Dear Jones, please allow me to offer this to my readers on EGO OUT, citing you. Thanks! Peter
On Fri, Oct 23, 2015 at 3:16 AM, 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. > > -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
