In the 'curious factoids department' relating to easily overlooked but anomalous levels energy from hydrogen when in contact with a host metal like nickel ... Nickel may not be alone, as an active host for hydrogen. In fact there could be many others. In the past 150+ years of the automobile and electrical storage, requiring low cost batteries, at least 3 billion lead-acid batteries have been manufactured and sold on the planet. They were invented in 1859. Since the lead is usually recycled, your new battery could possibly contain a bit of lead which was mined before the US Civil War. This 'legacy effect' means that only a little new lead ore needs to be mined, to meet supply. The extreme irony of this factoid is that "on paper" lead is not a particularly good candidate for an electrochemical battery! The anode and cathode have only the single metal - not two metals with different reduction potentials. Of course, the lead is in various states of oxidation or sulfation, depending on whether it is acting as the cathode or anode - so the end result is similar. But we are absolutely missing the most aggressive types of Galvanic of Voltaic redox reactions - which generally require two different metals- like zinc and copper, for instance. These galvanic/voltaic technologies go back almost another hundred years before lead was first used. Yet they are not as cost effective as lead. Why not? It would be most ironic if one of the reasons for the success of lead-acid, vis-à-vis the more potent galvanic combinations - relates to an occasional background reaction. This means that we must consider that a slight (but regular) energy anomaly with hydrogen, on the host metal in normal work-a-day batteries (one of two reactions per hundred "regular" redox reactions) could be a "hidden" M.O. (the one that masks, or compensates for the low "natural" redox capabilities of two electrodes which employ a single metal). Specifically - The three ionization potentials (of the lowest valences electrons) of lead are found at: 7.4+ eV, 15 eV, and 31.9+eV which when added, total almost exactly the important 54.4 eV Rydberg multiple (4Ry) - one of the closest fits on the periodic table to this key value. Common lead oxides include:
Lead(II) oxide, PbO,
Lead(II,II,IV) oxide, Pb3O4, aka red lead
Lead (IV) oxide, PbO2 or dioxide
Less common lead oxides are:
Lead(II,IV) oxide, Pb2O3, lead sesquioxide
Pb12O19 (dark-brown lead)
Anyway, once you start to think about lead in the context of some of its
advantages (having being overlooked or not completely understood in the
context of Rydberg emissions), it is easier to grasp how, when partially
oxidized, we can see the occasional high energy reaction at 54.4 eV.
IOW - oxygen, which want to takes 2 electrons from lead's massive number of
82 (and also can have the same 54.4 eV 'hole') - can interact within these
oxidation states to create an energy gap at 54.4 eV ... which, after all, is
many times normal redox spreads which go from +1.7 to -1.5. One of these EUV
reactions per hundred normal redox reactions effectively increases the gain
by a third, and 3 per hundred double it.
The bottom line in this suggestion - is that only a few percent of the
higher energy EUV reactions can effectively double the net energy of normal
see-sawing within a redox system, and the end result is that a weak system
seems more robust than it should.
And in the context of Bedini - and possibly the new player in South Africa
as well - anything that makes this EUV reaction happen more often that 1-3%
of the time can pass for overunity ... or magic, when the reaction is still
chemical, and technically not overunity at all.
Jones
<<attachment: winmail.dat>>
