I believe that the Ni-H theory that Rossi advertizes is invalid and I hold that fusion of multi H is occurring.
The same reaction that produces transmutation in the pure carbon/water experiment is at work in the Rossi reaction. This involves activation of H- ions and clustering under the influence of graphite and catalyzed to a state of fusion by Ni. The pure carbon/water experiment had poor results because the water became contaminated with ash that destroyed most of the H- ions over a longer running time. This carbon based experiment started out fast when the water was clean but slowed to a stop over time by ash when the water got heavily contaminated. If the experimenter on the carbon/water experiment put a nano-filter on the water, he would have gotten excellent results. In the Rossi reactor, pulsed operation of the control box keeps carbon contamination of the hydrogen under control where the pulse is timed to optimize the formation of H- clusters. Most ash is trapped in the nickel powder avoiding H contamination. On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 6:24 PM, Stephen A. Lawrence <[email protected]>wrote: > Thanks, Kyle. > > I didn't check your math, but I bet it's correct. It fits with the general > picture. (And the conclusion is pretty funny, really...) > > I still want to know how come we haven't seen a sample of anything from > Rossi which didn't show natural isotope ratios. Rossi's claimed to have > observed such things; so, how come the only (and much-anticipated) sample of > anything he's given anyone turned out to look natural? > > And how come people on this list still seem to believe that Ni+H fusion is > taking place, given the thundering lack of evidence for such a reaction? > (H+H is something else again, but Rossi isn't claiming it, and there hasn't > been much discussion of it here that I've seen.) > > > > > On 11-05-09 07:09 PM, Kyle Mcallister wrote: > >> --- On Mon, 5/9/11, Terry Blanton<[email protected]> wrote: >> >> He then claims that 58 g of Ni provides the equivalent >>> energy of >>> 30,000 tons of oil with the strangest calculation that >>> begins with 10 >>> MeV of energy per reaction. This is converted to mass >>> equivalent, >>> multiplied by Avogadro's number and, using Einstein's >>> equation, >>> converted back to energy! >>> >> What the...? >> >> That's not fission level energy, or even fusion level energy. That's >> talking within the order of magnitude of converting rest mass directly into >> energy. >> >> Assuming by ton of oil he means 'tonne of oil equivalent'... >> >> 30,000 tons of oil would yield 1.26x10^15J (42x10^9J/tonne of oil >> equivalent) >> >> Entire rest mass of 58g converted to energy yields 5.22x10^15J... >> >> So Rossi is claiming to be able to convert 24.14% of the ENTIRE REST MASS >> OF THE NICKEL CATALYST to energy??? Someone, tell me I did this math wrong, >> please. This has to be some theory of his, and not what really happens. The >> grocery list of stuff he claims in the ash reads like the near-collapse core >> of a massive star at the end of its life. >> >> Put another way, from that 58g of nickel can come the energy of a 300kT >> W87 nuclear warhead? >> >> And this produces no radiation, he didn't see the cheerful >> gin-and-tonic-under-a-blacklight blue glow and promptly die? God almighty, >> this thing was looking interesting, but its getting to where you can only >> twist one's arm so far before it gets ridiculous. >> >> If he can make a heat source that makes 100C steam, fine. It's grand, you >> can use it in any radiator in place of a oil-fired or gas-fired boiler. Even >> if you can't make high grade electricity due to thermodynamics, just a >> heater is damned important. >> >> But he's claiming to have something equivalent to a mass to energy >> converter in that little pipe, and no one has been char broiled? Is his >> hidden catalyst antimatter? >> >> I suppose the lead shielding (which ain't that fantastic from the look of >> things) keeps them from being cooked. Alright. Anyone know of radiation >> hazards produced by past tests of nickel and hydrogen under similar >> circumstances? Any unexplained deaths? Burns? Radiation sickness or >> sterility? Somebody should have pulled a Madame Curie by now, or at least >> saw something scintillating or fluorescing. So where is it? >> >> Confusing. >> >> --Kyle >> >> >> >
