Re: [Vo]:PhononNuclear Coupling
In reply to JonesBeene's message of Mon, 30 Oct 2017 15:17:46 -0700: Hi, [snip] > >Nigel > >With water, there is the phenomenon of proton hopping even without >cavitation. > >The Hagelstein paper you cite proposes a neutron analog of electron hopping in >semiconductors. This means that there are two natural phenomena on which to >model neutron hopping. > >Protons hop from one water molecule to another naturally and consequently the >principle of proton mobility in water has been known for 200 years ... now >called the Grotthuss mechanism but all attempts to split water more >efficiently by using it have failed. It is a very fast mechanism and >apparently recombination is too rapid to make it useful. >https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grotthuss_mechanism I don't think this actually requires proton tunneling. Collisions between molecules would suffice. > >But the Grotthuss mechanism could be understood to provide a closer analogy to >neutron hopping, since the mass difference is small between the two, with the >huge advantage of the neutron having no difficulty with the Coulomb barrier. Neutrons don't have a problem with the Coulomb barrier, but they are much more firmly bound to their nucleus than a proton is bound in a water molecule. > >Radiation in the range of 1-5 keV is surely evidence of some type of LENR but >not cold fusion. It is too bad that the two are conflated. It may not be evidence of some type of LENR. The shock wave would accelerate the atoms/electrons of the plate, possible sufficient to create the effect directly. BTW 1-5 keV is also what one might expect from a Hydrino reaction. UV could excite the electrons ;) [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
RE: [Vo]:Phonon–Nuclear Coupling
Nigel With water, there is the phenomenon of “proton hopping” even without cavitation. The Hagelstein paper you cite proposes a neutron analog of electron hopping in semiconductors. This means that there are two natural phenomena on which to model neutron hopping. Protons hop from one water molecule to another naturally and consequently the principle of proton mobility in water has been known for 200 years ... now called the Grotthuss mechanism – but all attempts to split water more efficiently by using it have failed. It is a very fast mechanism and apparently recombination is too rapid to make it useful. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grotthuss_mechanism But the Grotthuss mechanism could be understood to provide a closer analogy to neutron hopping, since the mass difference is small between the two, with the huge advantage of the neutron having no difficulty with the Coulomb barrier. Radiation in the range of 1-5 keV is surely evidence of some type of LENR but not cold fusion. It is too bad that the two are conflated. From: Nigel Dyer One of the systems mentioned in Hagelstein's 2015 paper (http://www.currentscience.ac.in/Volumes/108/04/0601.pdf) is the Vysotskii system where what appears to be a coherent collapse of cavitaion bubbles causes a shock wave to travel through a metal plate and generate a very sharp pulse of 1-5keV X-rays from the metal surface on the other side. I have just come back from a conference where Vysotskii presented this. I felt that it was very clever and appeared to show some very interesting coherent energy conversion phenomena, but there did not appear to be any evidence of LENR Nigel JonesBeene wrote: Hi Robin The neutron “hopping” modality is indeed one way that gain could happen. In fact you are probably referring to Hagelstein’s 1993 paper where he introduces this concept wrt palladium. I do not think he was envisioning iron as the active metal at that time. Perhaps he will be reminded of this possibility. I like it but it also demands that the 2.4 MeV gamma is attenuated via the down-conversion aspect – so there are two miracles involved. … or do you get both miracles for the price of one when you have up and down conversion together ???
Re: [Vo]:Phonon–Nuclear Coupling
One of the systems mentioned in Hagelstein's 2015 paper (http://www.currentscience.ac.in/Volumes/108/04/0601.pdf) is the Vysotskii system where what appears to be a coherent collapse of cavitaion bubbles causes a shock wave to travel through a metal plate and generate a very sharp pulse of 1-5keV X-rays from the metal surface on the other side. I have just come back from a conference where Vysotskii presented this. I felt that it was very clever and appeared to show some very interesting coherent energy conversion phenomena, but there did not appear to be any evidence of LENR Nigel On 27/10/2017 23:09, JonesBeene wrote: Hi Robin The neutron “hopping” modality is indeed one way that gain could happen. In fact you are probably referring to Hagelstein’s 1993 paper where he introduces this concept wrt palladium. I do not think he was envisioning iron as the active metal at that time. Perhaps he will be reminded of this possibility. I like it but it also demands that the 2.4 MeV gamma is attenuated via the down-conversion aspect – so there are two miracles involved. … or do you get both miracles for the price of one when you have up and down conversion together ???
Re: [Vo]:PhononNuclear Coupling
In reply to JonesBeene's message of Sun, 29 Oct 2017 08:19:31 -0700: Hi Jones, [snip] Another possibility is that fast daughter nuclei rip through the lattice creating lots of free electron - ion pairs. As the electrons return to the ions in a strong magnetic field, they will emit cyclotron radiation (or would in free space). If this can be captured resonantly, one could end up with a system where nuclear energy is converted mostly into electrical energy, with only a minority left over as heat. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
RE: [Vo]:Phonon–Nuclear Coupling
The Mossbauer effect has been mentioned in many past LERN experiments where gain is seen -- but in a nebulous way. In fact nickel as well as iron has a Mossbauer isotope (61 Ni) Despite the association of heat with gamma radiation of any kind, when a thermal anomaly is seen with iron it is often cooling (magnetocaloric effect) rather than excess heating. The idea of a nucleus being “recoil free” essentially means it does not heat up so as to thermalize applied gamma radiation. In fact, cooling could be more likely than heating due to an as yet undescribed mechanism. Magnetic cooling in iron, due to a lossless resonance at 14.4 keV is a concept which fits into surprising phenomena known as the “Manelas effect”. For a nucleus to emit a gamma-ray and a second nucleus to absorb it with no thermal gain and then reemit it - implies a thermal loss since there is a time constant in which nothing else can take place (during that delay). The delay in iron is very long on that scale <50 ns. With nickel the and the Mossbauer gamma, the delay is much shorter and the radiation is much stronger likely (67.4 keV), so a magnetocaloric effect is far less by two orders of magnitude. That may be a naïve way to describe the situation but it could be one reason LENR with nickel is difficult to accomplish on a reliable basis and does not happen with iron at all since it could be the case that sometimes Nickel can self-cool with the magnetocaloric effect which cancels out thermal gain from the gamma. Iron is more likely to self-cool all the time unless the geometry forces the gamma to be retained longer. Thus an iron rod could heat but an iron sheet would cool due to gammas being emitted readily from the higher surface area and field lines. In all cases, the thermal anomaly would begin with a gamma, which could be initiated by some other mechanism such as neutron hopping - and since tunneling is involved, far less net energy is involved than the isotopic mass difference would suggest. Jones Yes it is clear that Meyer got the theory wrong - and possibly most of the data. Other features of the experiment are interesting in a historical context. I can find no claimed replication online. The significance of his experiment today is mostly in relationship to the more recent work of Hagelstein and Wallace. The possibility that iron could be unstable in any nuclear sense (i.e. “hopping”) raises the possibility of a “back door” to gain with both iron and nickel, which is so contrary to expectation that it doesn’t settle well with what we know or think we know about the nucleus. >Going back to the general principle of stimulating the element iron with waves >of another type and/or frequency, in order to cause actual isotope >transmutation - there is another entry: the Meyer-Mace device which received a >flurry of attention 20 years ago, was patented and then all but disappeared.. > >http://jnaudin.online.fr/html/mmcgen.htm Fe56 can't be converted to Fe54 unless you can find another isotope that is even hungrier for neutrons than Fe56. (Difficult considering that Fe56 is near the top of the binding energy curve). So I think their theory is probably nonsense, but they may have had something practical nevertheless.
RE: [Vo]:Phonon–Nuclear Coupling
Robin, Yes it is clear that Meyer got the theory wrong - and possibly most of the data. Other features of the experiment are interesting in a historical context. I can find no claimed replication online. The significance of his experiment today is mostly in relationship to the more recent work of Hagelstein and Wallace. The possibility that iron could be unstable in any nuclear sense (i.e. “hopping”) raises the possibility of a “back door” to gain with both iron and nickel, which is so contrary to expectation that it doesn’t settle well with what we know or think we know about the nucleus. >Going back to the general principle of stimulating the element iron with waves >of another type and/or frequency, in order to cause actual isotope >transmutation - there is another entry: the Meyer-Mace device which received a >flurry of attention 20 years ago, was patented and then all but disappeared.. > >http://jnaudin.online.fr/html/mmcgen.htm Fe56 can't be converted to Fe54 unless you can find another isotope that is even hungrier for neutrons than Fe56. (Difficult considering that Fe56 is near the top of the binding energy curve). So I think their theory is probably nonsense, but they may have had something practical nevertheless. [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
Re: [Vo]:Phonon–Nuclear Coupling
Bob, thanks for the heads up. I will look at the references. From: bobcook39...@hotmail.com Sent: Saturday, October 28, 2017 11:01 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: [Vo]:Phonon–Nuclear Coupling Here are some more ideas from Meyer. https://www.scribd.com/document/142531064/Michel-Meyer-NMR-Generator Note the list of referenced NMR documents with some by Floyd Sweet. They may help Ahern understand the operation of his magnetic block device. It appears to be a good source of information on potential LENR mechanisms and an extensive bibliography on NMR. Bob Cook Sent from Mail<https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgo.microsoft.com%2Ffwlink%2F%3FLinkId%3D550986&data=02%7C01%7CAhern_Brian%40msn.com%7C2e724501295f42f6f18e08d51e796115%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435%7C1%7C0%7C636448429029695946&sdata=rPWVCJyyj%2BRza6tkGQVcJuhHJxQKUkOv0L7xG7YvvR8%3D&reserved=0> for Windows 10 From: bobcook39...@hotmail.com Sent: Saturday, October 28, 2017 8:45:33 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: [Vo]:Phonon–Nuclear Coupling What happened to Meyer-Mace? Does anyone know? Another link from 2008-09 regarding the Meyer-Mace device withadditional comments is here: http://overunity.com/4333/meyer-mace-isotopic-nmr-generator/<https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Foverunity.com%2F4333%2Fmeyer-mace-isotopic-nmr-generator%2F&data=02%7C01%7CAhern_Brian%40msn.com%7C2e724501295f42f6f18e08d51e796115%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435%7C1%7C0%7C636448429029695946&sdata=SvtaERhmgaU8xqiqk%2FNw9NsinlJyxhu2natUr8YJ36g%3D&reserved=0> Bob Cook From: JonesBeene Sent: Saturday, October 28, 2017 7:06:06 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: [Vo]:Phonon–Nuclear Coupling Going back to the general principle of stimulating the element iron with waves of another type and/or frequency, in order to cause actual isotope transmutation - there is another entry: the Meyer-Mace device which received a flurry of attention 20 years ago, was patented and then all but disappeared. http://jnaudin.online.fr/html/mmcgen.htm<https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fjnaudin.online.fr%2Fhtml%2Fmmcgen.htm&data=02%7C01%7CAhern_Brian%40msn.com%7C2e724501295f42f6f18e08d51e796115%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435%7C1%7C0%7C636448429029695946&sdata=Qrx0%2FPxkVIA4I%2Bjm7KLyGr8WnW3UQ7%2Fiwja8Dmlyh9k%3D&reserved=0> In this device an iron rod was said to produce x-rays of ~20 keV from NRM stimulation. In contrast, the Hagelstein paper talks about x-rays of 14.4 keV being derived from ultrasonic stimulation. In addition, John Wallace who is an expert in ferrous materials has performed a similar experiment using iron which is apparently gainful. [no citation available at the moment but I have read the paper] Bottom line, given the credentials of Wallace and Hagelstein - this cannot easily be categorized as fringe physics, even though the thought of bringing about nuclear changes with low energy input makes it seem suspect in the eyes of the mainstream.
Re: [Vo]:PhononNuclear Coupling
In reply to JonesBeene's message of Sat, 28 Oct 2017 07:06:06 -0700: Hi, [snip] > > >Going back to the general principle of stimulating the element iron with waves >of another type and/or frequency, in order to cause actual isotope >transmutation - there is another entry: the Meyer-Mace device which received a >flurry of attention 20 years ago, was patented and then all but disappeared.. > >http://jnaudin.online.fr/html/mmcgen.htm Fe56 can't be converted to Fe54 unless you can find another isotope that is even hungrier for neutrons than Fe56. (Difficult considering that Fe56 is near the top of the binding energy curve). So I think their theory is probably nonsense, but they may have had something practical nevertheless. [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
RE: [Vo]:Phonon–Nuclear Coupling
Here are some more ideas from Meyer. https://www.scribd.com/document/142531064/Michel-Meyer-NMR-Generator Note the list of referenced NMR documents with some by Floyd Sweet. They may help Ahern understand the operation of his magnetic block device. It appears to be a good source of information on potential LENR mechanisms and an extensive bibliography on NMR. Bob Cook Sent from Mail<https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> for Windows 10 From: bobcook39...@hotmail.com Sent: Saturday, October 28, 2017 8:45:33 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: [Vo]:Phonon–Nuclear Coupling What happened to Meyer-Mace? Does anyone know? Another link from 2008-09 regarding the Meyer-Mace device withadditional comments is here: http://overunity.com/4333/meyer-mace-isotopic-nmr-generator/ Bob Cook From: JonesBeene Sent: Saturday, October 28, 2017 7:06:06 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: [Vo]:Phonon–Nuclear Coupling Going back to the general principle of stimulating the element iron with waves of another type and/or frequency, in order to cause actual isotope transmutation - there is another entry: the Meyer-Mace device which received a flurry of attention 20 years ago, was patented and then all but disappeared. http://jnaudin.online.fr/html/mmcgen.htm In this device an iron rod was said to produce x-rays of ~20 keV from NRM stimulation. In contrast, the Hagelstein paper talks about x-rays of 14.4 keV being derived from ultrasonic stimulation. In addition, John Wallace who is an expert in ferrous materials has performed a similar experiment using iron which is apparently gainful. [no citation available at the moment but I have read the paper] Bottom line, given the credentials of Wallace and Hagelstein - this cannot easily be categorized as fringe physics, even though the thought of bringing about nuclear changes with low energy input makes it seem suspect in the eyes of the mainstream.
RE: [Vo]:Phonon–Nuclear Coupling-- additional Meyer ideas from 1976
See the English translation from French at half way through the item. http://www.hyiq.org/Reference/Profile?Name=Michel%20Meyer MFMP folks may have an interest for a duplication of the Meyer device. Note that Meyer suggests that resonant energy stimulation of the electronic structure may be accomplished by fractional input signals with respect to the primary electronic resonance of the copper induction coils. Tuned high frequency stimulated EM emission devices may also work to achieve resonant energy input. I would suspect that a close look at the iron or copper isotopic concentration would make sense out of the excess energy reported for the Meyer device with the presence of nucleons with lower binding energy. This appears to be a LENR with coupling to the copper lattice electrons and creation of an electric field that induces a classical current—an intrinsic LENR dynamo. Bob Cook Sent from Mail<https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> for Windows 10 From: JonesBeene Sent: Saturday, October 28, 2017 7:06:06 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: [Vo]:Phonon–Nuclear Coupling Going back to the general principle of stimulating the element iron with waves of another type and/or frequency, in order to cause actual isotope transmutation - there is another entry: the Meyer-Mace device which received a flurry of attention 20 years ago, was patented and then all but disappeared. http://jnaudin.online.fr/html/mmcgen.htm In this device an iron rod was said to produce x-rays of ~20 keV from NRM stimulation. In contrast, the Hagelstein paper talks about x-rays of 14.4 keV being derived from ultrasonic stimulation. In addition, John Wallace who is an expert in ferrous materials has performed a similar experiment using iron which is apparently gainful. [no citation available at the moment but I have read the paper] Bottom line, given the credentials of Wallace and Hagelstein - this cannot easily be categorized as fringe physics, even though the thought of bringing about nuclear changes with low energy input makes it seem suspect in the eyes of the mainstream.
RE: [Vo]:Phonon–Nuclear Coupling
What happened to Meyer-Mace? Does anyone know? Another link from 2008-09 regarding the Meyer-Mace device withadditional comments is here: http://overunity.com/4333/meyer-mace-isotopic-nmr-generator/ Bob Cook From: JonesBeene Sent: Saturday, October 28, 2017 7:06:06 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: [Vo]:Phonon–Nuclear Coupling Going back to the general principle of stimulating the element iron with waves of another type and/or frequency, in order to cause actual isotope transmutation - there is another entry: the Meyer-Mace device which received a flurry of attention 20 years ago, was patented and then all but disappeared. http://jnaudin.online.fr/html/mmcgen.htm In this device an iron rod was said to produce x-rays of ~20 keV from NRM stimulation. In contrast, the Hagelstein paper talks about x-rays of 14.4 keV being derived from ultrasonic stimulation. In addition, John Wallace who is an expert in ferrous materials has performed a similar experiment using iron which is apparently gainful. [no citation available at the moment but I have read the paper] Bottom line, given the credentials of Wallace and Hagelstein - this cannot easily be categorized as fringe physics, even though the thought of bringing about nuclear changes with low energy input makes it seem suspect in the eyes of the mainstream.
RE: [Vo]:Phonon–Nuclear Coupling
Going back to the general principle of stimulating the element iron with waves of another type and/or frequency, in order to cause actual isotope transmutation - there is another entry: the Meyer-Mace device which received a flurry of attention 20 years ago, was patented and then all but disappeared.. http://jnaudin.online.fr/html/mmcgen.htm In this device an iron rod was said to produce x-rays of ~20 keV from NRM stimulation. In contrast, the Hagelstein paper talks about x-rays of 14.4 keV being derived from ultrasonic stimulation. In addition, John Wallace who is an expert in ferrous materials has performed a similar experiment using iron which is apparently gainful. [no citation available at the moment but I have read the paper] Bottom line, given the credentials of Wallace and Hagelstein - this cannot easily be categorized as fringe physics, even though the thought of bringing about nuclear changes with low energy input makes it seem suspect in the eyes of the mainstream.
Re: [Vo]:PhononNuclear Coupling
In reply to JonesBeene's message of Fri, 27 Oct 2017 15:09:37 -0700: Hi, [snip] >Hi Robin > >The neutron hopping modality is indeed one way that gain could happen. > >In fact you are probably referring to Hagelsteins 1993 paper where he >introduces this concept wrt palladium. > >I do not think he was envisioning iron as the active metal at that time. > >Perhaps he will be reminded of this possibility. > >I like it but it also demands that the 2.4 MeV gamma is attenuated via the >down-conversion aspect so there are two miracles involved. [snip] I'm not sure there would be a gamma. The energy may appear as kinetic energy of the two new nuclei, where they "push off" against one another, moving in opposite directions. Because they are massive, there would also be virtually no bremsstrahlung. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
RE: [Vo]:Phonon–Nuclear Coupling
Hagelstein has been working om a coupling between phonic lattice spin energy states (thermal energy) and nuclear energy states, including (I believe) nuclear spin energy states. sonoluminescence<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sonoluminescence> testing has been accomplished in the past at PNL by G. Posakony with the collaborators at ONL. Neutrons and other radiation has been observed as I recall and I believe draft papers exist. The mechanism for the coupling has not been identified to my knowledge, but it seems like the Haelelstein modelling may be pertinent. The math associated with spin coupling is not well understood, since the Planck constant and spin quanta do not have a good conceptual foundation at small distances IMHO. How uncertainty principle applies to spin energy and quantized angular momentum is another glitch. The PNL/ONL work may help understand the mechanism. It may be that the compression produced in the sonoluminescence experiment, involving cavitation bubble collapse in a fluid, produces a coherent system with increasing phonic temperatures and resonant energy states which allows the coherent system to expel EM x-rays and reach a lower total energy including lower phonic energy. The similarity to LENR is the existence of a coherent system with induced resonant conditions coupling lattice electron spin with nuclear spin and probable transition to lower total energy. Bob Cook From: JonesBeene<mailto:jone...@pacbell.net> Sent: Friday, October 27, 2017 1:06 PM To: Vortex List<mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com> Subject: [Vo]:Phonon–Nuclear Coupling Think about this: a process for converting sound into x-rays but not involving hydrogen or sonoluminescence<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sonoluminescence>…. The conference papers from ICCM/20-Sendai includes an important but overlooked paper “Developing Phonon–Nuclear Coupling Experiments with Vibrating Plates and Radiation Detectors” Florian Metzler, Peter Hagelstein and Siyuan Lu This was available on the LENR-CANR site but for some reason a proper URL citation cannot be found. Also, apparently it has been updated with further work recently. Abstract Excess heat has been reported in cold fusion experiments since 1989; however, there is at present no accepted explanation for what mechanisms are involved. Over the past decades a general theory has been developed which seems applicable to excess heat and other anomalies systematically; but in this case we do not yet have unambiguous experimental support for the phonon–nuclear coupling and enhanced up-conversion and down-conversion mechanism. This has motivated experimental studies with which we hope to develop relevant experimental results from which clear tests of theory can be made. A facility has been developed with which we are able to induce vibrations in metal plates from about 10 kHz up to about 10 MHz and then measure the relative displacement. With a high-power piezo transducer we have driven a steel plate at 2.23 MHz to produce a vibrational power of 100W We are able to detect X-rays… END. In short they put in sound waves which produce x-rays by upconversion. This seems to be related to the Mossbauer effect. No indication is provided of the power ratio in vs out but anytime upconversion is claimed, there is a potential avenue for gain unless there is a corresponding downconversion to balance the books. One variation which I would like to see is to irradiate iron (57Fe) with both ultrasound and RF at the first sideband absorption line at 34 MHz The is a surprising history in alternative energy of anomalous energy coming from iron. With MIT/Hagelstein on the case, answers may be forthcoming.
RE: [Vo]:Phonon–Nuclear Coupling
Hi Robin The neutron “hopping” modality is indeed one way that gain could happen. In fact you are probably referring to Hagelstein’s 1993 paper where he introduces this concept wrt palladium. I do not think he was envisioning iron as the active metal at that time. Perhaps he will be reminded of this possibility. I like it but it also demands that the 2.4 MeV gamma is attenuated via the down-conversion aspect – so there are two miracles involved. … or do you get both miracles for the price of one when you have up and down conversion together ??? In reply to JonesBeene's message: Hi, 57Fe+57Fe => 58Fe + 56Fe + 2.399 MeV >Think about this: a process for converting sound into x-rays but not involving >hydrogen or sonoluminescence . > >The conference papers from ICCM/20-Sendai includes an important but overlooked >paper >Developing PhononNuclear Coupling Experiments with Vibrating Plates and >Radiation Detectors >Florian Metzler, Peter Hagelstein and Siyuan Lu
Re: [Vo]:PhononNuclear Coupling
In reply to JonesBeene's message of Fri, 27 Oct 2017 13:06:29 -0700: Hi, 57Fe+57Fe => 58Fe + 56Fe + 2.399 MeV >Think about this: a process for converting sound into x-rays but not involving >hydrogen or sonoluminescence . > >The conference papers from ICCM/20-Sendai includes an important but overlooked >paper >Developing PhononNuclear Coupling Experiments with Vibrating Plates and >Radiation Detectors >Florian Metzler, Peter Hagelstein and Siyuan Lu > >This was available on the LENR-CANR site but for some reason a proper URL >citation cannot be found. Also, apparently it has been >updated with further work recently. > >Abstract >Excess heat has been reported in cold fusion experiments since 1989; however, >there is at present no accepted explanation for what >mechanisms are involved. Over the past decades a general theory has been >developed which seems applicable to excess heat and >other anomalies systematically; but in this case we do not yet have >unambiguous experimental support for the phononnuclear >coupling and enhanced up-conversion and down-conversion mechanism. This has >motivated experimental studies with which we >hope to develop relevant experimental results from which clear tests of theory >can be made. A facility has been developed with >which we are able to induce vibrations in metal plates from about 10 kHz up to >about 10 MHz and then measure the relative >displacement. With a high-power piezo transducer we have driven a steel plate >at 2.23 MHz to produce a vibrational power of 100W >We are able to detect X-rays END. > >In short they put in sound waves which produce x-rays by upconversion. This >seems to be related to the Mossbauer effect. > >No indication is provided of the power ratio in vs out but anytime >upconversion is claimed, there is a potential avenue for gain unless >there is a corresponding downconversion to balance the books. > >One variation which I would like to see is to irradiate iron (57Fe) with both >ultrasound and RF at the first sideband absorption line at 34 MHz > >The is a surprising history in alternative energy of anomalous energy coming >from iron. > >With MIT/Hagelstein on the case, answers may be forthcoming. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
[Vo]:Phonon–Nuclear Coupling
Think about this: a process for converting sound into x-rays but not involving hydrogen or sonoluminescence…. The conference papers from ICCM/20-Sendai includes an important but overlooked paper “Developing Phonon–Nuclear Coupling Experiments with Vibrating Plates and Radiation Detectors” Florian Metzler, Peter Hagelstein and Siyuan Lu This was available on the LENR-CANR site but for some reason a proper URL citation cannot be found. Also, apparently it has been updated with further work recently. Abstract Excess heat has been reported in cold fusion experiments since 1989; however, there is at present no accepted explanation for what mechanisms are involved. Over the past decades a general theory has been developed which seems applicable to excess heat and other anomalies systematically; but in this case we do not yet have unambiguous experimental support for the phonon–nuclear coupling and enhanced up-conversion and down-conversion mechanism. This has motivated experimental studies with which we hope to develop relevant experimental results from which clear tests of theory can be made. A facility has been developed with which we are able to induce vibrations in metal plates from about 10 kHz up to about 10 MHz and then measure the relative displacement. With a high-power piezo transducer we have driven a steel plate at 2.23 MHz to produce a vibrational power of 100W We are able to detect X-rays… END. In short they put in sound waves which produce x-rays by upconversion. This seems to be related to the Mossbauer effect. No indication is provided of the power ratio in vs out but anytime upconversion is claimed, there is a potential avenue for gain unless there is a corresponding downconversion to balance the books. One variation which I would like to see is to irradiate iron (57Fe) with both ultrasound and RF at the first sideband absorption line at 34 MHz The is a surprising history in alternative energy of anomalous energy coming from iron. With MIT/Hagelstein on the case, answers may be forthcoming.