Axil wrote: > >A temperature difference is not required between the cathode and the reactor >walls to work however there would be one. The wall would be at a temperature >of
>600C and the cathode would be at a temperature of 2500C. > >It is the very hot temperature of the cathode that allows electrons to escape >the surface of the cathode where high temperatures matter. > >But the difference required is electrostatic. The cathode would be emitting >large numbers of negatively charged hydrogen ions; the wall would be at a >neutral electrostatic charge since it is grounded by the water flow and the >structure of the Cat-E itself. But the wall would be seen as positive >electrostatically relative to the negative cathode and negative ions would >flow >toward the wall. > So the ions move to the reactor walls because they are all repelling each other, not because they are attracted to the walls. I think you should call the heater an ionizer instead of a cathode, because where there is a cathode there is normally an anode. > >The minimum cathode material that could generate hydrogen ions is tungsten. >Usually, thorium is alloyed with tungsten to increase electron emissions. This >may be why Rossi did not want a radiation spectrum taken of the Cat-E because >it > >would have detected thorium gamma emissions since thorium is slightly >radioactive. > Hoyt recalls Rossi saying there is no tungsten in the reactor. I think he said that on his blog. Of course, Rossi may be trying to hide the fact that he using a heater wire made of tungsten. who knows? Harry
