and it will be
associated with a depletion of fuel mass.
Dave
-Original Message-
From: Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Sat, Oct 18, 2014 10:48 pm
Subject: RE: [Vo]: Gettering in the Lugano IH reactor
One thing worth adding – Rossi
: RE: [Vo]: Gettering in the Lugano IH reactor
From: David Roberson
Ø But what about the conservation of energy? What mass is being depleted in
order to release the energy?
Electron mass – 511 keV.
The Dirac sea of negative energy is the repository in this suggestion
On Sun, Oct 19, 2014 at 8:25 AM, Bob Cook frobertc...@hotmail.com wrote:
I understand why Jones thinks his latest idea is radical. But, it fits many
of the observations--what about the observed nuclear transmutations in LENR?
Suppose the mass of the electron is absorbed by a proton in the
-Original Message-
From: Terry Blanton
Bob Cook wrote:
I understand why Jones thinks his latest idea is radical. But, it fits many
of the observations--what about the observed nuclear transmutations in LENR?
Suppose the mass of the electron is absorbed by a proton in the
nucleus
On Sun, Oct 19, 2014 at 12:20 PM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:
I keep going back to the SPP and to NASA, etc.
It's not like they are doing a lot these days, eg no rocket science.
Terry--
That's a good supplement to Jone's idea, that he may not think is too
radical:)
Bob
- Original Message -
From: Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Sunday, October 19, 2014 9:14 AM
Subject: Re: [Vo]: Gettering in the Lugano IH reactor
On Sun, Oct
Jones--
I thought you might like Terry's idea.
Bob
- Original Message -
From: Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Sunday, October 19, 2014 9:20 AM
Subject: RE: [Vo]: Gettering in the Lugano IH reactor
-Original Message-
From: Terry Blanton
Bob Cook
-Original Message-
From: Bob Cook
I thought you might like Terry's idea.
Awkshully, Bob... it could work, but is the proton then neutralized as a
neutron? Having a free neutron creates problems. What I had been thinking is a
bit different- that the electron itself goes into the Dirac
One of the things I noted about the new hotCat is that it seemed to not be
affected by the air that would have been present after the powder was
loaded. There was no means to pull a vacuum to clean out the air. In
thinking about the use and effects of the LiAlH4, it occurred to me that
this
On Sat, Oct 18, 2014 at 7:45 AM, Bob Higgins rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com
wrote:
Once the Li is a thin alloy film on the Ni particle surfaces which are
catalyzed to produce a LENR reaction, the Li may then be a participant in
the LENR in condensed matter form as opposed to being a participant in
]: Gettering in the Lugano IH reactor
One of the things I noted about the new hotCat is that it seemed to not be
affected by the air that would have been present after the powder was loaded.
There was no means to pull a vacuum to clean out the air. In thinking about
the use and effects
- Original Message -
From: Eric Walker
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Saturday, October 18, 2014 8:23 AM
Subject: Re: [Vo]: Gettering in the Lugano IH reactor
On Sat, Oct 18, 2014 at 7:45 AM, Bob Higgins rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com wrote:
Once the Li is a thin alloy film
eric.wal...@gmail.com
*To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com
*Sent:* Saturday, October 18, 2014 8:23 AM
*Subject:* Re: [Vo]: Gettering in the Lugano IH reactor
On Sat, Oct 18, 2014 at 7:45 AM, Bob Higgins rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com
wrote:
Once the Li is a thin alloy film on the Ni particle surfaces which
@eskimo.com
*Sent:* Saturday, October 18, 2014 8:23 AM
*Subject:* Re: [Vo]: Gettering in the Lugano IH reactor
On Sat, Oct 18, 2014 at 7:45 AM, Bob Higgins rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com
wrote:
Once the Li is a thin alloy film on the Ni particle surfaces which are
catalyzed to produce a LENR reaction
The left side (in Figure 1) 45-50mm of the reactor are much cooler than the
heated core between the insulated supports. This end near the thermocouple
plug probably never exceeded 700C. Particles that ended up there did not
undergo as much sintering. As I recall the Lugano test particle was
This idea contributes the belief that the nickel particles are the source
of heat production. What you are saying is that the particles caused heat
to be generated somewhere else in the reactor, not in or near the nickel
particles. How can the surface of the reactor sustain a temperature of
1420C
and mixed particles of Ni and TiC.
Note the increased thermal stability.
Bob
--- Original Message -
From: Bob Higgins
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Saturday, October 18, 2014 10:13 AM
Subject: Re: [Vo]: Gettering in the Lugano IH reactor
As someone who has first hand
On Sat, Oct 18, 2014 at 10:13 AM, Bob Higgins rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com
wrote:
By the time the IH reactor is operating above 1000C, there are no nickel
nanoparticles or nano-features of any kind left - they are all melted into
larger agglomerations.
Is it possible that the micro-scale features
...@gmail.com
*To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com
*Sent:* Saturday, October 18, 2014 10:13 AM
*Subject:* Re: [Vo]: Gettering in the Lugano IH reactor
As someone who has first hand experience working with micro-scale carbonyl
Ni powder, and treating these powders in a thermochemical reactor, I can
tell you
No...This surface nanostructure is a result of the processing of the
carbonyl Ni powder precursor which is long gone in the resultant pure
nickel particle uses by Rossi.
On Sat, Oct 18, 2014 at 3:47 PM, Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Oct 18, 2014 at 10:13 AM, Bob Higgins
absorbed by the
Ni particles. This seems unlikely to me.
Bob
- Original Message -
From: Axil Axil
To: vortex-l
Sent: Saturday, October 18, 2014 11:38 AM
Subject: Re: [Vo]: Gettering in the Lugano IH reactor
This idea contributes the belief that the nickel particles
18, 2014 11:38 AM
*Subject:* Re: [Vo]: Gettering in the Lugano IH reactor
This idea contributes the belief that the nickel particles are the source
of heat production. What you are saying is that the particles caused heat
to be generated somewhere else in the reactor, not in or near the nickel
What I am saying is that the reaction site it not hotter than its
environs. Think about it like a microwave oven (only x-rays instead of
microwaves). The oven walls don't initially get hot. The food inside gets
hot from the microwave absorbtion and the IR from the food then heats up
the walls
@eskimo.com
*Sent:* Saturday, October 18, 2014 11:38 AM
*Subject:* Re: [Vo]: Gettering in the Lugano IH reactor
This idea contributes the belief that the nickel particles are the source
of heat production. What you are saying is that the particles caused heat
to be generated somewhere else
You are close to my thinking. However,what the micro particles produce is
not x-rays but coherent magnetism at extreme strength.
On Sat, Oct 18, 2014 at 7:31 PM, Bob Higgins rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com
wrote:
What I am saying is that the reaction site it not hotter than its
environs. Think about
I am sure that there may be a Ni-X alloy that melts at higher temperature
than pure Ni. The field is wide open. There is just not enough good
concrete data or a theory to say what works and what doesn't. It appears
that Rossi has something that works, but this Lugano report provides, once
The SEI assay on page 45 of the report shows a PURE nickel particle with
tubercles that have been unaffected by heat having survived 32 days of
destructive temperatures up to 1400C.
Lithium 6 is a reaction ash. Lithium 7 is a secret sauce (SS) alkali
metal additive, The older versions of Rossi's
Another remote possibility should be mentioned, if real gain is found in this
device… and that would be this: the basis of gain could be only SPP – surface
plasmon polaritons. This species may be gainful in itself as it condenses.
Electrons would be lost to the Dirac sea via SPP, for instance
I like it.
SPPs only live for a few picoseconds. They are half light and half
electron. SPPs need to be vigorously pumped. If fusion feeds SPP creation
we should see an increase in electrons as well as heat. As Rossi reported,
he sees a large production of electrostatic charge in his reactor,
From: Axil
I like it.
SPPs only live for a few picoseconds. They are half light and half electron.
SPPs need to be vigorously pumped. If fusion feeds SPP creation we should see
an increase in electrons as well as heat.
Since this reactor depends on continuous electrical input to
It is unlikely that the SAME micro-scale features would re-appear - at
least in Rossi's historical carbonyl process Ni particles. The particle
shape with the high external surface area is a unique outcome from
precipitatation from a highly volatile liquid. As the temperature rises to
500C,
Fusion must be involved because there is all kinds of transmutations taking
place. If the energy came from the vacuum, then no ash would be generated
and the reactor will not need a fuel recharge to function.
On Sat, Oct 18, 2014 at 8:39 PM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:
*From:* Axil
See my previous reply to Eric. Bare Ni will sinter together into a low
porosity bulk at 500C. Coating the Ni particles with the Fe2O3 nanopowder
before they ever get hot prevents large scale sintering. The tubercles
that Rossi described during growth are micron-scale features. These are
not
Maybe this low temperature sintering particle behavior is the reason why
Rossi takes so much time to start the E-Cat going. He needs to get the
magic going before the nickel particles are destroyed by heat,
On Sat, Oct 18, 2014 at 8:46 PM, Bob Higgins rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com
wrote:
It is
*These do not melt like nanoscale features.*
What is the temperature at which these surface features are destroyed?
On Sat, Oct 18, 2014 at 8:50 PM, Bob Higgins rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com
wrote:
See my previous reply to Eric. Bare Ni will sinter together into a low
porosity bulk at 500C.
Magnetism is even less likely the cause at the temperature of the hotCat.
It is one thing to ascribe coherent effects at temperatures of 400C (being
improbable there), but by the time you get over 1000C, it is hard to
imagine being able to maintain any kind of condensed matter alignment that
could
BTW – the beauty of an SPP hypothesis is that - not only is it falsifiable,
but the proof or disproof will happen in about 6 days if everything goes
well.
If the MFMP puts together a “dummy” reactor - and it is even slightly
gainful, then of course the mystery will be solved.
Tubercles is a nebulous description. You could call those features
tubercles, but I do not. They are not tubes at all. I have seen tubes
(hence my belief that I saw tubercles in my powder and they were at
larger scale (pictures are in my paper). Only Rossi can say which he
intended as
How do SPPs convey the heat away from the NAE so that the nanoscale is NOT
the hottest spot? SPPs normally attenuate at very small scale, and the
attenuation is electromagnetic absorption of the lossy plasmon waveguide.
If the NAE is the hottest spot in the reactor, then there could never be a
No radioactive isotopes production is another LENR miracle.
On Sat, Oct 18, 2014 at 8:57 PM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:
BTW – the beauty of an SPP hypothesis is that - not only is it falsifiable,
but the proof or disproof will happen in about 6 days if everything goes
well.
If
The entire volume of the reactor is a SPP condensate. This condensate acts
as one super atom where all its parts have the same temperature. As heat is
input into the condensate, all the SPP share in the temperature rise and
the temperature of the system goes evenly up as one unit without hot
From: Bob Higgins
How do SPPs convey the heat away from the NAE so that the nanoscale is NOT the
hottest spot? SPPs normally attenuate at very small scale, and the attenuation
is electromagnetic absorption of the lossy plasmon waveguide. If the NAE is
the hottest spot in the reactor,
One thing worth adding – Rossi is said to use a sintered
instead of a fused alumina tube. This could be an important detail in
superradiance, since the particle size of the alumina before sintering would
influence emissivity. For instance, if the tube was made from 10-11 micron
of fuel mass.
Dave
-Original Message-
From: Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Sat, Oct 18, 2014 10:48 pm
Subject: RE: [Vo]: Gettering in the Lugano IH reactor
One thing worth adding – Rossi is said to use a sintered
instead
From: David Roberson
* But what about the conservation of energy? What mass is being depleted in
order to release the energy?
Electron mass – 511 keV.
The Dirac sea of negative energy is the repository in this suggestion - that
intense field of the SPP is analogous to being a
45 matches
Mail list logo
