Mills made a terrible mistake when he believed his Hydrino model. The
energy of H*-H* condensation is limited to maximally 2 x 496eV as there
is only one SO(4) conform orbit available. This is almost 10000 time
less than real fusion (=LENR !! ).
In my view it doesn't make sense to produce free H*-H* as such a
compounds may very well be dangerous as H*-H* virtually can react with
all nuclei it attaches too.
Adding H* to any useful isotope would result in a much better energy
gain in the range of 1..8 MeV at best. Adding H* is neutron like and
not always harmless...
Due to our measurements the reaction 105Pd + D*-D*-->109Ag is always
running and consumes some Pd.
I would roughly estimate that about 10^5 105Pd disappear for 3kW/s. we
have about 10^18 there what gives quite a good live time for 3kW.
Jürg Wyttenbach
Am 03.08.19 um 16:14 schrieb JonesBeene:
Piantelli does have similar technology based on nickel - and actually
(historically) he was the first by a few months – that is: the first
to report thermal gain results without palladium - ahead of Mills in
1989 and only months after P&F.
That did not stop Mills from getting the landmark patent – the one
that just recently expired - since he (Mills) developed a formal and
coherent theory for “why” certain metals work (based on Rydberg energy
gaps in the ionization potential) … And at least with the USPTO and
with investors, there has been no real competition from Piantelli,
Rossi or anyone else for Mills when it comes to raising capital to
pursue anomalous thermal gain. And history is written by the winners,
but in this case Mills may not be the ultimate winner.
Mills has raised well over $100 million and Piantelli almost nothing.
Investors could be wrong on their bets of course – as they were with
Rossi, but essentially most of the money in the entire field of LENR
has been raised by Mills. This is true even though Mills does not use
the LENR designation for his technology. Piantelli’s company -
Nichenergy – founded ten years ago, has been a notable flop. No great
papers, claims or theories have come from it - and nothing presently
on the horizon which even comes close to the recent Mizuno breakthrough.
It could well be that in the end – the stubbornness of both Mills and
Piantelli - to avoid using palladium, which was due to P&F and their
major IP priority for that metal - was fatal and doomed their efforts
from the start - despite being ever so close. Apparently, and as
always these observations are pending replication – but it looks like
even a very thin layer of palladium over a nickel substrate is one
key to success along with very low internal pressure – even milligrams
of Pd is enough to see kilowatts of heat if it has been applied as a
nanostructure.
Absolutely incredible! That this result could happen in the way that
it appears to have happened, and it has baffled almost every expert.
As of now, calcite inclusions may be needed, as well as nano-palladium
but that should be verified soon.
The main thing is that this is a fabulous time to be following the
field after 30 years of controversy. Not that there isn’t going to be
plenty of controversy remaining, be all the issues are now brought
into clear focus based on the Mizuno breakthrough.
The jury is still out on several key issues but we have to say this
much – Hat’s off to Mizuno !
You da man, bro.
*From: *Axil Axil <mailto:janap...@gmail.com> wrote:
From the piantelli patent, just about any transition metal will
support the LENR reaction.
-----------------------------------------
If one subscribes to a Millsean approach, palladium is
somewhat unique In the Periodic Table in that it is relatively
non-reactive with oxygen or other oxidants while having an
ionization potential which is near the first Rydberg level at
27.2 eV. Nickel alone has no such “entry level” Rydberg value …
The four other metal substitutes for Pd at the first Rydberg
level are Mo, Zn, Cu and Cs – and all of them plus bare
protons have assorted chemical reactivity problems meeting
requirements for catalyzing the first drop in orbital
according to Mills.
This is according to my older version of his theory which may
have changed. Hydrogen ions (bare protons) also qualify as
self-catalytic but they are usually too reactive.
Any of these metals would be interesting as a catalyst
substitute for expensive palladium – but all are relatively
reactive in ways which could quench the effect. The best
realistic catalytic fit is molybdenum and as an inexpensive
di-sulfide it would be interesting to try. It is commonly
available as a lubricant and relatively unreactive.
*From: *Nicholas Cafarelli <mailto:nic...@gmail.com>
Recent posts make me wonder if the Palladium is required.
What would happen if the Nickel mesh were only burnished with
a Nickel rod after the tap water treatment?
Is this an example of simplication? Simplification through
elimination.
--
Jürg Wyttenbach
Bifangstr.22
8910 Affoltern a.A.
044 760 14 18
079 246 36 06
