Regarding: ** weeks to accumulate **.

Could this long preparation time be the reason for fuel preprocessing as
seen in the Lugano fuel sample?

On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 8:16 PM, Jones Beene <[email protected]> wrote:

> Very interesting presentation this morning. Ólafsson was both low key and
> optimistic that Holmlid is onto something important. Alan Goldwater also
> presented his open source work on the basic glow reactor of
> Rossi/Parkhomov. At first glance, there would appear to be no connection
> between the two … but read on.
>
> Holmlid is clearly the lead individual on the dense hydrogen phenomenon
> and Ólafsson is interpreting his work going back to 2008 and before.
> However, most of the proof is by process of elimination. This will be even 
> more
> controversial than cold fusion until proven. Again, what was demonstrated
> is NOT cold fusion and not really hot fusion either. Copious amounts of
> radiation would expected in such a laser driven reaction when it gets up
> to the kilowatt level of thermal gain. Now it is subwatt.
>
> However, in different circumstances (electrolysis) the same reactant (which
> is dense deuterium clusters) could explain P&F cold fusion, and explain
> the lack of radiation in circumstances where a laser does not disintegrate
> the reactant. IOW, there can be a range of circumstances– all involving
> dense deuterium bound at a few picometers separation - where other
> outcomes are expected: other than disintegration to mesons -> pions ->
> muons etc. With the laser as the input power, when a deuteron
> disintegrates in a laser pulse, over 900 MeV or ~ 40 times MORE energy is
> released than in fusion !
>
> There were about 35 people in attendance including  a few heavy hitters
> who prefer not to be identified. The venue is a stone’s throw from Sand
> Hill Road. A video crew filmed the whole thing. Holmlid apparently wants
> to call the phenomenon “Cold Spallation” but I think that is a bad
> choice, since it does not look like nuclear spallation as we know it. And
> there is nothing cold about the output. BTW – Ólafsson said that calling
> the Rydberg matter “inverted” (in the paper with Miley) was not accurate.
>
> The only thing needed now is replication.
>
> A professor whose name I did not catch (San Jose State ?) has been trying
> to replicate LH but has not been successful. Holmlid recently told him that
> the dense hydrogen takes several weeks to accumulate, and has an extended
> shelf life thereafter. That seems to me to be the main takeaway lesson  ** 
> weeks
> to accumulate **.
>
> As I recall, a few years back, there was a message where Rossi mentioned
> that his supplier in Italy required months to make a batch of active
> reactant. Could it be that Rossi has been inadvertently getting dense
> hydrogen all along?
>
> The presentation of Alan Goldwater was very impressive. I am confident
> that if and when Alan announces thermal gain in a Rossi style reactor –
> we can believe it. That has not happened yet but he is very methodical and
> dedicated. Like many others including myself, he accepts Bob Higgins
> downgraded assessment of the Lugano report (slight gain – perhaps COP~1.2
> see Bob’s white paper).
>
> I encouraged Alan – in light of Olafsson’s presentation - to consider a 
> 2-stage
> or compound system where he would manufacture the dense deuterium
> separately from the reactor where it is to be converted to heat. At first
> he seemed dubious that two steps would be required – in order to merge
> Holmlid’s results with Rossi. But this strategy would allow a very low
> powered continuous laser to accumulate the dense material over time. The
> ideal situation, if one wishes to avoid radiation toxicitym seems to be:
> do NOT to use a fast pulse intense laser to convert dense deuterium into
> heat (this assumes there does exist the radiation-free route to convert
> it to heat).
>
> IMO - It will be very difficult to continuously resupply the dense
> Rydberg matter in situ (in the same reactor it is being burnt in) and not
> see harmful radiation. It can be done at the subwatt level, but those two 
> processes
> are fundamentally in conflict – especially when you get to high power.
>
>

Reply via email to