[Vo]:Re: Titanium/Hematite combined catalyst for low temperature
Axil-- I thought that was the case. That’s why I pointed out that he has apparently decided to use Ti in some fashion in the Quark device. Maybe Jones is on to something. Ti in a Ni lattice may cause the magnetic B field that occurs in the lattice to change drastically from location to location and thereby provide the necessary resonances to effect LENR in the local coherent system. It could also be involved in the production of differential voltage and the direct production of electricity, which has been reported for the E Cat X and maybe transferred to the design of the Quark-X device. Bob Cook From: Axil Axil Sent: Friday, April 22, 2016 11:56 AM To: vortex-l Subject: Re: [Vo]:Re: Titanium/Hematite combined catalyst for low temperature To the best of my understanding, titanium is not covered in Rossi's patent for the hot cat. On Fri, Apr 22, 2016 at 2:23 PM, Bob Cook wrote: Jones and Robin-- Rossi as said today on his blog that he uses Ti in his Quark-x device. Bob Cook -Original Message- From: Jones Beene Sent: Friday, April 22, 2016 6:17 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: [Vo]:Titanium/Hematite combined catalyst for low temperature Hi Robin, You misunderstand. I am not trying to explain of validate Mills version of titanium as a hydrino catalyst. He clearly got it wrong for this element, at least for any parameters below plasma conditions. There is no way on earth that his theory can explain the results I mentioned from Professor Dash and the others, who found that Ti was more active than palladium in his experiments which were at ambient. Of course, one could say that titanium was active for another reason besides f/H but that goes against common sense. As does the suggestion that Dash missed another active catalyst at work or that he was doing "cold fusion" which automatically negates a fractional hydrogen pathway. My effort was aimed at showing a possible way of using the most intuitive part of Mills theory (the Rydberg/Hartree values) in a revised version, not Mills version - which can show that titanium is indeed the one and only catalyst which can work at the lowest possible temperature, due to its low ionization multiple of the first electron. This is not anti-Mills so much as it is Mills-inspired. It involves multibody reactions, as the tradeoff. -Original Message- From: mix...@bigpond.com [mailto:mix...@bigpond.com] Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2016 3:28 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Titanium/Hematite combined catalyst for low temperature In reply to Jones Beene's message: Hi, [snip] Back to the CQM theory. The catalytic hole at 190 eV is next to impossible to achieve without a plasma, even as a transient state in the hottest glow tube, so it would seem that Mills’ theory is irrelevant… but, hold on … let’s consider a special type of multibody reaction that would only work at moderate temperature. Turns out that titanium has a first ionization potential at 6.8 eV which is a quarter of the Rydberg (Hartree) energy, and is the only transition metal to have such a value, meaning that on paper, four titanium atoms operating together would express an alternative to the Mills catalytic “hole.” Multibody reactions would be unlikely in gas or plasma phase, or at high temperature but in a FCC crystal structure with 14 atoms of Ti, we have a stable solid phase structure where it should be possible (on a regular basis - thousands of times per second) to have 4 electrons temporarily displaced - enough to create the required catalytic window- not as Mills suggests, but in an effective alternative so long as the hydrogen can be retained in the matrix (requiring low temperature). This multibody route can explain the comment of Dash that titanium is more active than palladium for gain. 1) When metal atoms combine in a lattice the energy levels of the valence electrons change, so they no longer add to 190 eV. You may have more luck using the work function of the metal (which will be influenced by "contaminants"). 2) The catalytic hole is an absorption hole, IOW Ti will accept 190 eV from H as the H shrinks, with Ti losing the first 5 of it's electrons as a result. It's as though the H "boils off" the Ti electrons. 3) Getting hold of atomic Ti may mean at least using Ti vapor. The boiling point of Ti is 3287°C. Although alternatively you could use electrolysis where Ti is formed from a salt at the cathode, one atom at a time. The problem here however is that cathodes need to be conducting, i.e. usually metallic so the newly minted Ti atoms are going to join the lattice, implying a very short or even non-existent window for a shrinkage reaction to take place. (Carbon cathode perhaps?) 4) The energy released by each H atom shrinking 7 levels in one go
Re: [Vo]:Re: Titanium/Hematite combined catalyst for low temperature
To the best of my understanding, titanium is not covered in Rossi's patent for the hot cat. On Fri, Apr 22, 2016 at 2:23 PM, Bob Cook wrote: > Jones and Robin-- > > Rossi as said today on his blog that he uses Ti in his Quark-x device. > > Bob Cook > > -Original Message- From: Jones Beene > Sent: Friday, April 22, 2016 6:17 AM > To: vortex-l@eskimo.com > Subject: RE: [Vo]:Titanium/Hematite combined catalyst for low temperature > > Hi Robin, > > You misunderstand. > > I am not trying to explain of validate Mills version of titanium as a > hydrino catalyst. He clearly got it wrong for this element, at least for > any parameters below plasma conditions. There is no way on earth that his > theory can explain the results I mentioned from Professor Dash and the > others, who found that Ti was more active than palladium in his experiments > which were at ambient. Of course, one could say that titanium was active > for > another reason besides f/H but that goes against common sense. As does the > suggestion that Dash missed another active catalyst at work or that he was > doing "cold fusion" which automatically negates a fractional hydrogen > pathway. > > My effort was aimed at showing a possible way of using the most intuitive > part of Mills theory (the Rydberg/Hartree values) in a revised version, not > Mills version - which can show that titanium is indeed the one and only > catalyst which can work at the lowest possible temperature, due to its low > ionization multiple of the first electron. This is not anti-Mills so much > as > it is Mills-inspired. It involves multibody reactions, as the tradeoff. > > -Original Message- > From: mix...@bigpond.com [mailto:mix...@bigpond.com] > Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2016 3:28 PM > To: vortex-l@eskimo.com > Subject: Re: [Vo]:Titanium/Hematite combined catalyst for low temperature > > In reply to Jones Beene's message: > Hi, > [snip] > >> Back to the CQM theory. The catalytic hole at 190 eV is next to >> impossible to achieve without a plasma, even as a transient state in the >> > hottest glow tube, so it would seem that Mills’ theory is irrelevant… but, > hold on … let’s consider a special type of multibody reaction that would > only work at moderate temperature. Turns out that titanium has a first > ionization potential at 6.8 eV which is a quarter of the Rydberg (Hartree) > energy, and is the only transition metal to have such a value, meaning that > on paper, four titanium atoms operating together would express an > alternative to the Mills catalytic “hole.” Multibody reactions would be > unlikely in gas or plasma phase, or at high temperature but in a FCC > crystal > structure with 14 atoms of Ti, we have a stable solid phase structure where > it should be possible (on a regular basis - thousands of times per second) > to have 4 electrons temporarily displaced - enough to create the required > catalytic window- not as Mills suggests, but in an effective alternative so > long as the hydrogen can be retained in the matrix (requiring low > temperature). This multibody route can explain the comment of Dash that > titanium is more active than palladium for gain. > > 1) When metal atoms combine in a lattice the energy levels of the valence > electrons change, so they no longer add to 190 eV. You may have more luck > using the work function of the metal (which will be influenced by > "contaminants"). > > 2) The catalytic hole is an absorption hole, IOW Ti will accept 190 eV from > H as the H shrinks, with Ti losing the first 5 of it's electrons as a > result. It's as though the H "boils off" the Ti electrons. > > 3) Getting hold of atomic Ti may mean at least using Ti vapor. The boiling > point of Ti is 3287°C. Although alternatively you could use electrolysis > where Ti is formed from a salt at the cathode, one atom at a time. The > problem here however is that cathodes need to be conducting, i.e. usually > metallic so the newly minted Ti atoms are going to join the lattice, > implying a very short or even non-existent window for a shrinkage reaction > to take place. (Carbon cathode > perhaps?) > > 4) The energy released by each H atom shrinking 7 levels in one go would be > 856.674 eV, of which 190 eV is used to ionize the Ti (and later released as > the Ti reclaims it's missing electrons). > > 5) I suspect that the importance of Ti for LENR is more likely to be that > it > is a spillover catalyst. > > Regards, > > Robin van Spaandonk > > http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html > >
[Vo]:Re: Titanium/Hematite combined catalyst for low temperature
Jones and Robin-- Rossi as said today on his blog that he uses Ti in his Quark-x device. Bob Cook -Original Message- From: Jones Beene Sent: Friday, April 22, 2016 6:17 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: [Vo]:Titanium/Hematite combined catalyst for low temperature Hi Robin, You misunderstand. I am not trying to explain of validate Mills version of titanium as a hydrino catalyst. He clearly got it wrong for this element, at least for any parameters below plasma conditions. There is no way on earth that his theory can explain the results I mentioned from Professor Dash and the others, who found that Ti was more active than palladium in his experiments which were at ambient. Of course, one could say that titanium was active for another reason besides f/H but that goes against common sense. As does the suggestion that Dash missed another active catalyst at work or that he was doing "cold fusion" which automatically negates a fractional hydrogen pathway. My effort was aimed at showing a possible way of using the most intuitive part of Mills theory (the Rydberg/Hartree values) in a revised version, not Mills version - which can show that titanium is indeed the one and only catalyst which can work at the lowest possible temperature, due to its low ionization multiple of the first electron. This is not anti-Mills so much as it is Mills-inspired. It involves multibody reactions, as the tradeoff. -Original Message- From: mix...@bigpond.com [mailto:mix...@bigpond.com] Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2016 3:28 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Titanium/Hematite combined catalyst for low temperature In reply to Jones Beene's message: Hi, [snip] Back to the CQM theory. The catalytic hole at 190 eV is next to impossible to achieve without a plasma, even as a transient state in the hottest glow tube, so it would seem that Mills’ theory is irrelevant… but, hold on … let’s consider a special type of multibody reaction that would only work at moderate temperature. Turns out that titanium has a first ionization potential at 6.8 eV which is a quarter of the Rydberg (Hartree) energy, and is the only transition metal to have such a value, meaning that on paper, four titanium atoms operating together would express an alternative to the Mills catalytic “hole.” Multibody reactions would be unlikely in gas or plasma phase, or at high temperature but in a FCC crystal structure with 14 atoms of Ti, we have a stable solid phase structure where it should be possible (on a regular basis - thousands of times per second) to have 4 electrons temporarily displaced - enough to create the required catalytic window- not as Mills suggests, but in an effective alternative so long as the hydrogen can be retained in the matrix (requiring low temperature). This multibody route can explain the comment of Dash that titanium is more active than palladium for gain. 1) When metal atoms combine in a lattice the energy levels of the valence electrons change, so they no longer add to 190 eV. You may have more luck using the work function of the metal (which will be influenced by "contaminants"). 2) The catalytic hole is an absorption hole, IOW Ti will accept 190 eV from H as the H shrinks, with Ti losing the first 5 of it's electrons as a result. It's as though the H "boils off" the Ti electrons. 3) Getting hold of atomic Ti may mean at least using Ti vapor. The boiling point of Ti is 3287°C. Although alternatively you could use electrolysis where Ti is formed from a salt at the cathode, one atom at a time. The problem here however is that cathodes need to be conducting, i.e. usually metallic so the newly minted Ti atoms are going to join the lattice, implying a very short or even non-existent window for a shrinkage reaction to take place. (Carbon cathode perhaps?) 4) The energy released by each H atom shrinking 7 levels in one go would be 856.674 eV, of which 190 eV is used to ionize the Ti (and later released as the Ti reclaims it's missing electrons). 5) I suspect that the importance of Ti for LENR is more likely to be that it is a spillover catalyst. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
