At 09:52 PM 10/18/2010, [email protected] wrote:
In reply to Abd ul-Rahman Lomax's message of Mon, 18 Oct 2010 19:26:46 -0400:
Hi,
[snip]
>But I'll also be looking for visible light, remember when I asked if
>anyone had done that? With a microscope, in the dark? I'll also have
>a piezoelectric sensor attached to the cell. So maybe I'll get lucky.
>Light and sound won't prove "nuclear," but I don't care. If I can
>show that sound and/or light are *associated* with the reaction, I
>then may have a way to determine that the reaction is taking place
>without waiting for film to be exposed and developed.
You should look for IR. That is always associated with excess heat (by
definition).
Good point. I need to stay "cheap." Curent design has two exposed
sections of cathode wire: one is underneath the LR-115 SSNTDs, the
other is against the side around the corner of the cell where it is
fully visible to the microscope.
Because I decided to follow the Galileo protocol in terms of length
of wire, initial amounts of lithium chloride and palladium chloride,
and current profile, I went back to lots of wire length: Galileo
seems to have used roughly two inches of silver wire. So I'm using an
inch of gold (in two half-inch exposed sections) and an inch of
silver. Thus I'll be, hopefully, confirming the SPAWAR results as to
neutron emissions from gold vs. silver (certainly a mystery!).
IR emission is a great idea. So, how? I've been planning on sticking
a temperature probe in the cell, recording electrolyte temperature,
plus I'd have a probe in the air, plus another in a control cell, if
I do run a light water control. I'm still dithering on that. Mmmm...
The issue has been voltage, I was going to run the cells in series so
that the currents matched, but current regulators are cheap, and I
could adjust two regulators to match currents, that should be quite
good enough. I was worried about head room for the current
regulators, going over my power supply voltage of 20 volts. So....
glad to have this discussion, I'll need to buy some extra current
regulators, a few dollars.
This will also simplify the recording of the voltage and current data
because everything will be referenced to ground. Cool.
Now, how can I easily sense IR? Quantitative sensing is best, but
imaging could do the trick, perhaps. Ideas?
I have no idea of the IR sensitivity of the microscope imaging chip.
I also have no idea about transient response. The microscope is a
Celestron 44340.
If someone wants to design something, I could use it and credit the
design (as well as loan of equipment, if any). And I may be able to
sell it as a kit option.
(The basic kit will be just a cell, SSNTDs included, ready to pour in
the electrolyte, supplied, and go, power supply needed. Target price
for this is $100. Truly, that should be a wholesale price for this
thing to be reasonably profitable, retail might be double that. In
the original concept, "equipment," like power supply, would be
available for purchase or rental. I.e., you'd pay for it, but you'd
get your money back, minus a fee, if you return it in good condition.
The target market was high school students. But, in fact, it seems,
this may be going to grad students in certain places, and they would
have access to needed equipment, likely. My guess, as well, is that
they would buy many cells, not just one. Target price for a control
cell -- light water,everything else identical -- is $70. Because
palladium and platinum and gold are rising in market price, these
numbers may need to go a bit north. How is it that this experiment
needs the most precious of metals? Three of them! Fortunately, not much!)
