On May 24, 2013, at 1:45 PM, Bob Higgins wrote:
But, is there anything that can be gleaned from the anecdotal
information of a hotCat melt-down?
Something that strikes me is that if the heat was generated as
phonons locally at the NAE, then the NAE would be the hottest part
of the reactor. If a reactor melted, it would be with the NAE
hotter than the melted reactor SS shell. This doesn't sound
plausible as the NAE would not have been able to produce enough heat
fast enough to cause the melt-down before it destroyed itself. So,
evidence of a melt-down suggests to me that the energy transport
from the NAE is not carried by phonons.
I agree Bob. This is the reason why phonons cannot carry all the
energy. In addition, photons are DETECTED. Therefore, they are being
produced. Phonons cannot be detected.
On the other hand, now posit the NAE emitting a low energy photon or
particle radiation that would be absorbed by the SS reactor shell.
Now, it is possible that the reactor shell itself is hotter than the
NAE and it may be possible to melt the reactor shell without
necessarily destroying the NAE - at least early in the process.
Yes, photons will be absorbed throughout the apparatus, but most will
be absorbed near the source because, on average, they have a short
range in matter.
To me, this becomes anecdotal evidence of the energy being
transported outside of the NAE and collected in its dense environs.
The energy carrier could be low energy photons, beta, or alpha. If
beta or alpha, might one expect to measure escaping bremsstrahlung
radiation coming from the reactor?
I suggest further speculation is unwarranted because the required
information is not reported.
Ed Storms
On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 2:38 PM, Edmund Storms
<[email protected]> wrote:
Please people, stay in the real world. The description Alex gives
has no relationship to what has been described in the paper or to
what is possible. We have no way of knowing the melting point of
that material claim to melt. We have no way of knowing how much
melted. At the vary least, once the stainless steel container in
which the Ni was located formed a hole, the H2 would escape and the
nuclear reaction would stop. In addition, we do not know the melting
point of the Ni in the container because it was reacted with a
secret catalyst. In other words, we know nothing that would support
such speculations.
Ed Storms
On May 24, 2013, at 12:17 PM, David Roberson wrote:
-----Original Message-----
From: Axil Axil <[email protected]>
Sent: Fri, May 24, 2013 2:12 pm
Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:My evaluation of the Rossi test
The other very important piece of the puzzle that this Rossi demo
has revealed is how extreme the LENR can get. This tells us
important new things about the LENR reaction.
When the E-Cat melts down, its temperature reaches at least 2000C.
The melting point of the ceramic used is in that temperature range.
We know that ceramic is used in the reactor and that the LENR
reaction can melt it. This is exciting.
At that temperature, the nickel powder and the AISI 310 steel has
long reached its melting point.
The LENR reaction must be able to function in a liquid metal
environment. The concept of an NAE supported in only solid material
must be discarded.
LENR must function in liquid and vapor.
Riddle me that one batman.
Collective, in other words, I will be awaiting your theories.
