Regarding the Dardik/Ultrasonic paper, I wonder if anyone has tried vapor
deposition of palladium (or nickel, titanium, lithium???) directly onto a
material with piezoelectric properties? Or for that matter, deposition on
to a SAW device, over a very thin passivation layer that in turn lies over
the metal "forks"?

I think this would only make sense if the resulting "chip" could be placed
in a compressed D2 environment. Electrolysis doesn't make sense here for
many reasons.

Piezo devices are high-impedance and voltage-driven - so you need a
(possibly big ratio, more than 100:1) step-up transformer if you're going
to use bipolar transistors to drive it. Power FETs might work directly.
Dunno, not enough of an AC circuit designer to say. Also don't know about
the drive characteristics of SAWs. Low voltages, I think.

Then you need a control system that would allow modulation of the pulses -
not difficult at ultrasonic frequencies, you could do it with a PC or just
about any microcontroller, but still another design task.

Yes, it quickly begins to resemble Godes' patent application.  Go figure.

I'm guessing the entire materials processing, system design and
implementation task is daunting enough that it's never been done, given the
paltry dollars available for LENR research. Of course Intel could do this
in a week if they decided to bother...dream on. (But boy, oh boy, are THOSE
guys going to be embarrassed if this all plays out and they miss out on all
the patents!)

For the record, I've never heard of SAW devices being mentioned in the same
breath with LENR. For the record, I note that this email might be
significant in some future patent or other IP law proceeding.

Ramblin' on into an unknown and unknowable future.
Jeff


On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 5:44 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax 
<a...@lomaxdesign.com>wrote:

> At 03:43 PM 9/25/2012, Jed Rothwell wrote:
>
>> Having David Kidwell to say anything unequivocally positive about cold
>> fusion is the fourth miracle of cold fusion. The three previous miracles,
>> brought to you by Huizenga, pale in comparison. The Coulomb barrier is
>> nothing compared to the Kidwell Attitude Barrier.
>>
>
> Maybe it's a miracle, but .... people with Seriously Bad Attitude about
> Cold Fusion don't run cold fusion experiments, because they are completely
> convinced that it's a waste of time.
>
> No, it appears that Kidwell is a skeptic, which is not at all a bad thing.
> He's obviously not a pseudoskeptic.
>
> Now, how will pseudoskeptics take Kidwells apparent turnabout? Putting on
> my pseudoskeptic hat, made of anti-tinfoil (looks exactly like tinfoil, but
> coming in contact with tinfoil, vanishes in a flash of hot air), I come up
> with:
>
> Kidwell obviously was an idiot, because he was willing to waste his time
> with this obvious nonsense, there is no credible theory that explains cold
> fusion, so any sane scientist won't touch it with a ten-foot-pole. We make
> sure they won't, because their reputations will be deservedly trashed
> faster than you can say "Bockris." Remember Joe Champion? No? Obviously you
> have fallen under the influence of these fanatic die-hards, like the
> American Chemical Society, those physics-deprived chemists, and like the
> editors of Naturwissenschafter, what do the editors of a biology journal
> know about physics? The U.S. Navy has supported cold fusion research? Yeah,
> the military also supported research on killing goats by staring at them.
>
> Nobel Prize-winners have supported cold fusion research? Obviously, beyond
> their prime, losing it, dotty in their old age, like Pauling and that
> Josefson fellow. Did you know he's seriously considered telepathy? Yeah, to
> even think that cold fusion is possible, you have to have drunk way too
> much Whacko Kool-Aid.
>
> No, this is all a plot to divert seriously needed government funding for
> hot fusion, which has already produced breakeven once, and, with another
> trillion dollars of funding, is on track to produce real power by 2050. All
> this attention to cold fusion is weakening this important project, which
> employs hundreds of physicists and supports major reputable institutions.
> Hot fusion is proven technology, it works, and there are only a few
> technical details to be worked out for commercial applications, and the
> radioactive waste produced can be easily handled.
>
> ...
>
> I really wish I was making this up. Most of these arguments I have
> actually encountered, in one form or another. Mostly, they come from
> physics grad students, since they now know everything and will soon need a
> job applying it. They don't know chemistry and materials science, which are
> the cold fusion fields. Therefore it's bogus. Physics Rules.
>
> One little detail: experimental evidence. Feynman. Cargo Cult Science.
>

Reply via email to