Jed is exactly spot on in that crack formation through high deuterium loading amplifies nanoplasmonic effects in the reactive substrate. But as Mizuno has shown, the key to a sucessful reaction is low deuterium loading. This is a oxymoron that has befuddled LENR theory for decades. Ir was indicated on rare occasions when an LENR experiment lost pressure and there was a spice in the generation of excess power as a result.
It is my belief that an active LENR reaction does not produce or more rightly said reveal power production until the reaction has terminated. Low deuterium loading makes this flickering of the LENR reaction possible whereas high deuterium loading hides power production from reality. On Sun, Jul 14, 2019 at 1:28 PM Jed Rothwell <[email protected]> wrote: > JonesBeene <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> The problem with any analysis being touted as the basis for future >> devices - is pinpointing the full and correct understanding of the >> operating principle. Unfortunately, the operating principle of this device >> is not well-described by Ed Storms. It would be a big mistake to apply >> Storms’ insight on palladium electrolysis to such an extremely different >> device. >> > > I do not know about Ed's theory, but what I think may be true is that the > shape of the surface (morphology) plays a key role. The nano-cracks play a > key role. With this device, the Pd expands with loading at a different rate > than Ni does. Since they are bound together, this forces open nano-cracks. > Which is where Ed thinks the reaction occurs. Even if he is wrong about the > precise mechanism or the events in the cracks, this might be true. Similar > nano-cracks might explain cold fusion in other implementations, and what > look like very different systems. > > I assume there is one fundamental cause of cold fusion in all systems. It > is the same thing in all cases. This is similar to saying that fission is > the same in reactors and bombs, although it looks and acts quite different. > > > Storms theory was derived from electrolysis experiments at (generally) low >> power input and output and using (generally) lithium based electrolyte and >> notably the most reliable level of thermal gain is in the range of watts >> per gram of palladium. > > > Some of those experiments produced 100 W or more with a high gain and 16 > W/cm^2. See: > > https://lenr-canr.org/wordpress/?page_id=1618 > >
