The Lithium Aluminum Hydride was not added to the fuel mix for its good looks. The Hydride had a definite purpose. Sorry, the reactor is a Nickel Hydrogen reactor.
On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 12:01 AM, Jones Beene <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Sorry – but this reactor is made of alumina – which is a proton conductor. > Beta alumina is among the best proton conducting ceramics but you would > never use any form of alumina if you wanted to retain a supply of hydrogen > after startup. > > > > All of the initial hydrogen is gone within an hour due to hydrogen > diffusion. > > > > This looks like a lithium-nickel reactor. > > > > *From:* Axil Axil > > > > > > NiH2 >Zn*> Ni + He > > 2H(1) + Ni(64) > Zn(66)* Step1 > > Zn(66)* > Ni(62) + He(4) Step 2 > > > > You also suffer from the nuclear physics syndrome where reactions are > fixed over all systems. Each LENR system has a unique transmutation > character based on the way the magnetic field emitters are deployed. In > fact, each nickel particle produces a different reaction. > > > > On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 11:29 PM, Robert Lynn < > [email protected]> wrote: > > so the claim is essentially that this soup of elements were also consumed > to exhaustion, without changing power input or output as their quantities > reduced, in an amazingly perfect process that has as its only product the > highest binding energy Ni62 (also consuming Ni64) and without creating any > observable radiation during the process and no radiative ash. > > > > It will require a very high level of proof to convince the world of the > truth of that. > > > > On 9 October 2014 11:15, Axil Axil <[email protected]> wrote: > > You have some unfounded assumptions in your thinking that are the same > assumption that the testers suffer from. > > > > The reaction does not center on the nickel or the lithium. The LENR > transmutation is done in the hydrogen and the aluminum and other elements. > > > > Did you see this line on page 53? > > > > Sample 2 was the fuel used to charge the E-Cat. It’s in the form of a very > fine powder. Besides the analyzed elements it has been found that the fuel > also contains rather high concentrations of C, Ca, Cl, Fe, Mg, Mn and these > are not found in the ash. > > This means that C, Ca, Cl, Fe, Mg, Mn were consumed in the LENR reaction. > > > > On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 11:07 PM, Robert Lynn < > [email protected]> wrote: > > De-cloaking long term lurker. > > Latest test result issues that raise my suspicions: > > · The uniformity of the Ni ash concerns me, the burn mechanism > somehow converts all natural Ni isotopes (smaller and larger!! so fusion > and fission in evidence) to Ni62, but with miraculously no radioactive > isotopes produced? > > · The test is stopped at a pre-determined time where all the Ni > just happens to have been converted, and nearly all the Li7, Rossi must > have done exhaustive development to judge it so perfectly. > > · Huge consumption of Li, Ni 'fuel' - almost to exhaustion, yet > the reaction power and COP appears to not change significantly through the > test. To me that is exceptionally strange (practically magical) behaviour. > > If I were setting up a fake there are simple means to get power into the > unit invisibly- like IR or UV lasers, fiber lasers, x-ray tubes, focused > microwaves etc but I don't have enough info about the setup and facilities > to make any judgement on things like this. I'm happy with black box > reactor approach, and optical thermography/calorimetry is OK for these > COPs, but flow calorimetry would be better. Unless and until truly > independent testers have full control over the environment and calorimetry > in facilities not controlled by Rossi these tests will not convince the > world. > > > > I'll continue to observe, and hold some hope, but given the track record > of sub-par demos and rumours of unpublished negative results I will need > independent external testing by other than old associates of Rossi. > > > > On 9 October 2014 10:26, Blaze Spinnaker <[email protected]> wrote: > > Jed, perhaps someone is trying to discredit Rossi and thought this was the > best way to do so. > > > > On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 7:22 PM, Jed Rothwell <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Blaze Spinnaker <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > If Rossi switched out the ash, he's a fraud. End of story. > > > > Here is something you think about. Why would he switch out the ash? What > possible benefit would that bring to him? What motivation would he have? > The answers are no reason, none and none. Reasons: > > > > 1. The people paying for this work do not care about what causes the > effect. They are interested in excess heat. Whether it comes from Ni > transmutation or zero-point-energy is beside the point. It will not be more > convincing to them if Rossi puts unnatural Ni isotopes into the mix. On the > contrary, that will only confuse the issue and delay the research. > > > > 2. Suppose he did it. He is bound to be caught sooner or later. If this > technology ever goes anywhere it will be independently replicated by people > Rossi never meets, in labs he never goes to. It is certain they will find > out he is faking. Long term, he will fail. So what short term gain can > there be? > > > > 3. Along the same lines, if it is not true, he cannot get a patent for it, > or a Nobel, or anything else. > > > > 4. Since people would soon distrust him, this would get in the way of > proving the excess heat is real, and setting up commercial ventures. The > excess heat is the only thing with commercial value at this stage, and > Rossi is only interested in commercial development. He does not give a fig > about science. > > > > Levi and Rossi's backers also have zero motivation to fake the Ni results. > It would not benefit them at all, for the same set of reasons. > > > > Can you suggest any reason he *would* want to do this? Since this is your > hypothesis, it is up to you to give a plausible reason why it might be true. > > > > - Jed > > > > > > > > > > > > >
