Well Bob, NASA is huge and as such they make a few mistakes here and there. We can still marvel at the things they did 40-50 years ago which they would have a hard time repeating today. But anyway sticking to LENR - here is some clarification on why they think neutron activation is not a problem - from a SciAm guest-blog piece written by Steve Krivit a few years ago
https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/its-not-cold-fusion-but-its-something/ Basically their rationale is that their imaginary neutrons have a very large DeBroglie wavelength and therefore have a huge capture cross-section. Problem is – this is pure BS since there is a large body of experimental work from top labs on ultra-cold neutrons which do not demonstrate this claim and which they choose to ignore. What other miracle keeps captured neutrons from activating electrodes? Their answer: Shut up !!! Still, we must realize that NASA has sponsored LENR R&D - probably quite a bit of it - some of which was successful and it is reasonable to assume that they have information not available to the public. Experiment rules! From: bobcook39...@hotmail.com I have very little positive feelings about NASA’s ethics and their scientific/engineering capability From: JonesBeene I must have signed up to get notices from USPTO since neither the inventor nor the application is familiar. Anyway – today this effort to Patent a particular concept for a LENR reactor was abandoned by Dan Steinberg, whoever that is - and the claimed operational mechanism appears to be strongly influenced by the low momentum neutron conjecture of Widom and Larsen. Perhaps there is some connection. No wonder that it was abandoned. These neutrons have yet to be documented yet the hypothesis lingers on. “Apparatus and Method for Low Energy Nuclear Reactions” https://patents.google.com/patent/US20130044847A1/en Abstract Provided are a method and apparatus for low energy nuclear reactions in hydrogen-loaded metals. A nickel cathode is disposed inside a pressure vessel loaded with heavy water. The vessel is heated to a temperature at which nickel oxide is reduced in the presence of hydrogen. The cathode is electrified, thereby producing hydrogen at the cathode, which removes any oxide layer on the nickel. The nickel can therefore more easily be loaded with hydrogen. The nickel cathode preferably has embedded particles of neutron-absorbing and/or hydrogen absorbing materials, such as boron-10… Boron-10 appears to be the key to this particular claim – and the reason is clear. This isotope has a cross-section for low energy neutrons of at least 3840 barns – “bigger than a barn” so to speak and if you believe W&L got it right – then this would have been your winning lotto ticket. Never mind that the claim was never “reduced to practice”… as they say in Crystal City. Unless that is – you are old enough to remember so called “Zip fuel” … <g>
