subject:"\[Vo\]\:diversity, one of the 6 pillars of LENR"

Re: [Vo]:diversity, one of the 6 pillars of LENR

2015-03-04 Thread Bob Higgins

What you say is absolutely true, Bob.  I don't believe that LENR occurred
in the MFMP Bang! experiment.  However the conditions were very similar to
the Lugano experiment at that temperature and with the fuel that MFMP
used.  Check the Lugano SEM images of their Ni ash and compare to the SEM
images of the MFMP Ni ash.  The images are almost identical. What I am
saying is that the conditions for LENR were likely pretty close to the same.

We would love to test some Parkhomov ash from an experiment that has shown
notable (outside error bar) excess heat.  If we don't see that from
Parkhomov, hopefully we will see it reported from someone else among the
many replicators of Parkhomov.

Since we are unlikely to get any ash from Rossi's HotCat, it is incumbent
on the replicators to do long runs and have isotopic analysis done on their
fuel and their ash.

On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 10:59 PM, Bob Cook frobertc...@hotmail.com wrote:

  Axil and Bob--

 You both seem to ignore the statement from the Lugano experiment that the
 Ni isotopic concentrations changed during the reaction.  It would be nice
 to get an isotopic analysis of the MFMP and the Parkhomov experiment's Ni
 powder available after the experiment to see if there are changes
 from normal Ni.

 I am not sure either the Parkhomov nor the MFMP test have good evidence of
 a nuclear reaction with a change in nuclear species or total mass of the
 the system.  Without an evident mass-to-energy conversion, what is the
 source of the explosive energy release in the two experiments?

 I do not consider either experiment has sufficient time producing XH to be
 indicative of LENR.  That is not to say the two experimental set-ups
 have no potential for producing excess heat, if properly controlled. ( I
 would agree that there seemed to be a start of an excess heat reaction
 prior to the bangs, however the extent of this production of excess heat
 was not very long. )



 Bob



 - Original Message -
 *From:* Bob Higgins rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com
 *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com
 *Sent:* Tuesday, March 03, 2015 9:23 PM
 *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:diversity, one of the 6 pillars of LENR

 See inline ...

 On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 8:05 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote:


  A sign that the nickel power is not working is the explosions that
 are occurring when the LENR reactions begin in the nano particles produced
 by lithium and hydrogen plasma as it cools from the high temperatures over
 1100C.

 There is no hydrogen plasma or lithium vapor for that matter.  Lithium at
 that pressure will not boil at the temperatures being used.  If you read
 Langmuir's work, you will see that it takes over 2500C for any significant
 hydrogen molecule dissociation, and it would be much hotter still to get a
 hydrogen plasma.


 Rossi says that his nickel is 5 9s pure.

5 9's pure has no bearing on whether the Ni was dissolving.  The
 Ni has been seen in EDX (Ed Storms' analysis of MFMP ash) the Li-Al-Ni-H
   solidified metal encasing the sintered Ni web.  It is now known that
 the Ni dissolves in the liquid Li-Al-H.


 There was a hydrogen fire that occurred after the alumina core raptured.
 Much the nickel melted because of the extra heat added to the 1057C
 temperature where the core failure took place. The fuel was sintered into a
 solid block by high heat.


 This is completely wrong.  The micrographs of the Ni ash in the MFMP
 experiment were the same as the Lugano Ni ash.  There was no explosion in
 the Lugano experiment.  Also, from personal experience, when Ni is heated
 in H2, it is fully oxide free by 250C and by 300C the sintering of the
 particles begins.  This happens long before there was ever an explosion.
 Not only that, but after the explosion, the Ni core was a completely intact
 molded rod of sintered material.  If you look at the micrographs, it would
 be impossible to create the sintered 3D web structure found by melting of
 the Ni.



 If the small features of the Ni are not complicit in the LENR, then it
 is not clear that size of the starting particles mean very much.


 Where is reference to this?

The reference is the Lugano report and Ed Storms' micrographs of
 the MFMP ash.  They show the Ni sintered into a 3D web with much larger
 dimensions.  I have personally seen this sintering in my experiments
 with Ni powder in H2 at much lower pressure.  I published a paper showing
 this.  In the gas phase experiments, much of the fine features on the
 carbonyl Ni particles are maintained, sintering at touching edges.


 Thanks for this info. I have always thought that placing the fuel in a
 pile was a bad idea. The DGT idea of spreading the fuel out in three
 dimensions in a scaffold of nickel nanofoam would keep the nickel particles
 apart so that they would not sinter together.


 In my experience, once you coat your carbonyl Ni particles with a
 nano-catalyst, the catalyst can prevent substantial sintering into a solid
 and help leave the Ni porous

Re: [Vo]:diversity, one of the 6 pillars of LENR

2015-03-04 Thread Bob Higgins

This is not true.  There are many physical and chemical thing happening
that set the stage for LENR, and just because the stage has been set, it
doesn't mean the show started.  The chemical changes are the dissociation
of the LiAlH4 and the dissolving of the Ni (at higher temperatures).  The
physical changes include the low temperature sintering of the cleaned Ni
into a 3D web.  Hydrogen cleaning of the Ni and the alumina surfaces
allowed the molten metal to wet which is a chemical reaction in a sense
because it involves monatomic hydrogen attachment to the surface oxide in
the case of the alumina and stripping of the oxide to water vapor in the
case of the Ni.  Lots going on before LENR occurs.

On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 11:17 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote:

 This is completely wrong.  The micrographs of the Ni ash in the MFMP
 experiment were the same as the Lugano Ni ash.  There was no explosion in
 the Lugano experiment.  Also, from personal experience, when Ni is heated
 in H2, it is fully oxide free by 250C and by 300C the sintering of the
 particles begins.  This happens long before there was ever an explosion.
 Not only that, but after the explosion, the Ni core was a completely intact
 molded rod of sintered material.  If you look at the micrographs, it would
 be impossible to create the sintered 3D web structure found by melting of
 the Ni.

 Thanks for your first hand observation. Doesn't your observation mean that
 the MFMP BANG was a LENR event since the fuel residue between Lagano and
 the bang are affected in the same way? Without the bang, the fuel is
 unchanged. I believe that I had seen that fuel difference reported on
 facebook or ECat news.

Re: [Vo]:diversity, one of the 6 pillars of LENR

2015-03-04 Thread Bob Higgins

This is a wonderful video, so thanks for pointing us to watch it.  However,
the molten Li-Al is not in a super-critical phase, but as he said, it
doesn't have to be supercritical - just hot and high pressure.  He also
demonstrated a chemical mixing that produced nanoparticles as a
precipitate.  That kind of chemical mixing is not taking place in the
Parkhomov/Rossi reactor as near as I am able to identify.

That having been said, and as I posted before, the Li-Al-Ni-H alloy becomes
saturated with Ni.  It may be possible to cycle the temperature (up to
dissolve and down to precipitate) and get the Ni to precipitate on the
surface of the remaining solid Ni like a co-deposition - taking H- anions
with it into the Ni surface at an accelerated rate.

Dennis Cravens pointed me to a very interesting paper that has many
similarities to this process:
http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/LiawBYelevatedte.pdf
See the paper by Liaw.

On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 10:57 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote:


 There is no hydrogen plasma or lithium vapor for that matter.  Lithium at
 that pressure will not boil at the temperatures being used.  If you read
 Langmuir's work, you will see that it takes over 2500C for any significant
 hydrogen molecule dissociation, and it would be much hotter still to get a
 hydrogen plasma.


 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6zurHSq4CB4

 This video shows how a super critical medium produces nanoparticles from
 dissolved ionic substances when there is a super critical phase transition
 caused by cooling the super critical medium so that the dissolved solids
 nucleate and form nanoparticles. Both dissolved Lithium,
 aluminum, and hydrides will nucleate and form nanoparticle in a cooled
 region of the supercritical hydrogen gas.

Re: [Vo]:diversity, one of the 6 pillars of LENR

2015-03-04 Thread Bob Higgins

One of the things not sampled in the Lugano experiment is the product gas
or gas ash.  This may have very important clues to the nature of the
reaction.  In my replication (under construction), I intend to be able to
collect the product gas for analysis off-site.  We could find enhanced
deuterium, tritium, and helium as a result of the process.  The HotCat was
not outfitted to be able to collect this gas - when they opened it, they
just had to let it go woosh into the air.

On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 11:07 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote:

 I believe that the reactor would need to run for some time like it did at
 Lagano for nuclear changes to show up. Maybe the Russian experiment that
 produced XP ran long enough to show changes.

 On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 12:59 AM, Bob Cook frobertc...@hotmail.com wrote:

  Axil and Bob--

 You both seem to ignore the statement from the Lugano experiment that the
 Ni isotopic concentrations changed during the reaction.  It would be nice
 to get an isotopic analysis of the MFMP and the Parkhomov experiment's Ni
 powder available after the experiment to see if there are changes
 from normal Ni.

 I am not sure either the Parkhomov nor the MFMP test have good evidence
 of a nuclear reaction with a change in nuclear species or total mass of
 the the system.  Without an evident mass-to-energy conversion, what is the
 source of the explosive energy release in the two experiments?

 I do not consider either experiment has sufficient time producing XH to
 be indicative of LENR.  That is not to say the two experimental set-ups
 have no potential for producing excess heat, if properly controlled. ( I
 would agree that there seemed to be a start of an excess heat reaction
 prior to the bangs, however the extent of this production of excess heat
 was not very long. )

 Bob

[Vo]:diversity, one of the 6 pillars of LENR

2015-03-03 Thread Peter Gluck

Dear Friends,

Daily News  focused on the Hot Cat, Axil's explanation and a few thoughts
about unity or diversity in LENR-.all here:

http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2015/03/seeking-truth-and-power-of-lenr.html

New replications at the horizon. Murphy, you never sleep?
Peter

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

Re: [Vo]:diversity, one of the 6 pillars of LENR

2015-03-03 Thread Bob Cook

Peter--

Your EGO-OUT report by Axil-Dixit sounds like it was written by Axil Axil who 
reports frequently on Vortex-l.  

Axil-Dixit's comments about the non-participating role of Ni in the Ni reaction 
is NOT borne out by the change of isotopic concentration measured in the Lugano 
Hot Cat test.  

Bob Cook
  - Original Message - 
  From: Peter Gluck 
  To: Arik El Boher ; Bo Hoistadt ; Brian Ahern ; CMNS ; Dagmar Kuhn ; doug 
marker ; Dr. Braun Tibor ; eCatNews ; Gabriel Moagar-Poladian ; Gary ; Haiko 
Lietz ; jeff aries ; Lewan Mats ; Nicolaie N. Vlad ; Peter Mobberley ; Pierre 
Clauzon ; Roberto Germano ; Roy Virgilio ; Sunwon Park ; vlad ; VORTEX ; Mark 
Tsirlin ; Steve Katinski ; David Daggett ; Valerio Ciampoli ; Peter Bjorkbom ; 
Peter Schlosser 
  Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 9:55 AM
  Subject: [Vo]:diversity, one of the 6 pillars of LENR




  Dear Friends,


  Daily News  focused on the Hot Cat, Axil's explanation and a few thoughts 
about unity or diversity in LENR-.all here:


  http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2015/03/seeking-truth-and-power-of-lenr.html


  New replications at the horizon. Murphy, you never sleep?
  Peter



  -- 

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

Re: [Vo]:diversity, one of the 6 pillars of LENR

2015-03-03 Thread Peter Gluck

Dear Bob,
Axil is my friend and collaborator.
This AXIL DIXIT- axil says' is his column in Ego Out.
Peter

On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 8:26 PM, Bob Cook frobertc...@hotmail.com wrote:

  Peter--

 Your EGO-OUT report by Axil-Dixit sounds like it was written by Axil Axil
 who reports frequently on Vortex-l.

 Axil-Dixit's comments about the non-participating role of Ni in the Ni
 reaction is *NOT* borne out by the change of isotopic concentration
 measured in the Lugano Hot Cat test.

 Bob Cook

 - Original Message -
 *From:* Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com
 *To:* Arik El Boher elboh...@missouri.edu ; Bo Hoistadt
 bo.hois...@physics.uu.se ; Brian Ahern ahern_br...@msn.com ; CMNS
 c...@googlegroups.com ; Dagmar Kuhn dagmar.k...@gmx.de ; doug marker
 dsmar...@gmail.com ; Dr. Braun Tibor br...@mail.iif.hu ; eCatNews
 p...@ecatnews.com ; Gabriel Moagar-Poladian gamo...@yahoo.com ; Gary
 g...@garywright.com ; Haiko Lietz h...@haikolietz.de ; jeff aries
 arias...@aol.com ; Lewan Mats mats.le...@nyteknik.se ; Nicolaie N.
 Vlad nicolaienv...@gmail.com ; Peter Mobberley
 petermobber...@hotmail.com ; Pierre Clauzon pierre.clau...@orange.fr
 ; Roberto Germano germ...@promete.it ; Roy Virgilio
 r.virgi...@gmail.com ; Sunwon Park swp...@kaist.ac.kr ; vlad
 v...@zpenergy.com ; VORTEX vortex-l@eskimo.com ; Mark Tsirlin
 tsirlin.m...@hotmail.com ; Steve Katinski steve...@aol.com ; David
 Daggett david.l.dagg...@gmail.com ; Valerio Ciampoli
 v.ciamp...@gmail.com ; Peter Bjorkbom peter.bjork...@neofire.com ; Peter
 Schlosser schloss...@t-online.de
 *Sent:* Tuesday, March 03, 2015 9:55 AM
 *Subject:* [Vo]:diversity, one of the 6 pillars of LENR


 Dear Friends,

 Daily News  focused on the Hot Cat, Axil's explanation and a few thoughts
 about unity or diversity in LENR-.all here:


 http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2015/03/seeking-truth-and-power-of-lenr.html

 New replications at the horizon. Murphy, you never sleep?
 Peter

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




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

Re: [Vo]:diversity, one of the 6 pillars of LENR

2015-03-03 Thread Bob Cook

Axil--

I may be mixing golden delicious and red delicious apples, but I do not think I 
have mixed up oranges with respect to either the Lugano test or Parknomov's 
test.  You may not recognize an apple when you see one(: 

Both the tests in question use an alumina container, nickel...as a fuel, add 
heat via electrical circuits etc.  As far as I know, they may both have used Li 
as well as a catalyst or fuel. The reaction temperature seems to be in the same 
ballpark for both tests.  And hydrogen seems to be involved in each test.  

How do you think the two experiments differ in significant design aspects that 
are documented?  Maybe I would agree with you, if I understand the differences 
you perceive based on reported facts from the respective tests. 

For example, do you know of changes  or lack thereof in the Ni isotope 
concentrations resulting from Parkhomov's test?

Bob Cook
  - Original Message - 
  From: Axil Axil 
  To: vortex-l 
  Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 1:43 PM
  Subject: Re: [Vo]:diversity, one of the 6 pillars of LENR


  Bob,


  Your mixing apples and oranges. The Lagano test has nothing to do with the 
latest Dr. Parkhomov's  experiment of the 27th/28th February. 






  On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 1:26 PM, Bob Cook frobertc...@hotmail.com wrote:

Peter--

Your EGO-OUT report by Axil-Dixit sounds like it was written by Axil Axil 
who reports frequently on Vortex-l.  

Axil-Dixit's comments about the non-participating role of Ni in the Ni 
reaction is NOT borne out by the change of isotopic concentration measured in 
the Lugano Hot Cat test.  

Bob Cook
  - Original Message - 
  From: Peter Gluck 
  To: Arik El Boher ; Bo Hoistadt ; Brian Ahern ; CMNS ; Dagmar Kuhn ; doug 
marker ; Dr. Braun Tibor ; eCatNews ; Gabriel Moagar-Poladian ; Gary ; Haiko 
Lietz ; jeff aries ; Lewan Mats ; Nicolaie N. Vlad ; Peter Mobberley ; Pierre 
Clauzon ; Roberto Germano ; Roy Virgilio ; Sunwon Park ; vlad ; VORTEX ; Mark 
Tsirlin ; Steve Katinski ; David Daggett ; Valerio Ciampoli ; Peter Bjorkbom ; 
Peter Schlosser 
  Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 9:55 AM
  Subject: [Vo]:diversity, one of the 6 pillars of LENR




  Dear Friends,


  Daily News  focused on the Hot Cat, Axil's explanation and a few thoughts 
about unity or diversity in LENR-.all here:


  
http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2015/03/seeking-truth-and-power-of-lenr.html 


  New replications at the horizon. Murphy, you never sleep?
  Peter



  -- 

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

Re: [Vo]:diversity, one of the 6 pillars of LENR

2015-03-03 Thread Axil Axil

Bob,

Your mixing apples and oranges. The Lagano test has nothing to do with the
latest Dr. Parkhomov's  experiment of the 27th/28th February.



On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 1:26 PM, Bob Cook frobertc...@hotmail.com wrote:

  Peter--

 Your EGO-OUT report by Axil-Dixit sounds like it was written by Axil Axil
 who reports frequently on Vortex-l.

 Axil-Dixit's comments about the non-participating role of Ni in the Ni
 reaction is *NOT* borne out by the change of isotopic concentration
 measured in the Lugano Hot Cat test.

 Bob Cook

 - Original Message -
 *From:* Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com
 *To:* Arik El Boher elboh...@missouri.edu ; Bo Hoistadt
 bo.hois...@physics.uu.se ; Brian Ahern ahern_br...@msn.com ; CMNS
 c...@googlegroups.com ; Dagmar Kuhn dagmar.k...@gmx.de ; doug marker
 dsmar...@gmail.com ; Dr. Braun Tibor br...@mail.iif.hu ; eCatNews
 p...@ecatnews.com ; Gabriel Moagar-Poladian gamo...@yahoo.com ; Gary
 g...@garywright.com ; Haiko Lietz h...@haikolietz.de ; jeff aries
 arias...@aol.com ; Lewan Mats mats.le...@nyteknik.se ; Nicolaie N.
 Vlad nicolaienv...@gmail.com ; Peter Mobberley
 petermobber...@hotmail.com ; Pierre Clauzon pierre.clau...@orange.fr
 ; Roberto Germano germ...@promete.it ; Roy Virgilio
 r.virgi...@gmail.com ; Sunwon Park swp...@kaist.ac.kr ; vlad
 v...@zpenergy.com ; VORTEX vortex-l@eskimo.com ; Mark Tsirlin
 tsirlin.m...@hotmail.com ; Steve Katinski steve...@aol.com ; David
 Daggett david.l.dagg...@gmail.com ; Valerio Ciampoli
 v.ciamp...@gmail.com ; Peter Bjorkbom peter.bjork...@neofire.com ; Peter
 Schlosser schloss...@t-online.de
 *Sent:* Tuesday, March 03, 2015 9:55 AM
 *Subject:* [Vo]:diversity, one of the 6 pillars of LENR


 Dear Friends,

 Daily News  focused on the Hot Cat, Axil's explanation and a few thoughts
 about unity or diversity in LENR-.all here:


 http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2015/03/seeking-truth-and-power-of-lenr.html

 New replications at the horizon. Murphy, you never sleep?
 Peter

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

Re: [Vo]:diversity, one of the 6 pillars of LENR

2015-03-03 Thread Axil Axil

I said...

*There is now experimental analysis that discounts that the nickel powder
has contributed any power to the LENR reaction. From a theoretical
standpoint, this could be explained by the lack of proper sized particles
used in the experiment and also the lack of tubercles on the surface of any
nickel particle no matter its size.*

* This may mean that there has been no value added to the LENR reaction
from Parkhomov type nickel particles: these particles are LENR inert. For
Parkhomov, his LENR+ reaction is only carried by Dynamic NAE.*

On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 5:09 PM, Bob Cook frobertc...@hotmail.com wrote:

  Axil--

 I may be mixing golden delicious and red delicious apples, but I do not
 think I have mixed up oranges with respect to either the Lugano test or
 Parknomov's test.  You may not recognize an apple when you see one(:

 Both the tests in question use an alumina container, nickel...as a fuel,
 add heat via electrical circuits etc.  As far as I know, they may both
 have used Li as well as a catalyst or fuel. The reaction temperature seems
 to be in the same ballpark for both tests.  And hydrogen seems to be
 involved in each test.

 How do you think the two experiments differ in significant design aspects
 that are documented?  Maybe I would agree with you, if I understand the
 differences you perceive based on reported facts from the respective tests.

 For example, do you know of changes  or lack thereof in the Ni isotope
 concentrations resulting from Parkhomov's test?

 Bob Cook

 - Original Message -
 *From:* Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com
 *To:* vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
 *Sent:* Tuesday, March 03, 2015 1:43 PM
 *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:diversity, one of the 6 pillars of LENR

  Bob,

 Your mixing apples and oranges. The Lagano test has nothing to do with the
 latest Dr. Parkhomov's  experiment of the 27th/28th February.



 On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 1:26 PM, Bob Cook frobertc...@hotmail.com wrote:

  Peter--

 Your EGO-OUT report by Axil-Dixit sounds like it was written by Axil Axil
 who reports frequently on Vortex-l.

 Axil-Dixit's comments about the non-participating role of Ni in the Ni
 reaction is *NOT* borne out by the change of isotopic concentration
 measured in the Lugano Hot Cat test.

 Bob Cook

 - Original Message -
 *From:* Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com
 *To:* Arik El Boher elboh...@missouri.edu ; Bo Hoistadt
 bo.hois...@physics.uu.se ; Brian Ahern ahern_br...@msn.com ; CMNS
 c...@googlegroups.com ; Dagmar Kuhn dagmar.k...@gmx.de ; doug marker
 dsmar...@gmail.com ; Dr. Braun Tibor br...@mail.iif.hu ; eCatNews
 p...@ecatnews.com ; Gabriel Moagar-Poladian gamo...@yahoo.com ; Gary
 g...@garywright.com ; Haiko Lietz h...@haikolietz.de ; jeff aries
 arias...@aol.com ; Lewan Mats mats.le...@nyteknik.se ; Nicolaie N.
 Vlad nicolaienv...@gmail.com ; Peter Mobberley
 petermobber...@hotmail.com ; Pierre Clauzon pierre.clau...@orange.fr
 ; Roberto Germano germ...@promete.it ; Roy Virgilio
 r.virgi...@gmail.com ; Sunwon Park swp...@kaist.ac.kr ; vlad
 v...@zpenergy.com ; VORTEX vortex-l@eskimo.com ; Mark Tsirlin
 tsirlin.m...@hotmail.com ; Steve Katinski steve...@aol.com ; David
 Daggett david.l.dagg...@gmail.com ; Valerio Ciampoli
 v.ciamp...@gmail.com ; Peter Bjorkbom peter.bjork...@neofire.com ; Peter
 Schlosser schloss...@t-online.de
 *Sent:* Tuesday, March 03, 2015 9:55 AM
 *Subject:* [Vo]:diversity, one of the 6 pillars of LENR


 Dear Friends,

 Daily News  focused on the Hot Cat, Axil's explanation and a few thoughts
 about unity or diversity in LENR-.all here:


 http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2015/03/seeking-truth-and-power-of-lenr.html

 New replications at the horizon. Murphy, you never sleep?
 Peter

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

Re: [Vo]:diversity, one of the 6 pillars of LENR

2015-03-03 Thread Axil Axil

I believe that the reactor would need to run for some time like it did at
Lagano for nuclear changes to show up. Maybe the Russian experiment that
produced XP ran long enough to show changes.

On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 12:59 AM, Bob Cook frobertc...@hotmail.com wrote:

  Axil and Bob--

 You both seem to ignore the statement from the Lugano experiment that the
 Ni isotopic concentrations changed during the reaction.  It would be nice
 to get an isotopic analysis of the MFMP and the Parkhomov experiment's Ni
 powder available after the experiment to see if there are changes
 from normal Ni.

 I am not sure either the Parkhomov nor the MFMP test have good evidence of
 a nuclear reaction with a change in nuclear species or total mass of the
 the system.  Without an evident mass-to-energy conversion, what is the
 source of the explosive energy release in the two experiments?

 I do not consider either experiment has sufficient time producing XH to be
 indicative of LENR.  That is not to say the two experimental set-ups
 have no potential for producing excess heat, if properly controlled. ( I
 would agree that there seemed to be a start of an excess heat reaction
 prior to the bangs, however the extent of this production of excess heat
 was not very long. )



 Bob



 - Original Message -
 *From:* Bob Higgins rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com
 *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com
 *Sent:* Tuesday, March 03, 2015 9:23 PM
 *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:diversity, one of the 6 pillars of LENR

 See inline ...

 On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 8:05 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote:


  A sign that the nickel power is not working is the explosions that
 are occurring when the LENR reactions begin in the nano particles produced
 by lithium and hydrogen plasma as it cools from the high temperatures over
 1100C.

 There is no hydrogen plasma or lithium vapor for that matter.  Lithium at
 that pressure will not boil at the temperatures being used.  If you read
 Langmuir's work, you will see that it takes over 2500C for any significant
 hydrogen molecule dissociation, and it would be much hotter still to get a
 hydrogen plasma.


 Rossi says that his nickel is 5 9s pure.

5 9's pure has no bearing on whether the Ni was dissolving.  The
 Ni has been seen in EDX (Ed Storms' analysis of MFMP ash) the Li-Al-Ni-H
   solidified metal encasing the sintered Ni web.  It is now known that
 the Ni dissolves in the liquid Li-Al-H.


 There was a hydrogen fire that occurred after the alumina core raptured.
 Much the nickel melted because of the extra heat added to the 1057C
 temperature where the core failure took place. The fuel was sintered into a
 solid block by high heat.


 This is completely wrong.  The micrographs of the Ni ash in the MFMP
 experiment were the same as the Lugano Ni ash.  There was no explosion in
 the Lugano experiment.  Also, from personal experience, when Ni is heated
 in H2, it is fully oxide free by 250C and by 300C the sintering of the
 particles begins.  This happens long before there was ever an explosion.
 Not only that, but after the explosion, the Ni core was a completely intact
 molded rod of sintered material.  If you look at the micrographs, it would
 be impossible to create the sintered 3D web structure found by melting of
 the Ni.



 If the small features of the Ni are not complicit in the LENR, then it
 is not clear that size of the starting particles mean very much.


 Where is reference to this?

The reference is the Lugano report and Ed Storms' micrographs of
 the MFMP ash.  They show the Ni sintered into a 3D web with much larger
 dimensions.  I have personally seen this sintering in my experiments
 with Ni powder in H2 at much lower pressure.  I published a paper showing
 this.  In the gas phase experiments, much of the fine features on the
 carbonyl Ni particles are maintained, sintering at touching edges.


 Thanks for this info. I have always thought that placing the fuel in a
 pile was a bad idea. The DGT idea of spreading the fuel out in three
 dimensions in a scaffold of nickel nanofoam would keep the nickel particles
 apart so that they would not sinter together.


 In my experience, once you coat your carbonyl Ni particles with a
 nano-catalyst, the catalyst can prevent substantial sintering into a solid
 and help leave the Ni porous.  However, the carbonyl Ni particles by
 themselves don't want to sinter easily into a solid block - they want to
 sinter into a porous body naturally.



 The Ni particles get reduced of their oxide easily by 300C and they
 begin sintering into a porous web long before the reaction begins.  Thus,
 the starting particle size bears fairly little relation to the powder
 configuration at 900C and above.

 There is no oxide. Rossi says that his nickel is 5 9s pure.

 Chemically that statement, is total crap.  Whether Rossi
 started with 5 9's Ni, it was handled in air so there was an oxide.
 Further, the reactor
 was sealed with ambient air

Re: [Vo]:diversity, one of the 6 pillars of LENR

2015-03-03 Thread Axil Axil

This is completely wrong.  The micrographs of the Ni ash in the MFMP
experiment were the same as the Lugano Ni ash.  There was no explosion in
the Lugano experiment.  Also, from personal experience, when Ni is heated
in H2, it is fully oxide free by 250C and by 300C the sintering of the
particles begins.  This happens long before there was ever an explosion.
Not only that, but after the explosion, the Ni core was a completely intact
molded rod of sintered material.  If you look at the micrographs, it would
be impossible to create the sintered 3D web structure found by melting of
the Ni.

Thanks for your first hand observation. Doesn't your observation mean that
the MFMP BANG was a LENR event since the fuel residue between Lagano and
the bang are affected in the same way? Without the bang, the fuel is
unchanged. I believe that I had seen that fuel difference reported on
facebook or ECat news.



On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 12:23 AM, Bob Higgins rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com
wrote:

 See inline ...

 On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 8:05 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote:


 A sign that the nickel power is not working is the explosions that are
 occurring when the LENR reactions begin in the nano particles produced by
 lithium and hydrogen plasma as it cools from the high temperatures over
 1100C.

 There is no hydrogen plasma or lithium vapor for that matter.  Lithium at
 that pressure will not boil at the temperatures being used.  If you read
 Langmuir's work, you will see that it takes over 2500C for any significant
 hydrogen molecule dissociation, and it would be much hotter still to get a
 hydrogen plasma.


 Rossi says that his nickel is 5 9s pure.

5 9's pure has no bearing on whether the Ni was dissolving.  The
 Ni has been seen in EDX (Ed Storms' analysis of MFMP ash) the Li-Al-Ni-H
   solidified metal encasing the sintered Ni web.  It is now known that
 the Ni dissolves in the liquid Li-Al-H.


 There was a hydrogen fire that occurred after the alumina core raptured.
 Much the nickel melted because of the extra heat added to the 1057C
 temperature where the core failure took place. The fuel was sintered into a
 solid block by high heat.


 This is completely wrong.  The micrographs of the Ni ash in the MFMP
 experiment were the same as the Lugano Ni ash.  There was no explosion in
 the Lugano experiment.  Also, from personal experience, when Ni is heated
 in H2, it is fully oxide free by 250C and by 300C the sintering of the
 particles begins.  This happens long before there was ever an explosion.
 Not only that, but after the explosion, the Ni core was a completely intact
 molded rod of sintered material.  If you look at the micrographs, it would
 be impossible to create the sintered 3D web structure found by melting of
 the Ni.



 If the small features of the Ni are not complicit in the LENR, then it
 is not clear that size of the starting particles mean very much.


 Where is reference to this?

The reference is the Lugano report and Ed Storms' micrographs of
 the MFMP ash.  They show the Ni sintered into a 3D web with much larger
 dimensions.  I have personally seen this sintering in my experiments
 with Ni powder in H2 at much lower pressure.  I published a paper showing
 this.  In the gas phase experiments, much of the fine features on the
 carbonyl Ni particles are maintained, sintering at touching edges.


 Thanks for this info. I have always thought that placing the fuel in a
 pile was a bad idea. The DGT idea of spreading the fuel out in three
 dimensions in a scaffold of nickel nanofoam would keep the nickel particles
 apart so that they would not sinter together.


 In my experience, once you coat your carbonyl Ni particles with a
 nano-catalyst, the catalyst can prevent substantial sintering into a solid
 and help leave the Ni porous.  However, the carbonyl Ni particles by
 themselves don't want to sinter easily into a solid block - they want to
 sinter into a porous body naturally.



 The Ni particles get reduced of their oxide easily by 300C and they
 begin sintering into a porous web long before the reaction begins.  Thus,
 the starting particle size bears fairly little relation to the powder
 configuration at 900C and above.

 There is no oxide. Rossi says that his nickel is 5 9s pure.

 Chemically that statement, is total crap.  Whether Rossi
 started with 5 9's Ni, it was handled in air so there was an oxide.
 Further, the reactor
 was sealed with ambient air in it.  The fuel also included other
 ingredients (Fe2O3 for example, more oxygen and iron which is a normal
 contaminant of Ni.  Another contaminant is carbon because it is
 from a carbonyl process.  The carbon may actually be a catalyst in the
 end, but it is there in tiny quantities and will be burned out
 of the Ni before 700C.  The Ni oxide is easy to form and easy to remove in
 hot H2.
 The 5 9's part is irrelevent in the reaction as long there were
 no significant poisons

Re: [Vo]:diversity, one of the 6 pillars of LENR

2015-03-03 Thread Bob Higgins

Axil, what you are describing as proper sized and tubercles are
applicable to Rossi's low temperature catalyzed Ni fuel.  This is not what
was used in the HotCat or Parkhomov experiment.  SEM images of the Ni core
from the MFMP experiment (Bang!) show that early on the Ni particles are
completely reduced of oxide by the evolved hydrogen and by 300C, they are
sintering into a sparse 3D web like structure.  Then above 900C, the
released Li-Al alloy molten metal is wetting to the Ni and actually
dissolving the fine features while completely coating the Ni.  This coating
is a Li-Al-Ni-H alloy and this is likely a new modality of LENR with Ni
inside liquid metal and with the hydrogen ions in the liquid metal.  The
iron in the Lugano experiment is a known catalyst to make LiAlH4 decompose
at a lower temperature.  That is probably why the Lugano HotCat worked
better at a lower temperature than Parkhomov (the Lugano temperatures were
significantly off, with the 1410C measurement probably ~1130C; I can send
you the paper if you want).  This also decreases that calculated COP by at
least 20% which is getting closer to Parkhomov.

Lugano and Parkhomov are commensurate.  Rossi's low temperature eCat
catalyzed fuel is different and the reaction there is gas phase.

On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 3:18 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote:


 I said...

 *There is now experimental analysis that discounts that the nickel
 powder has contributed any power to the LENR reaction. From a theoretical
 standpoint, this could be explained by the lack of proper sized particles
 used in the experiment and also the lack of tubercles on the surface of any
 nickel particle no matter its size.*

 * This may mean that there has been no value added to the LENR reaction
 from Parkhomov type nickel particles: these particles are LENR inert. For
 Parkhomov, his LENR+ reaction is only carried by Dynamic NAE.*

Re: [Vo]:diversity, one of the 6 pillars of LENR

2015-03-03 Thread Bob Higgins

Axil, have you looked at the SEM images (courtesy of Ed Storms) of the Ni
from the MFMP reactor?

https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0B5Pc25a4cOM2fllFSWpFNVJoUlIxbERhRTE2M2FTY0s3TU9sZ2FsVG5wMGdodlE2ZW1JMVEusp=sharing

On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 4:02 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote:

On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 5:40 PM, Bob Higgins rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com
wrote:

Axil, what you are describing as proper sized and tubercles are
applicable to Rossi's low temperature catalyzed Ni fuel.

For a temperature of 1200C, the proper size is about 2 microns give or
take.

This is not what was used in the HotCat or Parkhomov experiment. SEM
images of the Ni core from the MFMP experiment (Bang!) show that early on
the Ni particles are completely reduced of oxide by the evolved hydrogen
and by 300C, they are sintering into a sparse 3D web like structure.

Page 43 figure 2 of the Lagano report shows a particle with tubercles. The
other has been melted.

Then above 900C, the released Li-Al alloy molten metal is wetting to the
Ni and actually dissolving the fine features while completely coating the
Ni. This coating is a Li-Al-Ni-H alloy and this is likely a new modality
of LENR with Ni inside liquid metal and with the hydrogen ions in the
liquid metal.

There is no experimental proof of this statement.

The iron in the Lugano experiment is a known catalyst to make LiAlH4
decompose at a lower temperature.

true

That is probably why the Lugano HotCat worked better at a lower
temperature than Parkhomov (the Lugano temperatures were significantly off,
with the 1410C measurement probably ~1130C; I can send you the paper if you
want). This also decreases that calculated COP by at least 20% which is
getting closer to Parkhomov.

Key to my point, Lugano demo worked better than the Parkhomov system
because Rossi's nickel particles are LENR reaction proven. Parkhomov nickel
did not work as stated by Parkhomov's own experimental analysis.

Lugano and Parkhomov are commensurate. Rossi's low temperature eCat
catalyzed fuel is different and the reaction there is gas phase.

Rossi's nickel powder looks the same over all his applications.

Re: [Vo]:diversity, one of the 6 pillars of LENR

2015-03-03 Thread Axil Axil

In my version of the experiment, I plan to have samples of temperature,
pressure, input current and voltage, radiation count and gamma spectrum,
and then I will collect the product gas at the end for offline analysis.
Of course the Ni ash will also be collected for examination.  This, plus
the existing papers on LiAlH4 decomposition will go a long way in
understanding what is going on.  I will be able to stop the experiment at
any point and gather the gas and analyze the ash.

I am  privileged to discuss your first hand results with you. . As an
experimenter you have a  unchallengeable claim on the truth. Thanks.

It is interesting that you will now work with  LiAlH4.

On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 12:23 AM, Bob Higgins rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com
wrote:

 See inline ...

 On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 8:05 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote:


 A sign that the nickel power is not working is the explosions that are
 occurring when the LENR reactions begin in the nano particles produced by
 lithium and hydrogen plasma as it cools from the high temperatures over
 1100C.

 There is no hydrogen plasma or lithium vapor for that matter.  Lithium at
 that pressure will not boil at the temperatures being used.  If you read
 Langmuir's work, you will see that it takes over 2500C for any significant
 hydrogen molecule dissociation, and it would be much hotter still to get a
 hydrogen plasma.


 Rossi says that his nickel is 5 9s pure.

5 9's pure has no bearing on whether the Ni was dissolving.  The
 Ni has been seen in EDX (Ed Storms' analysis of MFMP ash) the Li-Al-Ni-H
   solidified metal encasing the sintered Ni web.  It is now known that
 the Ni dissolves in the liquid Li-Al-H.


 There was a hydrogen fire that occurred after the alumina core raptured.
 Much the nickel melted because of the extra heat added to the 1057C
 temperature where the core failure took place. The fuel was sintered into a
 solid block by high heat.


 This is completely wrong.  The micrographs of the Ni ash in the MFMP
 experiment were the same as the Lugano Ni ash.  There was no explosion in
 the Lugano experiment.  Also, from personal experience, when Ni is heated
 in H2, it is fully oxide free by 250C and by 300C the sintering of the
 particles begins.  This happens long before there was ever an explosion.
 Not only that, but after the explosion, the Ni core was a completely intact
 molded rod of sintered material.  If you look at the micrographs, it would
 be impossible to create the sintered 3D web structure found by melting of
 the Ni.



 If the small features of the Ni are not complicit in the LENR, then it
 is not clear that size of the starting particles mean very much.


 Where is reference to this?

The reference is the Lugano report and Ed Storms' micrographs of
 the MFMP ash.  They show the Ni sintered into a 3D web with much larger
 dimensions.  I have personally seen this sintering in my experiments
 with Ni powder in H2 at much lower pressure.  I published a paper showing
 this.  In the gas phase experiments, much of the fine features on the
 carbonyl Ni particles are maintained, sintering at touching edges.


 Thanks for this info. I have always thought that placing the fuel in a
 pile was a bad idea. The DGT idea of spreading the fuel out in three
 dimensions in a scaffold of nickel nanofoam would keep the nickel particles
 apart so that they would not sinter together.


 In my experience, once you coat your carbonyl Ni particles with a
 nano-catalyst, the catalyst can prevent substantial sintering into a solid
 and help leave the Ni porous.  However, the carbonyl Ni particles by
 themselves don't want to sinter easily into a solid block - they want to
 sinter into a porous body naturally.



 The Ni particles get reduced of their oxide easily by 300C and they
 begin sintering into a porous web long before the reaction begins.  Thus,
 the starting particle size bears fairly little relation to the powder
 configuration at 900C and above.

 There is no oxide. Rossi says that his nickel is 5 9s pure.

 Chemically that statement, is total crap.  Whether Rossi
 started with 5 9's Ni, it was handled in air so there was an oxide.
 Further, the reactor
 was sealed with ambient air in it.  The fuel also included other
 ingredients (Fe2O3 for example, more oxygen and iron which is a normal
 contaminant of Ni.  Another contaminant is carbon because it is
 from a carbonyl process.  The carbon may actually be a catalyst in the
 end, but it is there in tiny quantities and will be burned out
 of the Ni before 700C.  The Ni oxide is easy to form and easy to remove in
 hot H2.
 The 5 9's part is irrelevent in the reaction as long there were
 no significant poisons present.  Rossi either used it because he had it or
 used it
 just to be sure what he started with.


 To really know how the chemistry of the fuel evolves with time and
 temperature is to run a series of experiments that

Re: [Vo]:diversity, one of the 6 pillars of LENR

2015-03-03 Thread Bob Cook

Axil and Bob--

You both seem to ignore the statement from the Lugano experiment that the Ni 
isotopic concentrations changed during the reaction.  It would be nice to get 
an isotopic analysis of the MFMP and the Parkhomov experiment's Ni powder 
available after the experiment to see if there are changes from normal Ni. 

I am not sure either the Parkhomov nor the MFMP test have good evidence of a 
nuclear reaction with a change in nuclear species or total mass of the the 
system.  Without an evident mass-to-energy conversion, what is the source of 
the explosive energy release in the two experiments?  

I do not consider either experiment has sufficient time producing XH to be 
indicative of LENR.  That is not to say the two experimental set-ups have no 
potential for producing excess heat, if properly controlled. ( I would agree 
that there seemed to be a start of an excess heat reaction prior to the bangs, 
however the extent of this production of excess heat was not very long. )



Bob


  - Original Message - 
  From: Bob Higgins 
  To: vortex-l@eskimo.com 
  Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2015 9:23 PM
  Subject: Re: [Vo]:diversity, one of the 6 pillars of LENR


  See inline ...



  On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 8:05 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote:



A sign that the nickel power is not working is the explosions that are 
occurring when the LENR reactions begin in the nano particles produced by 
lithium and hydrogen plasma as it cools from the high temperatures over 1100C.

  There is no hydrogen plasma or lithium vapor for that matter.  Lithium at 
that pressure will not boil at the temperatures being used.  If you read 
Langmuir's work, you will see that it takes over 2500C for any significant 
hydrogen molecule dissociation, and it would be much hotter still to get a 
hydrogen plasma. 


Rossi says that his nickel is 5 9s pure.

 5 9's pure has no bearing on whether the Ni was dissolving.  The 
Ni has been seen in EDX (Ed Storms' analysis of MFMP ash) the Li-Al-Ni-H 
solidified metal encasing the sintered Ni web.  It is now known that the Ni 
dissolves in the liquid Li-Al-H.


There was a hydrogen fire that occurred after the alumina core raptured. 
Much the nickel melted because of the extra heat added to the 1057C temperature 
where the core failure took place. The fuel was sintered into a solid block by 
high heat.


  This is completely wrong.  The micrographs of the Ni ash in the MFMP 
experiment were the same as the Lugano Ni ash.  There was no explosion in the 
Lugano experiment.  Also, from personal experience, when Ni is heated in H2, it 
is fully oxide free by 250C and by 300C the sintering of the particles begins.  
This happens long before there was ever an explosion.  Not only that, but after 
the explosion, the Ni core was a completely intact molded rod of sintered 
material.  If you look at the micrographs, it would be impossible to create the 
sintered 3D web structure found by melting of the Ni. 

  If the small features of the Ni are not complicit in the LENR, then 
it is not clear that size of the starting particles mean very much.  


Where is reference to this?
 The reference is the Lugano report and Ed Storms' micrographs of 
the MFMP ash.  They show the Ni sintered into a 3D web with much larger 
dimensions.  I have personally seen this sintering in my experiments with Ni 
powder in H2 at much lower pressure.  I published a paper showing this.  In the 
gas phase experiments, much of the fine features on the carbonyl Ni particles 
are maintained, sintering at touching edges.


Thanks for this info. I have always thought that placing the fuel in a pile 
was a bad idea. The DGT idea of spreading the fuel out in three dimensions in a 
scaffold of nickel nanofoam would keep the nickel particles apart so that they 
would not sinter together. 


  In my experience, once you coat your carbonyl Ni particles with a 
nano-catalyst, the catalyst can prevent substantial sintering into a solid and 
help leave the Ni porous.  However, the carbonyl Ni particles by themselves 
don't want to sinter easily into a solid block - they want to sinter into a 
porous body naturally. 

  The Ni particles get reduced of their oxide easily by 300C and they 
begin sintering into a porous web long before the reaction begins.  Thus, the 
starting particle size bears fairly little relation to the powder configuration 
at 900C and above.


There is no oxide. Rossi says that his nickel is 5 9s pure.
  Chemically that statement, is total crap.  Whether Rossi started 
with 5 9's Ni, it was handled in air so there was an oxide.  Further, the 
reactor
  was sealed with ambient air in it.  The fuel also included other 
ingredients (Fe2O3 for example, more oxygen and iron which is a normal
  contaminant of Ni.  Another contaminant is carbon because it is 
from a carbonyl process

Re: [Vo]:diversity, one of the 6 pillars of LENR

2015-03-03 Thread Axil Axil

By the way,  Nicholas Cafarelli explained this to me.

On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 12:57 AM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote:


 There is no hydrogen plasma or lithium vapor for that matter.  Lithium at
 that pressure will not boil at the temperatures being used.  If you read
 Langmuir's work, you will see that it takes over 2500C for any significant
 hydrogen molecule dissociation, and it would be much hotter still to get a
 hydrogen plasma.


 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6zurHSq4CB4

 This video shows how a super critical medium produces nanoparticles from
 dissolved ionic substances when there is a super critical phase transition
 caused by cooling the super critical medium so that the dissolved solids
 nucleate and form nanoparticles. Both dissolved Lithium,
 aluminum, and hydrides will nucleate and form nanoparticle in a cooled
 region of the supercritical hydrogen gas.

 On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 12:23 AM, Bob Higgins rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com
 wrote:

 See inline ...

 On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 8:05 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote:


 A sign that the nickel power is not working is the explosions that are
 occurring when the LENR reactions begin in the nano particles produced by
 lithium and hydrogen plasma as it cools from the high temperatures over
 1100C.

 There is no hydrogen plasma or lithium vapor for that matter.  Lithium at
 that pressure will not boil at the temperatures being used.  If you read
 Langmuir's work, you will see that it takes over 2500C for any significant
 hydrogen molecule dissociation, and it would be much hotter still to get a
 hydrogen plasma.


 Rossi says that his nickel is 5 9s pure.

5 9's pure has no bearing on whether the Ni was dissolving.
 The Ni has been seen in EDX (Ed Storms' analysis of MFMP ash) the
 Li-Al-Ni-H solidified metal encasing the sintered Ni web.  It is
 now known that the Ni dissolves in the liquid Li-Al-H.


 There was a hydrogen fire that occurred after the alumina core raptured.
 Much the nickel melted because of the extra heat added to the 1057C
 temperature where the core failure took place. The fuel was sintered into a
 solid block by high heat.


 This is completely wrong.  The micrographs of the Ni ash in the MFMP
 experiment were the same as the Lugano Ni ash.  There was no explosion in
 the Lugano experiment.  Also, from personal experience, when Ni is heated
 in H2, it is fully oxide free by 250C and by 300C the sintering of the
 particles begins.  This happens long before there was ever an explosion.
 Not only that, but after the explosion, the Ni core was a completely intact
 molded rod of sintered material.  If you look at the micrographs, it would
 be impossible to create the sintered 3D web structure found by melting of
 the Ni.



 If the small features of the Ni are not complicit in the LENR, then
 it is not clear that size of the starting particles mean very much.


 Where is reference to this?

The reference is the Lugano report and Ed Storms' micrographs
 of the MFMP ash.  They show the Ni sintered into a 3D web with much larger
 dimensions.  I have personally seen this sintering in my experiments
 with Ni powder in H2 at much lower pressure.  I published a paper showing
 this.  In the gas phase experiments, much of the fine features on the
 carbonyl Ni particles are maintained, sintering at touching edges.


 Thanks for this info. I have always thought that placing the fuel in a
 pile was a bad idea. The DGT idea of spreading the fuel out in three
 dimensions in a scaffold of nickel nanofoam would keep the nickel particles
 apart so that they would not sinter together.


 In my experience, once you coat your carbonyl Ni particles with a
 nano-catalyst, the catalyst can prevent substantial sintering into a solid
 and help leave the Ni porous.  However, the carbonyl Ni particles by
 themselves don't want to sinter easily into a solid block - they want to
 sinter into a porous body naturally.



 The Ni particles get reduced of their oxide easily by 300C and they
 begin sintering into a porous web long before the reaction begins.  Thus,
 the starting particle size bears fairly little relation to the powder
 configuration at 900C and above.

 There is no oxide. Rossi says that his nickel is 5 9s pure.

 Chemically that statement, is total crap.  Whether Rossi
 started with 5 9's Ni, it was handled in air so there was an oxide.
 Further, the reactor
 was sealed with ambient air in it.  The fuel also included
 other ingredients (Fe2O3 for example, more oxygen and iron which is a 
 normal
 contaminant of Ni.  Another contaminant is carbon because it is
 from a carbonyl process.  The carbon may actually be a catalyst in the
 end, but it is there in tiny quantities and will be burned out
 of the Ni before 700C.  The Ni oxide is easy to form and easy to remove in
 hot H2.
 The 5 9's part is irrelevent in the reaction as long there were
 no significant poisons present.

Re: [Vo]:diversity, one of the 6 pillars of LENR

2015-03-03 Thread Axil Axil

Regarding:  I believe that I had seen that fuel difference reported on
facebook or ECat news.

This is it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XjWqx-BE4p0feature=youtu.be

On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 1:17 AM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote:

 This is completely wrong.  The micrographs of the Ni ash in the MFMP
 experiment were the same as the Lugano Ni ash.  There was no explosion in
 the Lugano experiment.  Also, from personal experience, when Ni is heated
 in H2, it is fully oxide free by 250C and by 300C the sintering of the
 particles begins.  This happens long before there was ever an explosion.
 Not only that, but after the explosion, the Ni core was a completely intact
 molded rod of sintered material.  If you look at the micrographs, it would
 be impossible to create the sintered 3D web structure found by melting of
 the Ni.

 Thanks for your first hand observation. Doesn't your observation mean that
 the MFMP BANG was a LENR event since the fuel residue between Lagano and
 the bang are affected in the same way? Without the bang, the fuel is
 unchanged. I believe that I had seen that fuel difference reported on
 facebook or ECat news.



 On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 12:23 AM, Bob Higgins rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com
 wrote:

 See inline ...

 On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 8:05 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote:


 A sign that the nickel power is not working is the explosions that are
 occurring when the LENR reactions begin in the nano particles produced by
 lithium and hydrogen plasma as it cools from the high temperatures over
 1100C.

 There is no hydrogen plasma or lithium vapor for that matter.  Lithium at
 that pressure will not boil at the temperatures being used.  If you read
 Langmuir's work, you will see that it takes over 2500C for any significant
 hydrogen molecule dissociation, and it would be much hotter still to get a
 hydrogen plasma.


 Rossi says that his nickel is 5 9s pure.

5 9's pure has no bearing on whether the Ni was dissolving.
 The Ni has been seen in EDX (Ed Storms' analysis of MFMP ash) the
 Li-Al-Ni-H solidified metal encasing the sintered Ni web.  It is
 now known that the Ni dissolves in the liquid Li-Al-H.


 There was a hydrogen fire that occurred after the alumina core raptured.
 Much the nickel melted because of the extra heat added to the 1057C
 temperature where the core failure took place. The fuel was sintered into a
 solid block by high heat.


 This is completely wrong.  The micrographs of the Ni ash in the MFMP
 experiment were the same as the Lugano Ni ash.  There was no explosion in
 the Lugano experiment.  Also, from personal experience, when Ni is heated
 in H2, it is fully oxide free by 250C and by 300C the sintering of the
 particles begins.  This happens long before there was ever an explosion.
 Not only that, but after the explosion, the Ni core was a completely intact
 molded rod of sintered material.  If you look at the micrographs, it would
 be impossible to create the sintered 3D web structure found by melting of
 the Ni.



 If the small features of the Ni are not complicit in the LENR, then
 it is not clear that size of the starting particles mean very much.


 Where is reference to this?

The reference is the Lugano report and Ed Storms' micrographs
 of the MFMP ash.  They show the Ni sintered into a 3D web with much larger
 dimensions.  I have personally seen this sintering in my experiments
 with Ni powder in H2 at much lower pressure.  I published a paper showing
 this.  In the gas phase experiments, much of the fine features on the
 carbonyl Ni particles are maintained, sintering at touching edges.


 Thanks for this info. I have always thought that placing the fuel in a
 pile was a bad idea. The DGT idea of spreading the fuel out in three
 dimensions in a scaffold of nickel nanofoam would keep the nickel particles
 apart so that they would not sinter together.


 In my experience, once you coat your carbonyl Ni particles with a
 nano-catalyst, the catalyst can prevent substantial sintering into a solid
 and help leave the Ni porous.  However, the carbonyl Ni particles by
 themselves don't want to sinter easily into a solid block - they want to
 sinter into a porous body naturally.



 The Ni particles get reduced of their oxide easily by 300C and they
 begin sintering into a porous web long before the reaction begins.  Thus,
 the starting particle size bears fairly little relation to the powder
 configuration at 900C and above.

 There is no oxide. Rossi says that his nickel is 5 9s pure.

 Chemically that statement, is total crap.  Whether Rossi
 started with 5 9's Ni, it was handled in air so there was an oxide.
 Further, the reactor
 was sealed with ambient air in it.  The fuel also included
 other ingredients (Fe2O3 for example, more oxygen and iron which is a 
 normal
 contaminant of Ni.  Another contaminant is carbon because it is
 from a carbonyl process.  The carbon may actually be a catalyst in the

Re: [Vo]:diversity, one of the 6 pillars of LENR

2015-03-03 Thread Axil Axil

On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 5:40 PM, Bob Higgins rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com
wrote:


Axil, what you are describing as proper sized and tubercles are
 applicable to Rossi's low temperature catalyzed Ni fuel.


For a temperature of 1200C, the proper size is about 2 microns give or take.


 This is not what was used in the HotCat or Parkhomov experiment.  SEM
 images of the Ni core from the MFMP experiment (Bang!) show that early on
 the Ni particles are completely reduced of oxide by the evolved hydrogen
 and by 300C, they are sintering into a sparse 3D web like structure.


Page 43 figure 2 of the Lagano report shows a particle with tubercles. The
other has been  melted.


 Then above 900C, the released Li-Al alloy molten metal is wetting to the
 Ni and actually dissolving the fine features while completely coating the
 Ni.  This coating is a Li-Al-Ni-H alloy and this is likely a new modality
 of LENR with Ni inside liquid metal and with the hydrogen ions in the
 liquid metal.



There is no experimental proof of this statement.


 The iron in the Lugano experiment is a known catalyst to make LiAlH4
 decompose at a lower temperature.


true



 That is probably why the Lugano HotCat worked better at a lower
 temperature than Parkhomov (the Lugano temperatures were significantly off,
 with the 1410C measurement probably ~1130C; I can send you the paper if you
 want).  This also decreases that calculated COP by at least 20% which is
 getting closer to Parkhomov.


Key to my point, Lugano demo worked better than the Parkhomov system
because Rossi's nickel particles are LENR reaction proven. Parkhomov nickel
did not work as stated by Parkhomov's own experimental analysis.




 Lugano and Parkhomov are commensurate.  Rossi's low temperature eCat
 catalyzed fuel is different and the reaction there is gas phase.

 Rossi's nickel powder looks the same over all his applications.

Re: [Vo]:diversity, one of the 6 pillars of LENR

2015-03-03 Thread Bob Higgins

Yes, that is correct. We do not have an SEM of Parkhomov's Ni particles.
You don't know that they were not similar to MFMP's. However, the same
thing happened to Parkhomov's particles as the MFMP particles - they were
covered with liquid Li-Al-Ni-H at the time of the reaction and the fine
features were substantially dissolved giving the Li-Al-Ni-H its 4% Ni.
This tends to equalize bigger and smaller particles.

Parkhomov's choice of Ni powder seemed to have worked. He didn't get quite
the COP claimed by the Lugano team for the HotCat (but the Lungano numbers
appear to be wrong too high). In the Lugano case, look on page 43 Figure 2
- it is almost identical to the micrographs of MFMP, and MFMP was
replicating Parkhomov. It is a pretty compelling case that all 3
experiments were commensurate at the core, save for some iron particles in
the HotCat.

On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 4:21 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote:

I have no problem with the surface features of the MFMP nickel powder. The
comparison was between Lagano and the latest Dr. Parkhomov's experiment of
the 27th/28th February.

Where is the micrograph of that Russian powder?

Your mixing apples and oranges.

On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 6:15 PM, Bob Higgins rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com
wrote:

Axil, have you looked at the SEM images (courtesy of Ed Storms) of the Ni
from the MFMP reactor?

https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0B5Pc25a4cOM2fllFSWpFNVJoUlIxbERhRTE2M2FTY0s3TU9sZ2FsVG5wMGdodlE2ZW1JMVEusp=sharing

On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 4:02 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote:

On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 5:40 PM, Bob Higgins rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com
wrote:

Axil, what you are describing as proper sized and tubercles are
applicable to Rossi's low temperature catalyzed Ni fuel.

For a temperature of 1200C, the proper size is about 2 microns give or
take.

Page 43 figure 2 of the Lagano report shows a particle with tubercles.
The other has been melted.

Then above 900C, the released Li-Al alloy molten metal is wetting to
the Ni and actually dissolving the fine features while completely coating
the Ni. This coating is a Li-Al-Ni-H alloy and this is likely a new
modality of LENR with Ni inside liquid metal and with the hydrogen ions in
the liquid metal.