Bob--
I thought you indicated that ICP_MS was assomplisheD--"I wish the experimenters
had been more specific about which samples were analyzed by TOF-SIMS and
ICP-MS. It would have been valuable to have SEM analysis of the actual
particles used in the MS studies to understand from where, within the reactor,
these particles had come."
What "MS studies" are you talking about?
Bob Cook
----- Original Message -----
From: Bob Higgins
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Sunday, March 08, 2015 1:31 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Critique of Levi et al. Lugano experiment
I don't believe Ed Storms and Kiva Labs has SIMS or ICP-MS. I know he as an
SEM with EDX capability.
Actually, MFMP is looking to catalog organizations and individuals who have
access to various means of testing who might be willing to look at the
materials we make. I know that Ed is willing to help us with SEM and EDX, when
he is available. Who can we get to help MFMP with the following:
a.. SIMS for near surface isotopic analysis
b.. ICP-MS for analysis of bulk samples
c.. Tritium detection
d.. Light gas isotopic analysis [high resolution for m/z<8]
e.. Light gas RGA [low resolution mass spec]
f.. XRD
g.. Thermocouple calibration furnace
h.. IR spectroscopy
Please feel to private email me if you think you can help.
Bob Higgins
On Sun, Mar 8, 2015 at 1:32 PM, Bob Cook <frobertc...@hotmail.com> wrote:
Higgins comments are right on.
MFMP should do mass spec analysis of the Ni particles to determine isotopic
concentration in the Parkhomov test. If the Parkhomov test actually produces
a variety of Ni--some reacted and some not reacted--that would be a nice
comparison to do.
Does anyone know if Ed has done the isotopic analysis suggested by Higgins?
It seems it is a definite must to do and I would be surprised it has not been
done by somebody.
The Lugano test was restricted by plan it seems to limit the determination
of changes of the fuel/loading from beginning to end. This was in way of
protecting IP of Industrial Heat. The key was the significant production of
excess heat to demonstrate a useful energy producing device, not a scientific
explanation of the theory of LENR, in contrast to the wishes of many.
Great changes in society most frequently happen as a result of contrarian
individuals and their ideas. In some societies such individuals are considered
special and honored. In others where the status quo is honored and promoted,
they are despised and called fraudsters. I think Rossi belongs to the former
group.
Dr King was thought by many as a contrarian and despised. However his
actions managed to change the social fabric of this country and the World. He
subsequently has become honored.
In Native American society, King and people like would be honored, and in
the Lakota people he would have been a heyoka person. In early English
society, jesters were such people and the kings and queens wisely kept them
around.
Bob Cook
----- Original Message ----- m: Bob Higgins
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Sunday, March 08, 2015 9:51 AM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Critique of Levi et al. Lugano experiment
Some features of the Lugano HotCat ash can now be identified based on the
follow-on work of MFMP and Parkhomov.
When trying to decide whether the Lugano team actually sampled the
important part of the HotCat ash, have a look at the TPR2 - Apendix 3 - Figure
2, the SEM photo of "Particle 1". This image is almost exactly the same as the
SEM photos that Ed Storms took of the MFMP sample of the sintered Ni core
material (molded into a rod matching the ID of the tube) that started out as
Vale T255 carbonyl powder. Here is the link to the folder of images:
https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0B5Pc25a4cOM2fnRiS3FkLW9md2w1RkZGc0oxYU1pUHgxRmkzS1Znbkx1Wk1UREJOZHduakU&usp=sharing
It is highly likely that the Ni cores look the same in all 3 reactors
(HotCat, Parkhomov, MFMP).
I wish the experimenters had been more specific about which samples were
analyzed by TOF-SIMS and ICP-MS. It would have been valuable to have SEM
analysis of the actual particles used in the MS studies to understand from
where, within the reactor, these particles had come.
However, the Lugano experimenters did not have the benefit of the MFMP
results when they went to identify their samples, so they had no way to
identify what place within the reactor the sample represented. The MFMP Bang!
was serendipitous because it left the entire Ni charge as a sintered molded
"rod" of Ni covered in Li-Al alloy metal - like Lugano Figure 2 (see the Debris
photo in the folder linked above). The Lugano Appendix 3-Figure 2-Particle 1
is representative of the sintered Ni core.
Since Ed's analysis shows that the Ni dissolved only to a small extent in
the Li-Al molten metal, most of the ash analysis of the Ni isotopic ratios must
have been from a sample of the core because that's the only place where there
is a significant amount of Ni. Note: Ed's EDX analysis of the solidified Li-Al
showed almost 4% Ni, but the percentage did not include the Li (which EDX does
not detect), so the actual percentage of Ni in solution may have been more like
2%.
Bob Higgins
