancy formation also by having finer materials. If they are small enough (somewhere around 10nm) the becomes little difference between the Ef for bulk and surface. (normally, the surface Ef is lower than the bulk) so.. I say all that to let you know that you can have systems that work below 179 C. My demo at NI week will be operating at 80C. D2 note: the Cu added to Ni (also Pt) helps in the dissociation of the H Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2013 10:24:12 -0500 From: jcol...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]:Defkalion/MFMP implications for electrolysis? With the recent corresponding findings of both Defkalion and MFMP suggesting the temperature needs to be 179C to initiate the reaction, I am wondering if this may also have implications for electrolysis with nickel. Obviously, it would be difficult to run electrolysis at a power level high enough to heat the cathode to that temperature for very long (the water would boil off). A pressurized electrolytic cell would seem to be an option. Another option would be lateral cathode pulses of high power and relatively brief duration to bring the cathode temp above 179C, but avoid boiling off the water. The trouble with this method may come in if the nickel needs to remain at 179C. This also has me wondering about two other things. 1) Brillouin Energy's method of electrolysis would seem likely to elevate the cathode temperature 179C. Could this be a factor in Godes' success? 2) Electrolytic plasma experiments with tungsten -- is the cathode temperature a key element rather than the plasma? Best regards,Jack
RE: [Vo]:Defkalion/MFMP implications for electrolysis?
I did not notice external coils. My cells often sing at a few hundred hertz (around 400) and at tens of MHz. I was never sure if it was the reaction itself or just ringing of the components. Letts's empirical model has the reaction rates proceeding via the Lamor frequency rates at the vacancies. That frequency depends on the B field of the reactive volumes. It has the reaction rate at roughly linear with B. I personally have Sm2Co17 powder in my system to increase the B field in the reactive volume. Some here may remember the ICCF 4 (Maui) demo in the parking lot where they were using Sm Co materials. Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2013 13:54:29 -0300 Subject: Re: [Vo]:Defkalion/MFMP implications for electrolysis? From: danieldi...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Because of the above limitations of passive shielding, an alternative used with static or low-frequency fields is active shielding; using a field created by electromagnets to cancel out the ambient field within a volume.[7] Solenoids and Helmholtz coils are types of coils that can be used for this purpose. We saw a solenoid around the reactor, didn't we? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetic_shielding 2013/7/26 DJ Cravens djcrav...@hotmail.com the magnetic field from a dipole falls of as the inverse cube of the distance. it falls off quickly. I am not sure what it would be outside a mu metal shielded device, but I would expect not much would be available for tools across the room. Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2013 13:45:17 -0300 Subject: Re: [Vo]:Defkalion/MFMP implications for electrolysis? From: danieldi...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Also, this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neodymium_magnet_toys 2013/7/26 Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com It is a strong field. But it falls fast, specially if the magnetized object is tiny: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neodymium_magnet 2013/7/26 Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net That kind of field at 20 cm from the device (their claim) would be pulling tools from across the room. Jones -- Daniel Rocha - rjdanieldi...@gmail.com -- Daniel Rocha - rjdanieldi...@gmail.com -- Daniel Rocha - rjdanieldi...@gmail.com
RE: [Vo]:Debye of Pd
Pd reactions possible at lower temps than Ni --yes, exactly. However the reduction of the energy of vacancy of formation is also a good thing. Cu in Ni, Au or Ag in Pd, Sn in Ti,. My understanding (as limited as it is) is that you need the phonon capability for the heat to leave the reaction areas and you need the vacancies to shuttle the H/D to and from where ever things are happening. (although I still think that there is a fair chance that the vacancies themselves may be the active site- that is vacancies with specific properties). D2 Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2013 14:06:35 -0400 Subject: Re: [Vo]:Debye of Pd From: hveeder...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com If being above the Debye temperature is one of the preconditions for excess heat, then Pd systems don't need an application of heat if they are done at room temperature (20C), since the Debye temperature of Pd is several degrees lower than room temperature. Harry On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 7:47 AM, Frank Roarty froarty...@comcast.net wrote: HarryDidn't Arrata have heat with PD powder at room temp? Maybe anomalous heat is a function of transition thru Debye temp and those experiments extracting heat provide repeated opportunities to make this transition at a higher rate. Fran
RE: [Vo]:Defkalion/MFMP implications for electrolysis?
I am using a chemical reduction of a metal salt solution. The metals end up in the pores of carbon mesopores. Average pore sizes are around 9nm. I use a range of mixtures. The Ni variations are good for higher temps and are cheaper. The Pd variations cost a lot to make but seem to give a better power density. If people try such a thing, one trick is to do the reduction slowly and at lower temps (say 10C). I expect what you really want to know is that I typically about 20:5:75 Ag:Au:Pd, or 20:2:78 Cu:Pt:Ni. Those are the metal ratios for the solution I use but I am unsure as to what actually gets reduced into the C pores. I am also see some glimmers of hope for a Ti based material. But work has to wait till after NI Week. The same with the metal loaded carbon aerogels (via formaldehyde resorcinol sol-gel production. I use the same type of material in the direct electrical stimulated/heated solid state things. Think souped up carbon resistors. That is why I am using C instead of the silicate based materials. Basically (over simplified), I just make the material, put it in a sealed brass sphere (some with a light insulation inside) and put in a constant temp bath. The samples get warmer than the bath (while the control sphere remains at the bath temp. I should say that I put some magnetic materials and some hydrogen storage metal material in the sphere as well. (load and purge with H or D gas at dry ice temps, then seal and warm. I expect it is about 5bar inside.) I get the best results when the spheres are not fully submerged into the bath- As Case showed (ref. the He measurement things with SRI) there needs to be come temp gradient or gas flow. D2 From: jone...@pacbell.net To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: [Vo]:Defkalion/MFMP implications for electrolysis? Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2013 11:48:27 -0700 From: DJ Cravens notice you only need the 179 figure to get above the Debye temp. You can get around that by alloying the Ni with Cu and even annealing. Dennis, Are you using something akin to Celani’s constantan alloy? Or else Monel? Jones
RE: [Vo]:Debye of Pd
I think that the Debye temp is useful, although I am not sure if it is the acoustical or optical phonons that are actually involve. I have a better feel for the optical phonon moderating the reaction ( as seen from the duel laser stuff) than the acoustical phonon that seem to be more involved with setting the Debye temps. But I am still confused exactly over such phonon modes and the ultimate interactions needed for the reactions. My mental model more easily sees the optical phonons pushing D's together then it sees acoustical phonons doing that. The heat release via phonons (effected by the Debye temp) is just part of the problem. There is also the reaction itself which seems to like the higher temps. This seems to be an exponential term that involves the temperature and the energy of vacancy formation. You need higher temps or a lower Ef. Lowering the Ef even a little seems to really help. Notice in the codep exper. that the codep on Au plating works so much better than just directly on Cu. Au in Pd really drops the Ef. D2 Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2013 14:06:35 -0400 Subject: Re: [Vo]:Debye of Pd From: hveeder...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com If being above the Debye temperature is one of the preconditions for excess heat, then Pd systems don't need an application of heat if they are done at room temperature (20C), since the Debye temperature of Pd is several degrees lower than room temperature. Harry On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 7:47 AM, Frank Roarty froarty...@comcast.net wrote: HarryDidn't Arrata have heat with PD powder at room temp? Maybe anomalous heat is a function of transition thru Debye temp and those experiments extracting heat provide repeated opportunities to make this transition at a higher rate. Fran
RE: [Vo]:Defkalion/MFMP implications for electrolysis?
My HV based systems are normally pulsed in the range of 0.1 to 400 Hz. But even the old electrolysis system would give MHz signals. (bubbles) D2 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Defkalion/MFMP implications for electrolysis? From: dlrober...@aol.com Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2013 15:59:20 -0400 Dennis, do your experiments generally have pulses of currents hitting the active material? It might be that the metal wires are given impulse like kicks that cause them to ring at their resonant frequencies. Dave -Original Message- From: DJ Cravens djcrav...@hotmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Fri, Jul 26, 2013 1:09 pm Subject: RE: [Vo]:Defkalion/MFMP implications for electrolysis? I did not notice external coils. My cells often sing at a few hundred hertz (around 400) and at tens of MHz. I was never sure if it was the reaction itself or just ringing of the components. Letts's empirical model has the reaction rates proceeding via the Lamor frequency rates at the vacancies. That frequency depends on the B field of the reactive volumes. It has the reaction rate at roughly linear with B. I personally have Sm2Co17 powder in my system to increase the B field in the reactive volume. Some here may remember the ICCF 4 (Maui) demo in the parking lot where they were using Sm Co materials. Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2013 13:54:29 -0300 Subject: Re: [Vo]:Defkalion/MFMP implications for electrolysis? From: danieldi...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Because of the above limitations of passive shielding, an alternative used with static or low-frequency fields is active shielding; using a field created by electromagnets to cancel out the ambient field within a volume.[7] Solenoids and Helmholtz coils are types of coils that can be used for this purpose. We saw a solenoid around the reactor, didn't we? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetic_shielding 2013/7/26 DJ Cravens djcrav...@hotmail.com the magnetic field from a dipole falls of as the inverse cube of the distance. it falls off quickly. I am not sure what it would be outside a mu metal shielded device, but I would expect not much would be available for tools across the room. Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2013 13:45:17 -0300 Subject: Re: [Vo]:Defkalion/MFMP implications for electrolysis? From: danieldi...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Also, this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neodymium_magnet_toys 2013/7/26 Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com It is a strong field. But it falls fast, specially if the magnetized object is tiny: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neodymium_magnet 2013/7/26 Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net That kind of field at 20 cm from the device (their claim) would be pulling tools from across the room. Jones -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com
RE: [Vo]:Defkalion/MFMP implications for electrolysis?
yes, we tried to put in freqs into the electrolytic cells at the frequencies they were transmitting. No real effect.You might want to look up Letts' application of RF at around 82Mhz which was calculated based on the nuclear flip of a D nebulous due to the B field of an orbiting e. I think that use done ca 92-94 ?? with Bockris. Someone may want to calculate that for Ni. D2 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Defkalion/MFMP implications for electrolysis? From: dlrober...@aol.com Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2013 16:46:04 -0400 Interesting that you pulse some of them at 400 Hz. That might explain the occurrence of that frequency, but the MHz ones must be a different process. Bubbles seem to be a little slower acting, but who knows? I could imagine some form of reinforcement at RF frequencies which leads to a significant level of signal. Any time positive feedback is in effect, most anything can rise from the noise. Dave -Original Message- From: DJ Cravens djcrav...@hotmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Fri, Jul 26, 2013 4:05 pm Subject: RE: [Vo]:Defkalion/MFMP implications for electrolysis? My HV based systems are normally pulsed in the range of 0.1 to 400 Hz. But even the old electrolysis system would give MHz signals. (bubbles) D2 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Defkalion/MFMP implications for electrolysis? From: dlrober...@aol.com Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2013 15:59:20 -0400 Dennis, do your experiments generally have pulses of currents hitting the active material? It might be that the metal wires are given impulse like kicks that cause them to ring at their resonant frequencies. Dave -Original Message- From: DJ Cravens djcrav...@hotmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Fri, Jul 26, 2013 1:09 pm Subject: RE: [Vo]:Defkalion/MFMP implications for electrolysis? I did not notice external coils. My cells often sing at a few hundred hertz (around 400) and at tens of MHz. I was never sure if it was the reaction itself or just ringing of the components. Letts's empirical model has the reaction rates proceeding via the Lamor frequency rates at the vacancies. That frequency depends on the B field of the reactive volumes. It has the reaction rate at roughly linear with B. I personally have Sm2Co17 powder in my system to increase the B field in the reactive volume. Some here may remember the ICCF 4 (Maui) demo in the parking lot where they were using Sm Co materials. Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2013 13:54:29 -0300 Subject: Re: [Vo]:Defkalion/MFMP implications for electrolysis? From: danieldi...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Because of the above limitations of passive shielding, an alternative used with static or low-frequency fields is active shielding; using a field created by electromagnets to cancel out the ambient field within a volume.[7] Solenoids and Helmholtz coils are types of coils that can be used for this purpose. We saw a solenoid around the reactor, didn't we? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetic_shielding 2013/7/26 DJ Cravens djcrav...@hotmail.com the magnetic field from a dipole falls of as the inverse cube of the distance. it falls off quickly. I am not sure what it would be outside a mu metal shielded device, but I would expect not much would be available for tools across the room. Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2013 13:45:17 -0300 Subject: Re: [Vo]:Defkalion/MFMP implications for electrolysis? From: danieldi...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Also, this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neodymium_magnet_toys 2013/7/26 Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com It is a strong field. But it falls fast, specially if the magnetized object is tiny: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neodymium_magnet 2013/7/26 Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net That kind of field at 20 cm from the device (their claim) would be pulling tools from across the room. Jones -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com
RE: [Vo]:Defkalion/MFMP implications for electrolysis?
I was just using a freq. spectrum an. at the time. It just put the freq. in bins. or gave a FFT of the signal. I seem to recall that it had a 1/2 width of about 10 MHz You might ask Letts. I think he spent some time looking at such things. D2 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Defkalion/MFMP implications for electrolysis? From: dlrober...@aol.com Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2013 17:06:58 -0400 Do you recall how large the signal was that you saw at the RF frequencies? And, any idea of how tight the frequency emission band was? Too bad the system did not respond well to outside RF drive. Of course, the drive requirement might be too tight to achieve with your equipment. If the magnetic field being generated by the DGT device is anywhere near as large as they suggest then we have a some supers clues to follow. My first inclination is to assume some form of superconductivity interacts with the heat generation. Does anyone have information supporting the large magnetic field generation? Also, does this field vary strongly with time, or remain relatively stable? Dave -Original Message- From: DJ Cravens djcrav...@hotmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Fri, Jul 26, 2013 4:57 pm Subject: RE: [Vo]:Defkalion/MFMP implications for electrolysis? yes, we tried to put in freqs into the electrolytic cells at the frequencies they were transmitting. No real effect.You might want to look up Letts' application of RF at around 82Mhz which was calculated based on the nuclear flip of a D nebulous due to the B field of an orbiting e. I think that use done ca 92-94 ?? with Bockris. Someone may want to calculate that for Ni. D2 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Defkalion/MFMP implications for electrolysis? From: dlrober...@aol.com Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2013 16:46:04 -0400 Interesting that you pulse some of them at 400 Hz. That might explain the occurrence of that frequency, but the MHz ones must be a different process. Bubbles seem to be a little slower acting, but who knows? I could imagine some form of reinforcement at RF frequencies which leads to a significant level of signal. Any time positive feedback is in effect, most anything can rise from the noise. Dave -Original Message- From: DJ Cravens djcrav...@hotmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Fri, Jul 26, 2013 4:05 pm Subject: RE: [Vo]:Defkalion/MFMP implications for electrolysis? My HV based systems are normally pulsed in the range of 0.1 to 400 Hz. But even the old electrolysis system would give MHz signals. (bubbles) D2 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Defkalion/MFMP implications for electrolysis? From: dlrober...@aol.com Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2013 15:59:20 -0400 Dennis, do your experiments generally have pulses of currents hitting the active material? It might be that the metal wires are given impulse like kicks that cause them to ring at their resonant frequencies. Dave -Original Message- From: DJ Cravens djcrav...@hotmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Fri, Jul 26, 2013 1:09 pm Subject: RE: [Vo]:Defkalion/MFMP implications for electrolysis? I did not notice external coils. My cells often sing at a few hundred hertz (around 400) and at tens of MHz. I was never sure if it was the reaction itself or just ringing of the components. Letts's empirical model has the reaction rates proceeding via the Lamor frequency rates at the vacancies. That frequency depends on the B field of the reactive volumes. It has the reaction rate at roughly linear with B. I personally have Sm2Co17 powder in my system to increase the B field in the reactive volume. Some here may remember the ICCF 4 (Maui) demo in the parking lot where they were using Sm Co materials. Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2013 13:54:29 -0300 Subject: Re: [Vo]:Defkalion/MFMP implications for electrolysis? From: danieldi...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Because of the above limitations of passive shielding, an alternative used with static or low-frequency fields is active shielding; using a field created by electromagnets to cancel out the ambient field within a volume.[7] Solenoids and Helmholtz coils are types of coils that can be used for this purpose. We saw a solenoid around the reactor, didn't we? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetic_shielding 2013/7/26 DJ Cravens djcrav...@hotmail.com the magnetic field from a dipole falls of as the inverse cube of the distance. it falls off quickly. I am not sure what it would be outside a mu metal shielded device, but I would expect not much would be available for tools across the room. Date
[Vo]:FYI, patent issued
Just since some here might like to know. I was just issued a patent ( http://www.patentgenius.com/patent/8485791.html ) (This makes 6 useless CF patents for me . But the point is it can be done, but that by the time they get through the PTO, what is left is gutted beyond recognition) It is not very good one. It is based on some very old attempts (ca 09-10 my quite period - when some here said I was doing nothing). The PTO limited and gutted it to not much of its original self. I should note that a national lab was able to detect increased alphas from a sample of the material. It uses ceramic materials to isolate the fine metal powder and electrical stimulation through the material. A second similar on should be out shortly with B field control coils around the active region. My 9nm pore carbon based materials are still provisional and pending. I can throw a lot more power through the carbon materials. Hint: you want low energy of vacancy of formation and lowering of the Debye temp for the materials, fcc, fine metals, control of magnetic fields, and high temperatures. D2
RE: [Vo]:Ni 61 does not react. (Ideas why this would be?)
The grounded thick stainless steel container, mu metal, and outer metal insulated box should act as a cage for the Defkalion demo. I expect there was EMI from their HV supply D2 Subject: Re: [Vo]:Ni 61 does not react. (Ideas why this would be?) From: eric.wal...@gmail.com Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2013 11:54:32 -0700 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Point taken about the Faraday cage (I have not heard the original reference, so I am going on hearsay). After I thought about it, I suspect any shielding would be for low-level x-ray and gamma radiation rather than to protect electronics. Eric On Jul 24, 2013, at 7:19, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: Good point Eric. But keep in mind that a Faraday shield would not stop a magnetic field. They can eliminate electrostatic fields, but not magnetic ones unless the field is at a very high frequency. This is an important piece of the puzzle if true. Dave -Original Message- From: Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Wed, Jul 24, 2013 1:45 am Subject: Re: [Vo]:Ni 61 does not react. (Ideas why this would be?) On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 10:25 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: Today, Defkalion stated that the reactor packs huge magnetic fields capable of disrupting all electronic equipment in the general vicinity of the reactor core. The core had to be shielded by a double ply faraday cage. That huge field is produced by nano-particles in a bath of infrared radiation. This makes it sound like there is a current of some kind. If so, that is a point in favor of energetic particles (coherent groups, perhaps) and a point against slow deuterium/helium formation, which, presumably, would not produce currents (unless I'm misunderstanding an implication). Eric
RE: [Vo]:From no info to TMI from Defkalion
http://new.livestream.com/triwu2/Defkalion-US Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2013 09:28:07 -0500 Subject: Re: [Vo]:From no info to TMI from Defkalion From: jedrothw...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com No idea how to get to this on line. Sorry. - Jed
[Vo]:[Vo] New Thermocell
The new thermocell could be used to generate electricity from low grade steam in coal fired power stations at temperatures around 130°C. This would be implemented by having the steam pass over the outer surface of the hot electrode to keep it hot while the other electrode is air or water cooled. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/07/130716092752.htm?utm_source=feedburnerutm_medium=feedutm_campaign=Feed%3A+sciencedaily+%28ScienceDaily%3A+Latest+Science+News%29utm_content=Google+Feedfetcher
RE: [Vo]:Defkalion to demo at NI-WEEK .. can anyone confirm?
I asked Defkalion directly and got a non committal reply- neither confirming or denying. We do not disclose what we will present in NI Week and ICCF-18. I would say that I will be doing a small demo there and the powers that be are aware of that. I don't think it is a mater of eclipsing NI. Dennis From: alain.sep...@gmail.com Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2013 10:45:02 +0200 Subject: Re: [Vo]:Defkalion to demo at NI-WEEK .. can anyone confirm? To: vortex-l@eskimo.com I see no evidence of any LENR related conference, presentation, showcase, unlike last year...Even Defkalion corrected the enthusiams of a reporter (Jeane Manning I think) who announced a demo at NIWeek... It seems NI was afraid that LENR may eclipse NI usual business. 2013/7/15 blaze spinnaker blazespinna...@gmail.com Hi, I was wondering if anyone can confirm or has information about the likelihood of Defkalion demo'ing at NI-WEEK. Cheers, Blaze.
RE: [Vo]:Why Cold Fusion Has to Die
name/word games do not change the physics. How long have circuit diagrams used the direction positive current flow even when we know it is electrons? Historical terms tend to stick. Dennis From: mgi...@gibbs.com Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2013 03:52:49 -0700 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]:Why Cold Fusion Has to Die http://www.forbes.com/sites/markgibbs/2013/07/15/why-cold-fusion-has-to-die/ [mg]
RE: [Vo]:Why Cold Fusion Has to Die
I still label mine- HOPE , hydrogen or proton effect. With the understanding that hydrogen includes all isotopes of H. :) D2 Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2013 12:53:10 -0400 Subject: Re: [Vo]:Why Cold Fusion Has to Die From: jedrothw...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Adrian Ashfield posted an apt comment at Forbes: I don’t see that calling it 'Anomalous Energy System (AES)' gets us much further as it won’t be anomalous once it’s understood. Yes! It is a bit like calling them x-rays where x means unknown. There are countless words with origins based on mistakes, such as American Indian. - Jed
RE: [Vo]:Potassium Carbonate
Use of K carbonate with Ni for generation of excess heat: You might want to check the work of Thermocore circa 1994 and the NASA replication (Tech Memorandum 107167). I would doubt that its use with Ni for heat production via hydrogen reactions could be patentable today. It , as the use of other alkaline materials, is well known to those skilled in the art. i.e. those that actually are working with physical items within the field. D2 From: fran...@datacomm.ch To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2013 11:29:51 +0200 Subject: [Vo]:Potassium Carbonate Likely this has been discussed on list before, but here goes: Concerning his recent patent update, Andrea Rossi apparently removed claims to the catalyst (re: the Cat in E-Cat) and it was suggested that this might have to do with prior use of his secret ingredient (i.e., perhaps he borrowed the recipe from elsewhere or inadvertently rediscovered it). I just noticed that anomalous heat production from Potassium Carbonate in combination with atomic hydrogen and nickel is mentioned in this unclassified 1994 military report: http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/GernertNnascenthyd.pdf(the authors, incidentally, seem to be those today linked with BlackLight Power) Moreover, purportedly leaked notes from a 2012 Defkalion visit again mention Potassium Carbonate: http://ecatnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/Summary-of-Visit-to-Defkalion.pdf So is Potassium Carbonate used in the Rossi/Defkalion devices? And is powdering nickel sufficiently innovative to be protected by a Rossi patent? Would the Potassium Carbonate/Nickel/Hydrogen combination for energy production be under patent somewhere else or is it in the public domain? Charles
RE: [Vo]:Jet Energy - nanor/phusor question
One of the more reassuring things when you see heat from current through a loaded powder is the change in thermal output with applied magnetic fields. That is the thing that help convince me. Mitch, would you care to share any experience with mag. fields? The impedance match of the ceramic based materials is a lot of work. I applaud MS's work and efforts. I basically gave up working at the high impedance levels and moved to carbon based material as a way to isolate the particles. My electronic design skills were not the match for high R's and the lower R is easier for me to work with. If people doubt Mitch's work, I would point out that the NANOR's where run at MIT within the a department dealing with Electronics. I am sure that any obvious errors would be quickly ruled out. D2 Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2013 06:17:33 -0500 Subject: Re: [Vo]:Jet Energy - nanor/phusor question From: jcol...@gmail.com To: m...@theworld.com CC: vortex-l@eskimo.com Dr. Swartz, Thank you for responding. I had not realized the lengths to which you went to try to match the impedance, which must be very difficult with the changing impedance of the active material. With the leads being the same, you would have had times where the control impedance was greater than the active material with the work you did on matching (thus reversing a possible effect of power dissipation in the leads). Have you also had times where more power is put through the active vs. control to see how that affects the Delta T/watt comparison? On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 8:38 PM, Dr. Mitchell Swartz m...@theworld.com wrote: At 04:53 PM 7/4/2013, Jack Cole jcol...@gmail.com wrote: In my electrolysis research, I found that the wire leads for my control runs made a significant difference. Obviously, thinner wire connecting to the joule heater resulted in less power being dissipated in the joule heater and more being dissipated in the wire leads. I had initially thought the wire was thick enough, but I wasn't seeing as much heating as I expected. I switched to thicker wire, and then I saw better heating. That brings me to Jet Energy's (Mitchell Swartz) claims. His active material has a much higher resistance than his control resistance. Could the apparent excess heating in this device be related to the same phenomena (i.e., power dissipation in electrical leads vs. where the measurements are taking place)? Thank you for asking, Jack. Good questions. The active materials are not always higher electrical resistance than the control resistance. We try to make them equal, but the CF/LANR component undergoes changes for several reasons, and the controls are often changed to get them as equal as possible, or multiple thermal ohmic controls are included. On the leads. We use 1 mm diameter leads into the CF/LANR components. The PHUSORs have 1 mm Pt lead and 1mm Pd leads which are shown in the papers from ICCF10. That is mentioned in detail, and shown in photographs, in Swartz, M., Can a Pd/D2O/Pt Device be Made Portable to Demonstrate the Optimal Operating Point?, Condensed Matter Nuclear Science, Proceedings of ICCF-10, eds. Peter L. Hagelstein, Scott, R. Chubb, World Scientific Publishing, NJ, ISBN 981-256-564-6, 29-44; 45-54 (2006). The NANORs have similar size diameter of the leads and are pure copper. They were designed so that input impedance would not be an issue, and their impedances are measured as well. The CF/LANR device's electrical impedance is usually measured by four-terminal measurement. Also the excess heats are verified by several independent systems as discussed in the papers (three usually, for the NANORs). Mitchell Swartz
RE: [Vo]:News about Defkalion Europe...
Aggravated is a good term. They had me down in the Motorola deal for a 6 figure salary plus a car. But then if Jim could not reproduce the beads from scratch then it is likely best that the deal was not done. D2 Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2013 23:53:14 -0400 Subject: Re: [Vo]:News about Defkalion Europe... From: jedrothw...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com DJ Cravens djcrav...@hotmail.com wrote: Jim P. Yes, that was sad. ( I actually thought the number was $30 M from Motorola and $20M from State water heaters ). Was it that much? What a nightmare. I just remember hearing $20 million and feeling SO AGGRAVATED. Yet another lost opportunity for cold fusion. Oy veh. I have been feeling the same way about Rossi, on and off, for a while. Yet another golden opportunity, gradually fading away . . . I feel differently now with the Levi report and the report of production in the U.S. Still nervous, but more optimistic. A lot could still go wrong. I wish I could make those beads. I wish you could too! I don't think that Jim could recreate them either. He told me he could anytime, but he never did. As far as I know he never did. Maybe he never tried? He lost heart after Reding died. That was so awful. It is human drama that causes these lost opportunities. Patterson, IMRA Europe, the NHE project . . . It is always people and their emotions and politics that cause disaster. Someone dies young; someone is broken hearted; or someone is so pig headed and self destructive he would rather die with nothing than give up a few percent of a potential multi-trillion dollar fortune. - Jed
RE: [Vo]:DGT or ECAT? Same Process?
You and your motives are very hard to understand and do not seem inconsistent. First you say ” nothing, anywhere, ever about the kind of device you plan to show at NI Week”. (incomplete sentence) Again you make a big negative assumption about others. How do you know if I do or do not have a writeup?I will grant you it is not complete since my data acq system is in Austin getting a NI program installed and written,but there is a write up and even a folder with the user manuals for the major equipment items and chemical sources.Learn to check facts before you throw out automatic condemnations. When I point out that I have posted descriptions and pictures both via Vortex and CMNS you then back track and say“I mean a scientific paper. In a proceedings or journal.” (incomplete sentence) When I say that is not proper to present papers on demos that have not yet be preformed, you then say“I expect a demo to be accompanied with a complete description of the planned even (sic).” I would normally take that to mean you would not expect a full description until the planned event but that is in direct conflict of what I would normally understand from your first complaint. It is your continued use of incomplete sentences and misspelling in a public forum that make me very hesitant to accept your editing offer. I accept it from the science researchers but they do not profess to be editors. I suggest you write a report, now. You haven't even seen my first report about my demo. Why should I write another report? D2 Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2013 11:09:33 -0400 Subject: Re: [Vo]:DGT or ECAT? Same Process? From: jedrothw...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com DJ Cravens djcrav...@hotmail.com wrote: You obviously try to twist things. Are you really expecting people to present papers and descriptions of demos before the demos? Yes, absolutely. I expect a demo to be accompanied with a complete description of the planned even. Of course it may not come off as planned, but it should be planned. . So you ARE prepared. Good. I suggest you write a report, now. - Jed
RE: [Vo]:DGT or ECAT? Same Process?
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:DGT or ECAT? Same Process? From: dlrober...@aol.com Date: Tue, 9 Jul 2013 22:38:55 -0400 That is very interesting Dennis. If I understand you correctly, you solve the thermal run away problem by extracting heat fast enough to keep the thermal positive feedback loop gain below unity. That should work provided there is enough energy released per pulse of drive to achieve a high enough COP. Yes, that is the way I look at it. You can get large COP at lower outputs and lower temps. For example I have a small unit with no sparking that has infinite COP but only fractional watts of excess. The behavior that you describe would not depend upon very much gain being augmented by thermal feedback as I suspect that Rossi is relying upon. Do you understand why a spark would be so efficient at producing LENR? You mention local heating as a possible factor, which certainly could cause small hot regions to develop. Is this the key to high gain without meltdown? There must be a thermal path out of the region to take away the heat at the right speed. I assume that that could be done by adjusting the particle size and packing, but in my case, the metal host occupies pores within carbon. Once a hot spot is initiated, what prevents the heat from spreading rapidly into the adjacent material and causing a sudden extreme burst of energy? Perhaps the distribution of active hydrogen in the NAE is such that areas capable of spreading the heat only exist in small patches and are easy to extinguish. If this is true, new active regions would need to form in time to take over the process as others die out. Again, I believe the rates have an exponential them. coef. Notice in my case the active regions are isolated via the carbon. So as the heat spreads other regions would not be at as high a temp. and have a much lower heat production rate. The slowly extinguish as the spark moves to other regions. So what functions does the spark perform in a system of this type? Heating of a small region makes a great deal of sense as each spark strikes the surface. Also, do you expect that the spark breaks apart the hydrogen molecules as a second function? I can imagine a rain of protons falling upon the metal due to ionization as another possible piece of the puzzle. The spark just causes very high local temps. I don't really see the spark functioning to ionize the H (my case D and H). I think it is the H already in the lattice that reacts. Has there been evidence of enhanced reaction caused be the magnetic field associated with the currents entering or leaving the metal surfaces? If I recall, DGT speaks of dipole behavior of Ryndberg hydrogen helping out. Can you describe any evidence of this? Yes, it seems that the reaction is almost linear in respect to the B field. (also linear with mass, and expon. in terms of Energy of vacancy formation. (that is why Ag helps Pd system and Cu and Pd . helps Ni systems.) I believe that the H occupies or must move through the vacancies. The occupation of H in a vacancy is likely in a controlling pathway. Your bowl shaped targets are quite interesting to consider. Does the bowl tend to spread out the spark contact region? Yes, think of the plasma globe type lights. I have a central electrode (actually W rod held by a Cu tube). It is within a brass sphere holding my material. But the material is only stuck to the lower half on the wall. From what you describe it appears that your reaction is almost entirely a surface effect. Would you expect a very thin layer of active metal to work in the same manner? A thin coating layered upon another passive metal might be helpful in preventing a large scale thermal event. Maybe one of Axils heat pipes underneath could extract the heat quickly enough to enhance the net energy density. Yes, one configuration (I have 4) has variable heat conductive heat pipes. I have to juggle the heat extraction and production. (changes contact areas) Do you have to worry about the destruction of your active material as the process operates? If I turn it up to much my material is destroyed. In one device, I use internal B fields (added Sm 2 Co 17 powder) and it will demagnetize. Are you planning to demonstrate one of your devices at the conference? At NI Week (Booth 922). It will be just a golly gee type of demo not a science prove it demo. Small in the few watt range. I hope to be upstaged by Defkalion. Dave -Original Message- From: DJ Cravens djcrav...@hotmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tue, Jul 9, 2013 9:29 pm Subject: RE: [Vo]:DGT or ECAT? Same Process? My take on their process is that the control and the sparks are related to the positive heat coef. of the reaction and the rate at which the heat is extracted. My best empirical model shows an almost
RE: [Vo]:News about Defkalion Europe...
Jed, Not everything is intended for science. I see no reason that Defkalion should be assumed to be required to display the science behind their inventions. I would love to know their data, their theoretical models, . but.. When was the last time you saw CocaCola list their ingredients, or Boeing their data sheets and methods of heat treating rotor blades,. or Intel's methods of etching circuits, or the spec sheets for the Keyhole satellite systems . are not science and not engineering - they can be using very advanced science or engineering that you do not know about. Yes, it is great when science is shared but it can still be science and engineering without that. Dennis Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2013 09:27:10 -0400 Subject: Re: [Vo]:News about Defkalion Europe... From: jedrothw...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Frederic Gilardone is quoted: Currently, the temperatures obtained are of the order of 600 ° C in the secondary circuit through the use of appropriate thermal fluids. The reactor can be activated and deactivated in a short period of time and the reaction is quite mastered (about 20 to 30 minutes after start). . . .What is it with the people who visit Defkalion?!? They don't have wristwatches? They don't carry pens or a pad of paper?!? About 20 to 30 minutes -- what the hell is that supposed to mean? Which is it? 20 or 30? How many times did you observe it? Did you write down the start time and duration to full power, or did you stand there gaping? On the order of 600°C means what? 550°C? 670°C +/- 30°C? What kind of calorimetry do they use? What is the flow rate? How has it been calibrated? What instruments do they use to measure input power? This is terribly annoying. Dekalion has is annoying! To my knowledge they have never published a calibration curve or any other qualitative data. These impressionistic reports are not science and not engineering. They are public relations fluff, like the science reporting in the USA Today newspaper. - Jed
RE: [Vo]:News about Defkalion Europe...
yes, if you want data - go there and take it. Dennis Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2013 11:34:19 -0300 Subject: Re: [Vo]:News about Defkalion Europe... From: danieldi...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sign an NDA, visit them and stop complaining! 2013/7/10 Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com reaction is quite mastered (about 20 to 30 minutes after start). . . . What is it with the people who visit Defkalion?!? They don't have wristwatches? They don't carry pens or a pad of paper?!? About 20 to 30 minutes -- what the hell is that supposed to mean? Which is it? 20 or 30? How many times did you observe it? Did you write down the start time and duration to full power, or did you stand there gaping? On the order of 600°C means what? 550°C? 670°C +/- 30°C? -- Daniel Rocha - rjdanieldi...@gmail.com
RE: [Vo]:DGT or ECAT? Same Process?
?? yes it produces sparks or arcs or discharge I am not sure of the technical variations. I am using a modified strobe light circuit. I cannot see into the good brass sphere. I do have a cut away mockup of the sphere (I will have that with my demo). The terminal ending moves among the various locations. Most of the time the sparks terminate on one of the metal containing carbon particles. They are higher than the binder that holds them. There is a little more to it than that- actually the lower half of the sphere has an internal insulation layer to help it from too much heat loss, a conductive connection between the brass sphere and the conductive binder holding the particles. The upper half is empty or should I say filled with gas so there can be convection movement of the gas. One think I did learn from Les Case is that there must be convection or flow of H through the material, or mixing of the powders in the gas. (note: as mentioned in some of my earlier post, I am using mesopore carbon to contain my metal host lattice - which is a doped metal to lower its E of vac. formation - I have not bought into the transmutation of Nickel idea and am using mostly D not H) The sphere I will have at the NI demo is self sustaining at low power. But only when brought up in temp. I will be holding it at 75C in an Al bead dry bath. You can compare its temp to the control sphere. I hope to have one infinite COP (the spheres in a constant temp bath) device and a low COP higher power device. I will be lucky to get to 1.33. I have not evaluated the COP level for that one. Again, it is just for the unwashed masses and not as a science item to produce data. It took me a while to figure out something visual for the public to show heat production and compare it to a control. Something that does not require any calculation- just comparisons. (but yes, a passerby could put on a clamp amp meter if they enjoy that kind of thing.) I know it will tick of Jed, but it is just for fun and to stimulate public interest in the field - nothing more. D2 Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2013 13:28:09 -0400 Subject: Re: [Vo]:DGT or ECAT? Same Process? From: janap...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Yes, think of the plasma globe type lights. I have a central electrode (actually W rod held by a Cu tube). It is within a brass sphere holding my material. But the material is only stuck to the lower half on the wall. If this info is not closely held, does this electrode produce a spark? If not what does it do? On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 10:42 AM, DJ Cravens djcrav...@hotmail.com wrote: To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:DGT or ECAT? Same Process? From: dlrober...@aol.com Date: Tue, 9 Jul 2013 22:38:55 -0400 That is very interesting Dennis. If I understand you correctly, you solve the thermal run away problem by extracting heat fast enough to keep the thermal positive feedback loop gain below unity. That should work provided there is enough energy released per pulse of drive to achieve a high enough COP. Yes, that is the way I look at it. You can get large COP at lower outputs and lower temps. For example I have a small unit with no sparking that has infinite COP but only fractional watts of excess. The behavior that you describe would not depend upon very much gain being augmented by thermal feedback as I suspect that Rossi is relying upon. Do you understand why a spark would be so efficient at producing LENR? You mention local heating as a possible factor, which certainly could cause small hot regions to develop. Is this the key to high gain without meltdown? There must be a thermal path out of the region to take away the heat at the right speed. I assume that that could be done by adjusting the particle size and packing, but in my case, the metal host occupies pores within carbon. Once a hot spot is initiated, what prevents the heat from spreading rapidly into the adjacent material and causing a sudden extreme burst of energy? Perhaps the distribution of active hydrogen in the NAE is such that areas capable of spreading the heat only exist in small patches and are easy to extinguish. If this is true, new active regions would need to form in time to take over the process as others die out. Again, I believe the rates have an exponential them. coef. Notice in my case the active regions are isolated via the carbon. So as the heat spreads other regions would not be at as high a temp. and have a much lower heat production rate. The slowly extinguish as the spark moves to other regions. So what functions does the spark perform in a system of this type? Heating of a small region makes a great deal of sense as each spark strikes the surface. Also, do you expect that the spark breaks apart the hydrogen molecules as a second function? I can imagine a rain of protons falling upon the metal due to ionization as another
RE: [Vo]:DGT or ECAT? Same Process?
Thanks, but I am not really trying to compete with DGT or Rossi. I am just doing it to see if it can be done, and to give my swansong farewell before I retire to my arm chair. That is enough for me. I tried the commercialization path and got burned. never again. I have published papers on practical methods to observe the effect. The knowledge base is there for anyone who wants to look. I had a working device on a board table of a major corp, (actually two different companies) and had their technicians measure and verify and it went nowhere - back in the CETI days. I don't believe a word that Jed says about corporations jumping in and throwing money at commercialization. The proof and methodology is already there. We must first change the public perception. :) If you show up at NI, stop by, introduce yourself and I will heat up a cup of tea for you. (OK only COP 1.1 - I hope- but still ) :) I really do want DGT to upstage me. Dennis To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:DGT or ECAT? Same Process? From: dlrober...@aol.com Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2013 14:21:37 -0400 Thanks for the clarification Dennis. I wish you luck at the NI booth and perhaps DGT will have something that trumps yours, but it appears that you are in the running. Dave -Original Message- From: DJ Cravens djcrav...@hotmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Wed, Jul 10, 2013 10:42 am Subject: RE: [Vo]:DGT or ECAT? Same Process? To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:DGT or ECAT? Same Process? From: dlrober...@aol.com Date: Tue, 9 Jul 2013 22:38:55 -0400 That is very interesting Dennis. If I understand you correctly, you solve the thermal run away problem by extracting heat fast enough to keep the thermal positive feedback loop gain below unity. That should work provided there is enough energy released per pulse of drive to achieve a high enough COP. Yes, that is the way I look at it. You can get large COP at lower outputs and lower temps. For example I have a small unit with no sparking that has infinite COP but only fractional watts of excess. The behavior that you describe would not depend upon very much gain being augmented by thermal feedback as I suspect that Rossi is relying upon. Do you understand why a spark would be so efficient at producing LENR? You mention local heating as a possible factor, which certainly could cause small hot regions to develop. Is this the key to high gain without meltdown? There must be a thermal path out of the region to take away the heat at the right speed. I assume that that could be done by adjusting the particle size and packing, but in my case, the metal host occupies pores within carbon. Once a hot spot is initiated, what prevents the heat from spreading rapidly into the adjacent material and causing a sudden extreme burst of energy? Perhaps the distribution of active hydrogen in the NAE is such that areas capable of spreading the heat only exist in small patches and are easy to extinguish. If this is true, new active regions would need to form in time to take over the process as others die out. Again, I believe the rates have an exponential them. coef. Notice in my case the active regions are isolated via the carbon. So as the heat spreads other regions would not be at as high a temp. and have a much lower heat production rate. The slowly extinguish as the spark moves to other regions. So what functions does the spark perform in a system of this type? Heating of a small region makes a great deal of sense as each spark strikes the surface. Also, do you expect that the spark breaks apart the hydrogen molecules as a second function? I can imagine a rain of protons falling upon the metal due to ionization as another possible piece of the puzzle. The spark just causes very high local temps. I don't really see the spark functioning to ionize the H (my case D and H). I think it is the H already in the lattice that reacts. Has there been evidence of enhanced reaction caused be the magnetic field associated with the currents entering or leaving the metal surfaces? If I recall, DGT speaks of dipole behavior of Ryndberg hydrogen helping out. Can you describe any evidence of this? Yes, it seems that the reaction is almost linear in respect to the B field. (also linear with mass, and expon. in terms of Energy of vacancy formation. (that is why Ag helps Pd system and Cu and Pd . helps Ni systems.) I believe that the H occupies or must move through the vacancies. The occupation of H in a vacancy is likely in a controlling pathway. Your bowl shaped targets are quite interesting to consider. Does the bowl tend to spread out the spark contact region? Yes, think of the plasma globe type lights. I have a central electrode (actually W rod held by a Cu tube
RE: [Vo]:Rossi update
exactly. That is why effort must be made in public acceptance not company acceptance. Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2013 14:55:38 -0400 Subject: Re: [Vo]:Rossi update From: jedrothw...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: Jed, Rossi might still be working out the remaining bugs in his design. That is reason enough to keep his cards close. I expect he is. Based on the history of similar ground-breaking, radically new technology such as telegraphs, railroads, Diesel engines and aircraft, I doubt he is capable of working out the remaining bugs. If the Wright brothers had tried to do this themselves, at the pace they were working, the first practical airplane would have appeared sometime around 1930 I suppose. And they were incredibly fast workers! They made several prototypes a year, some of them with radical improvements, especially in 1905. Airplanes began making rapid progress after 1908 because many people began working on them. Most of those people were far less skilled than the Wrights. A few, such as Sikorsky and Sopwith, were more skilled, especially with regard to practical applications and manufacturing. That is why progress suddenly leaped forward. It takes a lot of people to make progress, because most of them are wrong, and they work on dead-end approaches. In 1911, three years after the world learned that airplanes are real, the Scientific American reported there were roughly 500,000 people working frantically on aviation. Yet airplanes were by no means practical in 1911. In 1955, three years after the transistor was revealed, dozens of companies and thousands of people were working frantically on transistors, but for most applications they were still not practical. Various smart people such as Henry, Wheatstone and Morse invented the telegraph from 1809 to 1835, but it went nowhere until a large group of smart, skilled and determined people such as Ezra Cornell spent large sums of money and made many mistakes building a telegraph line from Baltimore to Washington. They finally got that work in 1844. Morse could never have solved all the problems himself. No single person working in isolation in a laboratory could have. You had to be out in the field. I mean an actual field, floundering around in the mud. They tried putting cables underground, an interesting approach but a hundred years ahead of its time. Then they tried erecting telegraph polls for the first time in history. Imagine doing that when no one has ever thought of what a telegraph poll is, how it might hold a wire, what it should look like, what it should be made from, or how it should be guyed up. You learn that sort of thing by doing, not by theory. Go look at a telephone poll and ponder this. You will see it is a lot more complicated than you might think. That is just one of many problems they had to solve. I do not think that Rossi alone can make cold fusion practical. I think it will take thousands or hundreds of thousands of people, just as it did with every other breakthrough of this nature. - Jed
RE: [Vo]:DGT or ECAT? Same Process?
I do not want to reveal my formulation at this time. However, I would say that K and other things that can lower the energy of vacancy formation are useful. I prefer Li if I use an alkaline. I often reduce my metal after placed in C with Li Al hydride. I have tried to use Ni foam (http://mtixtl.com/nickelfoamforbatterycathodesubstrate1mlengthx300mmwidthx1.6mm.aspx ) I could not get it alone to work for me. It does if plated with other materials. But only marginally so. However recall I am doing things with D (or D with H impurities) and not H. I don't think that the spark is required. After all I have a warm sphere that sits and stays warm for months on end with on input. (but only if there is space available for convection flow) I think it is just giving a local hot spot. Part of that is from the laser/electrochemical experiments. Perhaps it helps pump things in and out of the material. I have turned to loaded Carbon particles. Since I can make it easier and keep the particles from sintering. Also I can make it in bulk. (you can get buckets/barrels of the stuff) I started with ceramics to isolate the particles but I could not get enough current to pass. Also the Carbon helps me keep the metal on the reduced side. What would be great to try (but costly) would be to try an IR laser to locally heat areas. D2 Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2013 14:58:53 -0400 Subject: Re: [Vo]:DGT or ECAT? Same Process? From: janap...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com As strange as it may sound at first, your approach is similar to what DGT is doing. DGT uses Ni foam to protect their powder from the high heat of the spark as you are doing. DGT: “We then had to protect the modified Ni crystals from the high temperatures around the glow discharges (3500 K at its surface, 14000 K in the kernel)[4] distributing them in a special designed “cage” of Ni foam of the same size (5 microns, 200 microns of porous)” Alain Sepeda said in a post dated may 30 I found that Nelson report reporting KCO3 usage by DGT: http://ecatnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/Summary-of-Visit-to-Defkalion.pdf From A to B, the temperature of the active chamber continues to rise prior to initiation of triggering. This is explained as a chemical reaction occurring between the 3 components added to the Nickel Powder to enhance the reaction 1 of which is Potassium Carbonate. I would be interested in a verification of this additive in your reactor. Could you add some Potassium Carbonate to your process to see if the production of Rydberg matter by spark improves your reactivity? On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 2:16 PM, DJ Cravens djcrav...@hotmail.com wrote: ?? yes it produces sparks or arcs or discharge I am not sure of the technical variations. I am using a modified strobe light circuit. I cannot see into the good brass sphere. I do have a cut away mockup of the sphere (I will have that with my demo). The terminal ending moves among the various locations. Most of the time the sparks terminate on one of the metal containing carbon particles. They are higher than the binder that holds them. There is a little more to it than that- actually the lower half of the sphere has an internal insulation layer to help it from too much heat loss, a conductive connection between the brass sphere and the conductive binder holding the particles. The upper half is empty or should I say filled with gas so there can be convection movement of the gas. One think I did learn from Les Case is that there must be convection or flow of H through the material, or mixing of the powders in the gas. (note: as mentioned in some of my earlier post, I am using mesopore carbon to contain my metal host lattice - which is a doped metal to lower its E of vac. formation - I have not bought into the transmutation of Nickel idea and am using mostly D not H) The sphere I will have at the NI demo is self sustaining at low power. But only when brought up in temp. I will be holding it at 75C in an Al bead dry bath. You can compare its temp to the control sphere. I hope to have one infinite COP (the spheres in a constant temp bath) device and a low COP higher power device. I will be lucky to get to 1.33. I have not evaluated the COP level for that one. Again, it is just for the unwashed masses and not as a science item to produce data. It took me a while to figure out something visual for the public to show heat production and compare it to a control. Something that does not require any calculation- just comparisons. (but yes, a passerby could put on a clamp amp meter if they enjoy that kind of thing.) I know it will tick of Jed, but it is just for fun and to stimulate public interest in the field - nothing more. D2 Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2013 13:28:09 -0400 Subject: Re: [Vo]:DGT or ECAT? Same Process? From: janap...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Yes, think of the plasma globe type
RE: [Vo]:DGT or ECAT? Same Process?
re read what I wrote. I said a board room not a hotel room. It was a board room with board members, president of a company, technical advisors showing the results of the tests. It is things like that make inventors not trust you or your motives. I personal resent you calling activities disgraceful and horrible. I thought that Vortex rules prevented such things. I will defend myself You keep making claims of being able to bring mega buck and big companies. You talk about the need to save the planet. But then you say you will not even sign a NDA. Why not sign, go convince yourself and then bring your big mega buck friends and let them see it. Or would they not believe you. You use your personal NDA views as an excuse for doing nothing. Why do you think others are wrong if they do not give you data when you won't even show yourself trustworthy? You do not publish your results.-You are totally wrong and misleading. You keep perpetuating this mistruth as if by saying many times it will come true. This is why many inventors do not trust you. You have or had several of my papers on lenr canr. You know that! Do you deny it? I just did a search on LENR CANR and find 122 hits. I have papers, and people know them and reference them. My guess is you will scrub them now like Mitch S. But you keep saying these things. You also know I gave the review and keynote speech at ICCF 14 If you don't believe it, here is a link to SK's video of it http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mskdJ31FXYg It was a review and things needed to see the effect and designed especially to help young researchers a start. I also gave papers at talk at ICCF10, 4, 7,.. coauthored papers with Peter H in MIT tech etc. Review facts before you attack. Stick to the facts not dreams in your sleep of how you will save the field by mega buck friends. Dennis Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2013 15:20:44 -0400 Subject: Re: [Vo]:DGT or ECAT? Same Process? From: jedrothw...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com DJ Cravens djcrav...@hotmail.com wrote: I had a working device on a board table of a major corp, (actually two different companies) and had their technicians measure and verify and it went nowhere - back in the CETI days. Are you are talking about the CETI demonstration they showed in the hotel next to Disneyland? The one that was supposed to impress Motorola. That was a DISGRACE!!! It was horrible. They did not even have a written description of it! When I wrote one, they used mine, for crying out loud. Without permission. This was after they almost threw me out because I wanted to their temperature (which was right) and flow (which was wrong). And why was it so bad? For the most idiotic reason imaginable. Patterson and Reding told me that they deliberately designed that to be unimpressive. They wanted to sway Motorola but not excite anyone else's interest. It was supposed to be carefully calibrated to be bad -- dreadful, really -- but just a smidgen good enough to bring in $20 million. It was enough to make me throw up. When I told Chris Tinsley about it on the phone that night I was hopping mad. Furious. By the time I finished we were both laughing hysterically. Chris and I had had experience doing demonstrations of products at trade shows. We knew a disaster when we saw it. If that was your idea of a demonstration you have no clue. I don't believe a word that Jed says about corporations jumping in and throwing money at commercialization. I repeat, if you think a corporation or any sane investor would put money into something as poorly presented as that, you have no clue. That demonstration made Rossi look like a consummate professional. I will grant the thing was probably working as claimed. As far as I could tell, it was. But if it had been done properly, with proper instruments, a written description and a professional presentation script, I could have used to that device to convince any corporation on earth. I could have brought in $100 million in my sleep. I offered to do this but Patterson rejected all offers of help, just as Rossi and others have done. Patterson told me he wanted a 100% market share. He got that, and took it to the grave with him. 100% of nothing. The proof and methodology is already there. We must first change the public perception. Oh, please. You have NEVER TRIED to change public perception. You will not even upload a paper to LENR-CANR.org. You have not lifted a finger to change public perception. I have done that. You have contributed nothing because you hide your light under a bushel. (You do not publish your results.) A person who does research but does not publish is no scientist. Rossi is no scientist, but he does research and tries to sell, so he is a businessman, instead. You are neither. Patterson was neither. - Jed
RE: [Vo]:News about Defkalion Europe...
We don't know if they are or are not planning a demo. At least one person of merit has said that they plan a engineering type paper at ICCF and a low key demo at NI Week. But that is rumor. I have tried and tried to get confirmation. I feeling is that they want a surprise factor. Also there is the cabbie award. Perhaps they are planning a demo for that one. I personally think that we need the public on our side and that means taking demos and information to a new audience. But I guess it depends on your desired outcome. If you just think of money then you may take a different tactic than if you are just after public awareness. I personally think that public awareness must proceed the other steps. Speaking in terms of linear algebra if you want to span a new vector space, then you must use new vectors that have components orthogonal to your existing ones. That is, if you want results of acceptance different from what has been occurring for the last 24 years, then you must do something different and for a different set of individuals and not seek to comfort and appease the same old group. Pleasing Vortex, CMNS,.. is not going to change much. It may even be required to go against the existing group wisdom to achieve new and different results. Group wisdom is Ok for activities closely related to the group but you must often go outside of that for outside acceptance. D2 Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2013 17:40:26 -0400 Subject: Re: [Vo]:News about Defkalion Europe... From: janap...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Maybe DGT is trying to perfect a common man type of demo, to advance the evaluation of their product above the outrages slings and arrows of the experts.
RE: [Vo]:DGT or ECAT? Same Process?
You again do not check before replying. You complained that DGT did not send you their data, yet now you say you are drowning in data. Make up you mind. NDA. Re read. I did not say for you to give your claimed big buck friends any NDA information other than to let them know you are convinced with what you saw. If they trust you, they would send people to check themselves. My guess is that your claimed connections do not exist. Name them. You want others to name their business contacts. nothing, anywhere, ever about the kind of device you plan to show at NI Week. --You might want to read some postings on Vortex. There is even a link to a picture of one of my devices.I think it is as basic as it gets. One sphere with a sample hotter than the control in the same constant temperature bath. There are also descriptions of the device. I even gave the volumes, make of the bath.. see for example: http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg83809.html Check your facts before your attacks. I have not described the second device. Only that I hope it to be visually interesting for a passerby. You assume too much. How do you know if I have funding or not and for what? You need to avoid attacking so much and not criticize other's path of actions as though you alone know what is best for others. If DGT wants to go the NDA route then let them. You do not know their or anyone else's constraints or who might be helping them. And never, ever, have you offered to help write or correct one of my papers. You have only presented attacks and criticisms.. Fact. D2 Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2013 19:34:28 -0400 Subject: Re: [Vo]:DGT or ECAT? Same Process? From: jedrothw...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com DJ Cravens djcrav...@hotmail.com wrote: re read what I wrote. I said a board room not a hotel room. In that case I know nothing about it. I personal resent you calling activities disgraceful and horrible. I resent seeing people piss away $20 million. I thought that Vortex rules prevented such things. I will defend myself I am talking about Patterson. You played only a bit role. You keep making claims of being able to bring mega buck and big companies. You talk about the need to save the planet. But then you say you will not even sign a NDA. Why not sign, go convince yourself and then bring your big mega buck friends and let them see it. You have that backward! I would not need to sign an NDA if I am presenting the information. As it happens, I have no secret information. Or would they not believe you. They believe me. That's why people download so many papers. You use your personal NDA views as an excuse for doing nothing. I do plenty! See: http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/RothwellJthefuturem.pdf Why do you think others are wrong if they do not give you data when you won't even show yourself trustworthy? I am drowning in data! You do not publish your results.-You are totally wrong and misleading. You keep perpetuating this mistruth as if by saying many times it will come true. Let me rephrase: You have not published your results in many years as far as I know. Perhaps I have not kept up with your publications. This is why many inventors do not trust you. Who would that be? You have or had several of my papers on lenr canr. You know that! Do you deny it? Nothing after 2008 and nothing, anywhere, ever about the kind of device you plan to show at NI Week. You have been talking about it for years but as far as I know you have not published so much as a calibration curve. And yet you expect people to magically know about it! I just did a search on LENR CANR and find 122 hits. I have papers, and people know them and reference them. My guess is you will scrub them now like Mitch S. But you keep saying these things. Mitch S. sent me two letters saying he would sue me if I uploaded his papers or quoted from them. If you send me letters like that, yes, I will scrub your papers. You don't even have to threaten a lawsuit. You tell me to remove them and they will be gone the next day. Several authors asked me to remove papers, usually just one paper, leaving the others. I have not removed any other papers for any other reason. - Jed
RE: [Vo]:News about Defkalion Europe...
When people ignore you, you blame them. I did not say people in general ignore me. Just you. You say I have no papers and no one ref. them. Yet by your own site: a search shows 115 listings from Cravens. I take that as an indication of number of papers and references to them. I am not as well funded as McKubre and Storms but they only have listings in the 300's, Celani 151. (notice you only have 159 and it is your site.) I do not see that as people most people ignoring me. Do not twist things to try to make a point. I disagree that only an engineer can understand a CF demo. I think that many non-engineers will understand that there is something going on if one sphere stays warmer than another for 5+ days. They may question what is in there, but they will know something is going on. You tend to down play others- public included. You should try to be smart enough to look beyond grammar and look at the science. I still take your comments like , You, Dennis, sometimes submit papers and put on a presentations (sic) not fit for a middle school science fair, as condescending an arrogant and a violation of Vortex rules. Please avoid personal attacks. Notice your own lack of proper English (above) while you are attack me. D2 PS, I do not think I have Failed as you put it. I think I have done considerable with the resources and time available to me. We cannot work in major labs, have secretaries/grad students, have mega buck rich friends ... Walk in another's moccasins before you condemn. Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2013 19:01:03 -0400 Subject: Re: [Vo]:News about Defkalion Europe... From: jedrothw...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com DJ Cravens djcrav...@hotmail.com wrote: I personally think that we need the public on our side and that means taking demos and information to a new audience. But I guess it depends on your desired outcome. If you just think of money then you may take a different tactic than if you are just after public awareness. Nonsense. That is a false dichotomy. At this stage the only members of the public who will understand a demonstration are scientists and engineers. A academic presentation to them is practically indistinguishable to a technical sales presentation you would make to get funding from any agency or investor. 98% of what you need to say or demonstrate at the NI conference is what you would say or do when meeting with venture capitalists, because the capitalists would bring a group of scientists and engineers to evaluate your claim. If you cannot do a demonstration that impresses people at the NI conference you will NEVER impress the general public and you will never impress a funding agency. From what I have seen of your work, the reason you fail is not because the test itself is unconvincing, but because you make no effort to present it properly. You don't even bother spell English words correctly, for crying out loud. When I and others offer to help you blow us away! Many professors write badly. They are always late. The papers are often disorganized. The spelling is awful and the use of Microsoft Word formatting is a nightmare. Here's the thing though: a department secretary or someone else ghost writes for professors. I have ghost written many papers for many professors. You, Dennis, sometimes submit papers and put on a presentations not fit for a middle school science fair. You don't bother to make a video or even do a spell check. Okay some of your papers have been masterpieces, as Fleischmann said -- and as I plan to say at ICCF18. But your efforts are uneven. First impressions are important! People judge things by presentation and spelling. This is something you should have learned in high school. When people ignore you, you blame them. Grow up! - Jed
RE: [Vo]:DGT or ECAT? Same Process?
What would I tell them? If they are real friends as you claim and they think you trustworthy, then it should be simple enough to say something like Kim said - that is, I have been there, I have seen their system, and it looks like they have something. Stop the excuses. I have never complained about lack of funding. That is only a accusation you continually make - as if everyone is after money. Yes there are times I have not been funded, but those times were good - nothing to complain about. Only money grabbers would think that statement of lack of funding is a complaint. Wise up to the real world where some people do things for reasons other than money. Get a heart and try to understand. I see you back tracking, which is your usually style. You definitely said nothing, anywhere. You typically attack then back track. You have edited some of my papers- true. But not by my request and have never offered to help. I would have accepted. But you are right in general. That is why this will be the end of my CF adventure. As you have pointed out, my papers do not do the field any favors, and my research should only be done in big labs. The era of the amateur is coming to a close. That is clear. D2 Who said I was forced to retire? Again you throw out insults without fact. I am retiring- True, but forced - False. Only in your mind. Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2013 21:28:23 -0400 Subject: Re: [Vo]:DGT or ECAT? Same Process? From: jedrothw...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com DJ Cravens djcrav...@hotmail.com wrote: You again do not check before replying. You complained that DGT did not send you their data, yet now you say you are drowning in data. I am not complaining that DGT has not sent me data. I don't give a damn about that. If they don't want me to know, I don't want to hear about it. I am complaining that they are making fools of themselves and presenting perfume advertisements at ICCF conferences instead of physics papers. It is embarrassing to watch. NDA. Re read. I did not say for you to give your claimed big buck friends any NDA information other than to let them know you are convinced with what you saw. What would I tell them? Someone has made a claim for years but has never published a paper describing it? Any investor would dismiss that, instantly. I might as well recommend they work with Patterson or Case, despite the fact that they are dead. I mean that a person who provides no rigorous, organized information in a paper might as well not exist. Gabbing about something on Vortex does not count. nothing, anywhere, ever about the kind of device you plan to show at NI Week. --You might want to read some postings on Vortex. There is even a link to a picture of one of my devices. I mean a scientific paper. In a proceedings or journal. I am pretty sure you know I mean that. Since I am aware of the existence of your claims, obviously I heard about them on Vortex or somewhere like that. You assume too much. How do you know if I have funding or not and for what? Well you sure have complained enough about not having funding, and being forced to retire! If DGT wants to go the NDA route then let them. How can I stop them? If they want to make themselves look like amateurs at ICCF conferences I can't stop that either. If you want to present papers with spelling errors I can't stop that, either, unless they make me the copy editor again. You and DGC are not the only ones doing this. In cold fusion many people run around acting unprofessional, and then they get upset because people don't respect them. Papers are often filled with spelling errors, contradictions, incorrect units, incomplete thoughts, made-up-terminology and other mistakes that no scientist or engineer should make. I have probably read more papers than anyone but Storms and Britz. I know how abysmal the documents and most of the research in this field is. That is typical of science in this stage, but the people who write that are not doing themselves any favors. You do not know their or anyone else's constraints or who might be helping them. And never, ever, have you offered to help write or correct one of my papers. You have only presented attacks and criticisms.. Fact. Oh Yes I Have. And I repeat that offer here and now. Furthermore, I have extensively edited your papers and the ones you co-authored. - Jed
RE: [Vo]:News about Defkalion Europe...
Voice input and typos are fact of life for me. Perhaps you should read and edit your material before you hit send. You do not enough resources (sic) You have a responsibility to get resources, succeed and to bring this technology to the world, if it is within your power to do so. Why don't you see your own need then to forget your NDA aversions, go to DGT, witness a demo, measure what you will, and then tell your claimed friends simply that you have seen it and they should see for themselves. YOU might could save 10's of thousands of lives a day IF you really have the mega buck friends you claim you have and can release millions in your sleep. Why do you always see things for others but not for yourself. If you believe Rossi and DFT as you claim and have the friend that you claim, then do it. Many people claim they have rich friends and can do such things but they don't and it is all just talk. If You do not then this conversation is a waste. D2 Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2013 21:57:09 -0400 Subject: Re: [Vo]:News about Defkalion Europe... From: jedrothw...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com I still take your comments like , You, Dennis, sometimes submit papers and put on a presentations (sic) not fit for a middle school science fair . . . Voice input and typos are fact of life for me. , as condescending an arrogant and a violation of Vortex rules. Please avoid personal attacks. I am talking about your papers, not you. It is my opinion that some of them are substandard. That's not a personal attack. PS, I do not think I have Failed as you put it. I think I have done considerable with the resources and time available to me. You do not enough resources. You should have gotten more. You have a responsibility to get resources, succeed and to bring this technology to the world, if it is within your power to do so. If you fail because you refuse to write a paper or use the spell check, that is as much your fault as any sloppy mistake you might make in the lab. We cannot work in major labs, have secretaries/grad students, have mega buck rich friends ... You can. If you have what you claim, you can. I think you, and other cold fusion researchers, have a social responsibility to do so. A person who has a device capable of saving 50,000 lives a week should not hesitate to do whatever is within his power to perfect that device. If it means you must write papers, spell check them, present the information and get funding then that's what you should do, however much you dislike those activities. If you do not have what you claim, this conversation is a waste of time and a farce. Many cold fusion researchers do not have what they claim. They think they do, but they are wrong. - Jed
RE: [Vo]:DGT or ECAT? Same Process?
Strange, you expect a write up of a demo before it happens. You are not realistic. D2 Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2013 21:28:23 -0400 Subject: Re: [Vo]:DGT or ECAT? Same Process? From: jedrothw...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com nothing, anywhere, ever about the kind of device you plan to show at NI Week. --You might want to read some postings on Vortex. There is even a link to a picture of one of my devices. I mean a scientific paper. In a proceedings or journal. I am pretty sure you know I mean that. Since I am aware of the existence of your claims, obviously I heard about them on Vortex or somewhere like that.
RE: [Vo]:DGT or ECAT? Same Process?
Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2013 22:21:47 -0400 Subject: Re: [Vo]:DGT or ECAT? Same Process? From: jedrothw...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com I have never complained about lack of funding. This is like saying you complain of thirst, not that you have no water. You complain you cannot do the work. You complain you are forced to retire. You cannot do the work because you do not have money. If you had money, you could do the work. Point to any complaint other than your attacks. Again your statement of forced to retire is a lie an insulting. (I do admit that my wife wants me to back of experiments with nano powders due to health safety.) Your statement of not working because I don't have the money, is a lie. I HAVE worked without getting money for it. That is not a complaint. Your analogy is weak. You do not have to be thirsty just because you have no water. Sometimes you just don't need water. And sometimes you can have things beside water. You don't always need money. There are other rewards at exploring the unknown. Only someone who totally misunderstands or tries to twist things would say that not being externally funded is a complaint. Only someone who totally misunderstands me would say I am a money grubber, or that I want you to get money for its own sake. I do not give a damn whether you live on welfare and you have $10 in the bank. It is no concern of mine. My only agenda is to see that cold fusion succeeds. I am in favor any step (sic) to promote that, including funding people who hate money. It is a means to an end. Perhaps you should work on your style because I misunderstand you. You tend to use the money argument over and over. If you care as you say, then talk to your so called friends. Either you are the type that people would believe you at your word or you have not shown yourself to be truly trustworthy, or they are only imaginary fair weather friends. - Jed
RE: [Vo]:DGT or ECAT? Same Process?
You obviously try to twist things. Are you really expecting people to present papers and descriptions of demos before the demos? No company does that. Programmer?? For example, do you expect a programmer to post source code before the public release and show? Or release a journal paper and presentation before the demo of a new program/ like a video game. Or a car company to present technical specs before they take it to a show. They just give general descriptions or perhaps a screen shot. That does not mean the have not tested the car or have not run a program and even tested a beta product. Why oh why do you conclude that just because I (or anyone) do not tell YOU ever thing before a demo that I do not have data, and other information? If you had not been kicked out of CMNS (or run off?) , you would have even been able to find the months of prep leading up to this, including a shot of my booth back wall and even what music selection that would be used as background. Strange expectations and as always, assuming the worst in others instead of hoping for the best in others. D2 PS, I expect to be writing up an article for IE about NI Week (by request). But that must wait till after the event, since Defkalion is still an unknown. (will they or won't they, and what will it be) Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2013 22:32:03 -0400 Subject: Re: [Vo]:DGT or ECAT? Same Process? From: jedrothw...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com DJ Cravens djcrav...@hotmail.com wrote: Strange, you expect a write up of a demo before it happens. OF COURSE I DO!!! For goodness sake, haven't you rehearsed?!? Don't you know what the thing will do? Assuming it works. This is mind boggling!!! I cannot imagine anyone going to a conference or a trade show with a device he intends to show who has not written a description of the device, and a script for a presentation, and who has not prepared gobs of data. Are you planning to wing it? Try the gadget for the first time in the conference hall??? Good grief! When I think of the weeks of work I put into trade show demos and customer demos in my youth, sweating bullets and rehearsing and rehearsing and rehearsing . . . To hear from you that you cannot write it up until after the presentation, makes my head spin. Of course the gadget may not work right, but that is all the more reason should have every detail nailed down, with gobs of paper and video presentation available in that event, ready to present in lieu of the demonstration. Heck I have devoted weeks to the paper I will present, and a month to Mizuno's poster presentation, and I will put another month into them when I get back. You are not realistic. And you are meshugganah, going off half cocked and unrehearsed! All I can say is, you are the polar opposite of a programmer. We leave nothing to chance, except when we must. - Jed
RE: [Vo]:News about Defkalion Europe...
Jim P. Yes, that was sad. ( I actually thought the number was $30 M from Motorola and $20M from State water heaters ). I wish I could make those beads. I don't think that Jim could recreate them either. But I now think that the layering of Cu then Ni and Pd , or Au and Pd was part of the secret. Au lowers the energy of vacancy of formation for the Pd as does Pd on Ni. I believe the vacancies are part of the required pathway, if not the active site itself. Also, the external heater was applying a B field in the better system. D2 Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2013 22:44:24 -0400 Subject: Re: [Vo]:News about Defkalion Europe... From: jedrothw...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com DJ Cravens djcrav...@hotmail.com wrote: Voice input and typos are fact of life for me. Perhaps you should read and edit your material before you hit send. You do not enough resources (sic) Meant: You do not HAVE enough resources. Have telegraphic style. Often drop words. Not voice input's fault. Probably influenced by Japanese. You no like, you can lump. Why don't you see your own need then to forget your NDA aversions . . . I have no aversion to NDAs. They would defeat my present purposes, that's all. If I had a reason to acquire secret information I would not hesitate to sign one, but I have no such reason. , go to DGT, witness a demo, measure what you will, and then tell your claimed friends simply that you have seen it and they should see for themselves. I told them to go. I am no middleman. Not qualified in any case. YOU might could save 10's of thousands of lives a day IF you really have the mega buck friends you claim you have and can release millions in your sleep. Anyone could raise that kind of money with the Patterson device. He could have had $20 million for the asking. It would be like taking candy from a baby. Rossi could have a billion for the asking, but he would lose control over the gadget, which he is loath to do. He wants control. Patterson wanted 100% market share. People who make impossible demands end up with nothing. Fortunately, Rossi seems to be softening his demands. - Jed
RE: [Vo]:DGT or ECAT? Same Process?
My take on their process is that the control and the sparks are related to the positive heat coef. of the reaction and the rate at which the heat is extracted. My best empirical model shows an almost exponential increase in max power output with temperature (due to vacancy production). A few very hot regions can produce a large fraction of the output. My reoccurring problem is to balance the temperature of the reaction species with the rate at which I remove the heat. You remove too much heat and the reaction sites cool down and the reaction slows. Most people seem to be looking at the global average temperature of the bulk and not the temperatures of local areas. By sparking to your sample you can have very high local temperatures and thus higher local reaction rates, IF your material is such that its resistivity increases with temperature. Notice this is the case for most metals. Since the sparks target the paths with greatest conductivity, the sparks are to new regions with lower temperatures and lower resistance. i.e. you hit new regions. I believe that they are basically sparking to a flat area within a cylinder. I prefer to use a spark into a bowl shaped target. You just simply make sure that your heat flow out of the system is large enough to stop any runaway reactions. (you are also saved by the 4th power law) For my system, it is a balancing act between heat production and heat transfer out of the system. I do that by both having a variable heat conductive path (variable contact areas by turning- think variable air caps) for rough tuning and then changing the spark rate (I use a strobe circuit). Dennis To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: dlrober...@aol.com Date: Tue, 9 Jul 2013 18:39:06 -0400 Subject: [Vo]:DGT or ECAT? Same Process? Whenever I read about the DGT device I get the impression that it behaves much differently than the ECAT. The main difference I focus upon so far is the method of control. We have discussed the ECAT thermal positive feedback control on many occasions and have developed models that appear to explain its operation. The same is not yet true for the DGT beast. Thermal control such as that used by Rossi seems to have difficulty achieving a stable COP of 6 for the basic device excluding electrical power generation and feedback. Of course it is expected that one will be able to use the fed back electrical power to drive the device one day and achieve a net COP of infinity. This should become possible fairly soon and Rossi appears to be working hard to arrive at a reasonable design. DGT suggests that they potentially can already obtain a large COP, but I have questions about the design since little has been demonstrated in public. My reservations can easily be disposed of by additional information and I anxiously await that time. The spark plug like ignition system of the DGT animal bears little resemblance to the thermal operation of Rossi's ECAT. I have the suspicion that there is something important to be learned by the fact that these various devices both function. How can that be? What is it about the DGT design that appears to efficiently use the spark induced reactions while maintaining excellent control? We certainly are not interested in hot fusion products which tend to be associated with high voltages such as spark discharges. If acceleration due to high voltage is present then why does this not occur? Does DGT balance the spark magnitude carefully enough to avoid this fate while achieving adequate LENR activity? I want to learn from the DGT device as well as the ECAT. There appears to be an understanding among most of us that some form of NAE is present which allows LENR to proceed, but what form does it take? Is it the same for both designs? What does the spark of DGT offer that heat alone seems to neglect in the ECAT? It seems as if the ECAT would love to thermally run away without much provocation while the DGT device does not seem to exhibit that behavior. Perhaps DGT has done a good job of hiding this problem, but they offer information that suggests that this is not happening with their design. I find the description that the DGT design can be turned on and off rapidly to potentially find applications that are diverse such as transportation, the gold standard of mine as evidence. If thermal run away were a major issue, then the rapid control might not be so easy to demonstrate. From the information that I have gleaned, both systems appear to offer excellent energy density and good power output. This is extremely important for future applications. It will be interesting to witness the race between these two horses in the near future. Of course, others might enter the fray soon and we all will benefit it that occurs. I realize that I have touched upon a multitude of interesting issues in this post and I hope that some of our esteemed members can add
RE: [Vo]:A show of hands, whose going to ICCF-18?
no, not me. I had to pick only one, so I decided to go to NI Week instead and do a demo there since ICCF delayed too long in replying to demo requests. Is anyone going to demo at ICCF?? sneak preview ..of one of two demo units, the other is still in the under construction but will be visually striking if I can pull it off: I tried to send this before with a picture, but I guess Vortex didn't like it. So here it is again without the picture. one sphere with sample, one with control(sand) in the same bath. Lab Armor Al beads for uniform bath temp, hollow (450ml) 4 brass spheres lightly plated with Au for uniform emissivity, with thermistor well and lampblack paint spot. (can also check with IR gun). The sample just stays warmer. (duration of expo is 5 days- about). I am not selling anything so that there will be no such fraud arguments. I will give vortex a heads up a little before NI Week about demo #2. But remember this is not a science experiment, it is a demo for the unwashed masses and is just to stimulate public awareness. dennis Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2013 09:56:53 -0700 From: p...@rasdoc.com To: vortex-L@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]:A show of hands, whose going to ICCF-18? I am.
RE: [Vo]:MFMP has built a flow calorimeter
the flow rate to cause turbulence and mixing depends on the ID of the tubing. For a 1/4 in ID, I would normally run at 57.3 ml/min or better. for 1/8 in, 15 ml/min likely be OK with mixers and bends upstream of the sensor. that is for a near constant flow. If you have a pulsating flow (some pumps are like that) you can get by with flows a little lower than with constant flow. I would have all the tubing insulated or the whole thing in a constant temp box/room. It is not just the temperatures you have to be concerned with, it is also the rate of heat flow. (drafts, humidity changes..) D2 Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2013 16:41:28 -0400 Subject: Re: [Vo]:MFMP has built a flow calorimeter From: jedrothw...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com DJ Cravens djcrav...@hotmail.com wrote: Be sure to use inline static mixers up stream from your sensors. I don't see that stated. Yeah, I thought about those in-line mixers you use when I read this. You should go on the MFMP site and recommend those things. Give them the part name and number. 15 ml/min. is too slow. They need mixing. Even the in-line mixers may not be enough. I think a faster flow rate might be advisable. As I recall, McKubre once told me it should never be less than 30 ml. Or was it 60? 1 per second? - Jed
RE: [Vo]:MFMP has built a flow calorimeter
Be sure to use inline static mixers up stream from your sensors. I don't see that stated. It is very important. Also me sure that the leads/shield probe length to the sensor are in the flow for a good distance so there is no wicking of temperature. D2 Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2013 15:01:15 -0400 From: hveeder...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]:MFMP has built a flow calorimeter The Martin Fleischmann Memorial Project has built a flow calorimeter for their next series of tests. Lots of pictures of the apparatus: http://www.quantumheat.org/index.php/en/follow/follow-3/280-multi-wire-test-to-be-run-with-new-flow-calorimeter#!DSC05822__Medium_ Harry
RE: [Vo]:MFMP has built a flow calorimeter
just a right angle bend is usually not enough. The flow at low rates is not well mixed and the placement of the sensor in the radial direction becomes important. You need a mixer that mixes the outer and inner radial parts of the flow. D2 Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2013 15:51:59 -0400 Subject: Re: [Vo]:MFMP has built a flow calorimeter From: jedrothw...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com That's something. It is sort of the opposite of most calorimeters, but I guess it should work. It says: Instead of measuring the exact mass flow rate, or the volume flow rate, however, we measure the heat capacity flow rate. What they mean is, they have a metering heater. That's the second heater, placed in line just before the copper cell. It adds a precise amount of heat to the flow, and they measure the temperature rise from that. The next temperature rise -- from the copper cell -- can then be compared to the metering heater temperature change. The flow rate is only 15 ml/minute which makes me worry that the mixing may not be effective. There may be streamlines. They did give some thought to mixing, putting the sensors after right angle tube connections. - Jed
RE: [Vo]:MFMP has built a flow calorimeter
Oh I should say that 15 ml / min is OK, depending on what your expected heat output is. It is almost the magic 14.33 ml/min that gives you 1 degree / watt. My guess is that they may practically get to about +/- 50 mW with the system. I would worry that the hot glue and heat shrink may cause problem if something goes wrong. (and it usually does). D2 Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2013 15:51:59 -0400 Subject: Re: [Vo]:MFMP has built a flow calorimeter From: jedrothw...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com That's something. It is sort of the opposite of most calorimeters, but I guess it should work. It says: Instead of measuring the exact mass flow rate, or the volume flow rate, however, we measure the heat capacity flow rate. What they mean is, they have a metering heater. That's the second heater, placed in line just before the copper cell. It adds a precise amount of heat to the flow, and they measure the temperature rise from that. The next temperature rise -- from the copper cell -- can then be compared to the metering heater temperature change. The flow rate is only 15 ml/minute which makes me worry that the mixing may not be effective. There may be streamlines. They did give some thought to mixing, putting the sensors after right angle tube connections. - Jed
RE: [Vo]:MFMP has built a flow calorimeter
Oh, yes, if your budget is short, you can get static mixers in some epoxy glue kits for cheap. D2 From: djcrav...@hotmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: [Vo]:MFMP has built a flow calorimeter Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2013 14:26:21 -0600 Be sure to use inline static mixers up stream from your sensors. I don't see that stated. It is very important. Also me sure that the leads/shield probe length to the sensor are in the flow for a good distance so there is no wicking of temperature. D2 Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2013 15:01:15 -0400 From: hveeder...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]:MFMP has built a flow calorimeter The Martin Fleischmann Memorial Project has built a flow calorimeter for their next series of tests. Lots of pictures of the apparatus: http://www.quantumheat.org/index.php/en/follow/follow-3/280-multi-wire-test-to-be-run-with-new-flow-calorimeter#!DSC05822__Medium_ Harry
RE: [Vo]:LENR EURO- Rothwell citation
It has fairly good information, however, the writing needs some editing (Like I should talk). It has grammar problems like incomplete sentences: Only will count the installed capacity and not the consumption. and things like: where he state having met Defkalion... But a little editing would make it a good article. D2 (but then I am not at such things my self- I hate to write) PS I am now terming my current work as HOPE (= hydrogen or proton effect), in attempts to avoid the nuclear label. Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2013 06:50:18 -0400 From: chiralex.k...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]:LENR EURO- Rothwell citation Greetings Vortex-l, http://www.lenrnews.eu/ Ad astra,Ron Kita, Chiralex
RE: [Vo]:LENR EURO- Rothwell citation
Over all I enjoyed the article. I know that English is my first language (or is it math) but I have about the same problems. You would never want to hear me try to speak or write French. (what do they say- like a sick sheep on the hill side). I thank you did a good job. Keep up the support. D2 From: alain.sep...@gmail.com Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2013 22:51:59 +0200 Subject: Re: [Vo]:LENR EURO- Rothwell citation To: vortex-l@eskimo.com I admit weaknesses in english, especially typo, and bad translation of (often indigest) french idioms...Part of the problem is google translation, that I did not correct well. Few years ago at work, my level was tested at work and it was stated that I should not write more than Telex and short mail. I'm sorry. any comment welcome. not sure I have courage to rewrite all... 2013/6/14 DJ Cravens djcrav...@hotmail.com It has fairly good information, however, the writing needs some editing (Like I should talk). It has grammar problems like incomplete sentences: Only will count the installed capacity and not the consumption. and things like: where he state having met Defkalion... But a little editing would make it a good article. D2 (but then I am not at such things my self- I hate to write) PS I am now terming my current work as HOPE (= hydrogen or proton effect), in attempts to avoid the nuclear label. Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2013 06:50:18 -0400 From: chiralex.k...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]:LENR EURO- Rothwell citation Greetings Vortex-l, http://www.lenrnews.eu/ Ad astra,Ron Kita, Chiralex
RE: [Vo]:[Vo] Rossi and temperature
thanks, but most of these are temperature as function of time. What I am after is power out as a function of temperature. Dennis Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2013 21:29:09 -0700 From: a...@well.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:[Vo] Rossi and temperature Lewan April 19 : http://www.nyteknik.se/incoming/article3166567.ece/BINARY/Report+test+of+E-cat+19+April+2011.pdf Not a clear knee ... maybe two linear slopes, then an exponential at the end Lewan April 28 : http://www.nyteknik.se/incoming/article3166569.ece/BINARY/Report+test+of+E-cat+28+April+2011.pdf Linear all the way to 100C Levi : December runs 1 (clear) 2 (not clear, data lost) http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/LeviGreportonhe.pdf As it can be seen the system was turned on just around 16.55. After approx 30 minutes a kink can be observed in the (Y). Because input power (1120 W also checked via and clamp amperometer) was not modified (see fig. 5 later) this change of slope testify that the reactor was ignited. After a startup period approx 20 minutes long a second where the reactor power was almost constant taking the water to ≈75°C a second kink is found when the reactor fully ignites raising the measured temperature to 101.6 +/-0.1°C and transforming the water into steam. (That's all the reports which report a time-temperature profile) - Original Message - Lewan Sep 7 : http://www.nyteknik.se/incoming/article3264365.ece/BINARY/Report+E-cat+test+September+7+%28pdf%29 Near the end -- only starts plotting from 100C (output) -- linear to 130C
[Vo]:[Vo] Rossi and temperature
somewhere I remember seeing power outputs of Rossi's device as a function of temperature. It was something like 0 until some threshold. Can anyone here remember where that was? Thanks, Dennis
RE: [Vo]:Heat pipes
you might want to look back at my Jun 4 vortex post under a couple hundred bucks... I am working on using heat pipes to extract heat. I have having to use a variable heat conductive path. You have to balance the heat extraction with the keeping the system at working temperature. I have been trying both a mechanical system (sliding tube contact area) and a ferro magnetic system. Date: Sun, 9 Jun 2013 12:18:21 -0400 From: janap...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]:Heat pipes I have spent a good deal of time thinking about fission reactor design and I have some opinions as these ideas apply to large scale LENR power stations. What makes for a competitive and cost effective reactor design is copious power density. When you try to sell a reactor design to an electric utility, they want “economies of scale”. That term implies that the most power should be produced from the least possible volume. One important means that a large scale LENR can be the most economical is to produce the most power from the least material and space. Rossi’s shipping container idea is not a good one because the power density derived from that design is pathetic. One way to get the power density up is to use heat pipes to move heat out of the reaction chamber and into the customer’s application. Have you ever considered using heat pipes in any future LENR reactor designs? Today, heat pipes are used in a good many non-water mediated fission reactor designs. Some of the Indian designs use heat pipes for passive cooling after shutdown. As an example of this point, an interesting product concept was the tub reactor. The heat pipe was the interface between the reactor and the customer. Unfortunately, this reactor design was discontinued because of the great expense of getting it certified by the NRC were only light water reactor designs are considered. But the concept was very attractive as a retrofit for fossil energy based power station replacements such as coal fired power generators and concrete plants. The heat pipe can support high temperature process heat. Such a heat transfer concept has an open ended heat range based on the material used as the transfer fluid. Vapor to/from liquid phase transition used in heat pipes are 1000 times more efficient than liquid coolants. That means that a reactor core element can be 1000 time smaller than it currently is. All things being equal, that means that the cost of the material that the reactor is made of is 1000 times cheaper. The replacement of existing coal and concrete plant heat sources will be a very attractive business opportunity for large scale LENR reactors. This whole cloth heat plant replacement would be made much easier if the power density and heat source size was about the same size as a fission plant or a coal combustion chamber. The ability to replace a heat plant in and existing utility installation is the dream of nuclear reactor designers because its saves about 90% of the plants value. The generators and grid connection are the most expensive part of a power plant. So a plug and play replacement for existing fossil fuel power plants and nuclear plants that can recover most of the existing infrastructure of those existing plants is attractive. This is one direction that LENR reactor provider might go. It will allow for a clean thermal plug and play customer interface where LENR reactor sub-modules can be hot swapped using a vacuum like plug arrangement into a common vacuum bus line supporting a common heat exchanger base unit. I liked the design of the tub reactor shown as follows: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrogen_Moderated_Self-regulating_Nuclear_Power_Module Info on heat pipes can be found at the following: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heat_pipe See how a coal plant retrofit with LENR can be done. http://www.coal2nuclear.com/Air%20Capture%20-%20SKYSCRUBBER%20LARGE%20POWER%20PLANT%20TWIN%20REACTOR%20BARGE%20-%202510.jpg
RE: [Vo]:Netherlands food exports
one interesting Dutch technology is Perfotec- they laser drill microscopic holes in plastic bags to give just the right balance of CO2, O2, H20 transpiration to keep the veggies fresh twice or so as long during shipment. Nothing like it in the US - yet. The match the holes with the specific crop (machines measure that specific crop's transpiration and match the holes exactly for that item) Date: Sun, 9 Jun 2013 17:14:34 -0400 Subject: Re: [Vo]:Netherlands food exports From: jedrothw...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Harry Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote: That is hard to believe. Perhaps they mean second largest food exporter per capita? No, the second largest in the world. I think measured in dollar value of the exports, not food tonnage. Amazing, isn't it? A little country with 16 million people. They also export the technology, but that is accounted separately, says NHK. The website I found says: Holland is the world’s 2nd largest exporter of agricultural products, after the USA. Together with the USA and France, Holland is one of the top 3 exporters of vegetables and fruit. The total value of Dutch agricultural exports was 75.4 billion euros in 2012. The Dutch agri-food industry contributes 52.5 billion euros of added value to Dutch GDP, and accounting for some 20% of Holland's total export value. The Netherlands is responsible for 22% of the world’s potato exports . . . The Dutch experts interviewed on NHK emphasized that this is a high tech, computer driven industry. One guy -- a farmer I guess you would call him -- gets up at 7 am and drives to an ultramodern office next to his 30-hectare food factory. He is sitting in an office looking at computer screens for a while. He jokes, things look good. I guess I can go home. He says he often spends more time looking at data than actual crops. Inside the greenhouse factory the roof is high and everything is metered and controlled to a fair-thee-well. It is all hydroponic. The incoming water is cleaned, filtered and cleared of bacteria, and then mixed with nutrients and iodine. The people picking crops wear haz mat suits and ride on electric cars that rise up to the high end of the vines. A robot train of picked crops threads its way to the processing building. Pretty soon I expect robots will also pick the crops. - Jed
RE: [Vo]:Heat pipes
my problem has been if I get the heat out too fast, then the reaction stops. These things like to stay warm. I do not have the technical ablity to make many massive control systems. I am doing well just to have one path and one system D2 Date: Sun, 9 Jun 2013 18:22:39 -0400 Subject: Re: [Vo]:Heat pipes From: janap...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com I assumed one could control the flow of vapor by using some sort of computer controlled valve with and adjustable opening capability. Am I wrong in that assumption? A microcontroller can supervise the temperature of N number of heat pipes if the polling cycle is fast enough. A very good heat removal system with an almost instantaneous response time could allow the LENR reaction to run very close to right on the critical run away temperature. This critical temperature could be exceeded if the response time of the automated valve system is faster than the runaway heat ramp velocity rate. If a high temperature LENR reactor could run at 800C, the efficiency of the thermo cycle would get to 60%. The key to this idea is to make the removal of heat very efficient and fast, if the heat pipe could transfer heat fast enough to keep the temperature of the heat exchanger and the heat pipe isothermal, and an isothermal heat pipe might be able to do that. The speed of heat removal is at the speed of sound in lithium vapor. That sounds fast. On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 6:00 PM, DJ Cravens djcrav...@hotmail.com wrote: you might want to look back at my Jun 4 vortex post under a couple hundred bucks... I am working on using heat pipes to extract heat. I have having to use a variable heat conductive path. You have to balance the heat extraction with the keeping the system at working temperature. I have been trying both a mechanical system (sliding tube contact area) and a ferro magnetic system. Date: Sun, 9 Jun 2013 12:18:21 -0400 From: janap...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]:Heat pipes I have spent a good deal of time thinking about fission reactor design and I have some opinions as these ideas apply to large scale LENR power stations. What makes for a competitive and cost effective reactor design is copious power density. When you try to sell a reactor design to an electric utility, they want “economies of scale”. That term implies that the most power should be produced from the least possible volume. One important means that a large scale LENR can be the most economical is to produce the most power from the least material and space. Rossi’s shipping container idea is not a good one because the power density derived from that design is pathetic. One way to get the power density up is to use heat pipes to move heat out of the reaction chamber and into the customer’s application. Have you ever considered using heat pipes in any future LENR reactor designs? Today, heat pipes are used in a good many non-water mediated fission reactor designs. Some of the Indian designs use heat pipes for passive cooling after shutdown. As an example of this point, an interesting product concept was the tub reactor. The heat pipe was the interface between the reactor and the customer. Unfortunately, this reactor design was discontinued because of the great expense of getting it certified by the NRC were only light water reactor designs are considered. But the concept was very attractive as a retrofit for fossil energy based power station replacements such as coal fired power generators and concrete plants. The heat pipe can support high temperature process heat. Such a heat transfer concept has an open ended heat range based on the material used as the transfer fluid. Vapor to/from liquid phase transition used in heat pipes are 1000 times more efficient than liquid coolants. That means that a reactor core element can be 1000 time smaller than it currently is. All things being equal, that means that the cost of the material that the reactor is made of is 1000 times cheaper. The replacement of existing coal and concrete plant heat sources will be a very attractive business opportunity for large scale LENR reactors. This whole cloth heat plant replacement would be made much easier if the power density and heat source size was about the same size as a fission plant or a coal combustion chamber. The ability to replace a heat plant in and existing utility installation is the dream of nuclear reactor designers because its saves about 90% of the plants value. The generators and grid connection are the most expensive part of a power plant. So a plug and play replacement for existing fossil fuel power plants and nuclear plants that can recover most of the existing infrastructure of those existing plants is attractive. This is one direction that LENR reactor provider might go. It will allow for a clean thermal plug and play customer interface where LENR reactor sub
RE: [Vo]:ideas for materials screening and LENR
For a simple electrochem sort see:http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/CravensDfactorsaff.pdf you can tell a lot by looking at the bubble patterns. (fine good, coarse bad). Mike M and Fran T. were able to test loading with a wire system moving a R tester along the wire to locate loaded areas. For co-deposit you can make a cell farm with multiple cells in the same water bath and compare temps and get relative numbers. That is how I did http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/CravensDpracticalta.pdf see slide 11 You can also plate Au onto thermistors and then co-dep and compare temps. it works well but the cost of thermistors limits the use for the self funded. Another farm system - is to run the cells in series (I1=I2) and put zeners in a tube and across the cell (to the keep the V's about equal- zeners you will need to think about that one- the electrodes dump some heat and the zeners dump the rest). I am still struggling in searches for powder based systems. Their R is all over the map. (packing, oxidation levels, surface area.) However, one way I have been experimenting with is to pack a tube with several powders (various loading, additives.) then passing pulsed current through the stack. I measure the temp of the outside of the tube. Using a Al2O3 ceramic tube. But it relies on the R through the various powders to be nearly the same. It is only good for large variations. I use a dilute stack with most of the stack unloaded C and then adding only a little of the (hopefully) various active materials along the tube. I doubt that this would be good for a spark like system, but I am doing a straight excitation of powder via currents. Good luck. D2 Date: Thu, 6 Jun 2013 15:35:42 -0500 From: jcol...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]:ideas for materials screening and LENR Hi All, I've been considering ideas for running LENR experiments in parallel. I know PF and others have done some experiments like this in the past with running multiple electrolytic cells simultaneously, so this is certainly an option. I'm wondering if there are any other thoughts on parallel experimental methods to screen materials. If we know that the effect appears maybe 1/20 to 1/7 times can a pre-screening process be performed in a relatively rapid manner to narrow down the material that works the best. One idea I had was to take a quartz tube (e.g., Celani/MFMP original cell design) with a heating element and loaded with hydrogen. In the bottom of the tube, have several types of materials (e.g., different nickel powder mixtures/sizes etc..) discretely separated and monitored with an IR camera similar to the setup for the E-cat test. The image could be monitored to determine which samples give off the most heat. Since the reproducibility problem is in part a materials problem, then it makes sense to me to develop a screening method to more quickly find samples that work and discard those that don't. A process using a method to simultaneously screen many samples would seem to be the most efficient way to empirically screen materials. NASA's chip array design would have some promise in this area, but would seem less practical, more expensive, and limited compared to other possibilities (e.g., IR camera). Any thoughts on this matter or other ideas on efficient materials screening processes? Best regards,Jack
