Yes. What is shown is a carbonyl Ni particle. It has no nanowires. It does have points, but no nanowires. Nanowires would not be visible at the scale of that micrograph. On Aug 23, 2013 2:29 PM, "Axil Axil" <[email protected]> wrote:
> Are you looking at slide 3, fabrication of fuels and reaction cells? > > the box of interest starts with the following... > > Modified Ni Crystal powders.... > > The 5 micron particle is pictured on that page. Can you see it now... > > > On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 1:58 PM, Bob Higgins <[email protected]>wrote: > >> The carbony Ni particles used by DGT, as was shown in Kim's presentation, >> have NO nanowires at all. >> >> >> On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 1:33 PM, Axil Axil <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Not for the first time, with amazing generosity, DGT has provided us >>> with a picture of a 5 micron nanowire coated micro-particle in their >>> ICCF-18 presentation that they have originally engineered base on suggested >>> information derived from Rossi’s revelations. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> There must be a million nanowires coming off that fuzzy looking >>> micro-particle. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> If 10 nanoparticle aggregation form on each nanowire tip and 100 hot >>> spots from inside each aggregation, that drive the NAE count for each >>> micro-particle up to 10 to the power of 9 hot spots per micro-particle. >>> >>> >>> >>> If 10,000,000 micro particles as used in the 3 grams of nickel power >>> reaction activator, then the NAE count goes up to 10 to the 16 power of >>> possible NAE sites in a Ni/H reactor. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Clearly, this micro-powder covered with nanowires approach to the >>> reaction has many orders of magnitude numerical superiority over the crack >>> regime. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 12:06 PM, Edmund Storms >>> <[email protected]>wrote: >>> >>>> Peter, I'm simply telling you what your comments mean to me. I'm not >>>> thinking in your place. If I have gotten the wrong understanding from what >>>> you have written, than you are free to tell me and to correct your writings >>>> so that other people do not also get the wrong impression, which is clearly >>>> the case. >>>> >>>> I do not think a crack is equally active along its length. I'm only >>>> proposing that somewhere in the gap, the fusion reaction is possible. I >>>> have described ALL aspects of the model. I'm only giving the broad >>>> requirements. Once these are accepted, you will be told more details. I >>>> see no reason to waste my time if the basic claim is rejected. I would >>>> rather spend my time using the model to make the effect work. >>>> >>>> Ed >>>> On Aug 23, 2013, at 9:53 AM, Peter Gluck wrote: >>>> >>>> Dear Ed. >>>> >>>> I would ask you to not think in my place, I really don't like it.It is >>>> typical for dictatures and I had enough from it starting with :"Der Fuhrer >>>> denkt fur uns alle" and ending with Ceausescu's omniscience. I have the >>>> right to think independently. >>>> Citing you: >>>> *you are assuming that D+Pd involves a different mechanism, a >>>> different NAE, and different nuclear products. * >>>> Clearly the products of reaction are different for Pd and Ni H simply >>>> because >>>> the reactants are different. I have NOT told that the mechanism of >>>> reaction >>>> are different. >>>> A question for you- a crack however beautiful is inherently very >>>> asymmetric >>>> do you think a crack nanometers broad but microns or even millimeters >>>> long >>>> is equally active along its entire lengths? Isn't it more plausible >>>> that inside >>>> this labyrinthic formation there are some even more preferential short >>>> areas >>>> where the activity is focused? And are you convinced that thse short >>>> areas >>>> are so different from a nanostructure? Couldn't be the things a bit more >>>> complicated but actually more unitary- as you otherwise also suggest? >>>> >>>> I think it is not possible to decide now sitting at our PC's if Nature >>>> uses >>>> only one soltion or more for creating excess energy. It is more useful >>>> to find new ways to force Nature to give us what we need and want >>>> and not care so much if she is whining a bit for that. >>>> >>>> Peter >>>> >>>> >>>> On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 6:16 PM, Edmund Storms >>>> <[email protected]>wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Aug 23, 2013, at 9:03 AM, Peter Gluck wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Dear Bob, >>>>> >>>>> Thank you for the idea of cracks' aesthetics! I know it well, I think >>>>> you have remarked the second Motto by Leonard Cohen based >>>>> on this idea.. >>>>> It happens that very early in my professional career I learned about >>>>> the >>>>> beauty and variety of cracks -when working at the Civil Engineering >>>>> Faculy of the Timisoara- Polytechnics, Chair of Concrete. It is a >>>>> world of cracks in concrete see e.g. >>>>> http://indecorativeconcrete.com/idcn/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/Why-Concrete-Cracks.pdf >>>>> Mistery and beauty are different from function. Let's admit the >>>>> possible role >>>>> cracks in Pd in the FPCell, is this something good for the results? >>>>> However Paintelli's process is based on very smart and beautiful >>>>> nanostructures more sophisticated and educated as cracks, and LENR+ uses >>>>> the high art of nanoplasmonics. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> How do you know this Peter? Besides, you are assuming that D+Pd >>>>> involves a different mechanism, a different NAE, and different nuclear >>>>> products. Consequently, the number of miracles is squared rather than >>>>> reduced. Do you really want to go down that path? What happens the effect >>>>> occurs using Ti? Does this involve an additional method and mechanism? >>>>> What how is tritium formed? Is this reaction different in Ni compared to >>>>> Pd? >>>>> >>>>> I believe the phenomenon is so rare and unusual that only one >>>>> condition and mechanism would be able to cause it. You take the opposite >>>>> view, that every material and isotope requires a different method and NAE. >>>>> This gives people a choice. I wonder how the vote would go? >>>>> >>>>> Ed >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Peter >>>>> >>>>> , >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 5:05 PM, Bob Higgins <[email protected] >>>>> > wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Recently, Peter published in his blog his reasons for hoping that the >>>>>> NAE aren’t cracks. After considering it, I believe he misses the >>>>>> uniqueness, durability, and beauty of the cracks that are being >>>>>> considered. >>>>>> **** >>>>>> >>>>>> ** ** >>>>>> >>>>>> To the uniqueness point… Consider that a crack is different than >>>>>> just two surfaces in close proximity. A crack is like a horn with a >>>>>> throat >>>>>> of minimum gap: the lattice spacing. Imagine the throat at x=0 with the >>>>>> crack surface spacing widening as x increases. The crack provides a >>>>>> unique >>>>>> environment in its smallest regions. Near x=0, the environment for a >>>>>> hydron asymptotically approaches that of the lattice. In this region, >>>>>> electron orbitals extend across or at least into the crack. Perhaps in >>>>>> this near-lattice spacing there is only room for an H+ ion (the case for >>>>>> Ni, but for Pd there is room at the lattice spacing for a neutral >>>>>> monatomic >>>>>> hydron). As x increases, the crack surface spacing (the gap) increases >>>>>> allowing room for neutral monatomic hydrons. At greater x, the crack >>>>>> spacing would support neutral H2 molecules, and beyond this, the crack is >>>>>> probably uninteresting. This unique gradient of hydron boundary >>>>>> conditions >>>>>> always exists in the crack near it throat (near x=0), even if the crack >>>>>> were to begin zipping itself open.**** >>>>>> >>>>>> ** ** >>>>>> >>>>>> To the durability point… In my past I had occasion to work with MEMS >>>>>> structures. When I first saw MEMS cantilever beams being used for >>>>>> switches >>>>>> and other functions, my first thought was, “Those are going to break!” >>>>>> What I learned was that a structure’s strength is inversely proportional >>>>>> to >>>>>> its size. So a building scaled twice as large will be half as strong. >>>>>> This is why you can drop an ant from as high as you wish and he will hit >>>>>> the ground running. Compare a 3 meter diving board (cantilever) to a 3 >>>>>> micron cantilever – the 3 micron cantilever will be a million times more >>>>>> robust. The cracks being considered for NAE are nanoscale cracks, but >>>>>> our >>>>>> natural experience is with cracks having dimensions of ~1cm. A 10nm >>>>>> crack, >>>>>> will be a million times more mechanically robust than a 1cm crack. At >>>>>> the >>>>>> nanoscale, the two split apart surfaces will be very stiff and behind the >>>>>> throat of the crack (x<0) there will be compression forces trying to >>>>>> restore the crack to its closed position. The surfaces may also >>>>>> experience >>>>>> a Casimir closing force. A nanoscale crack will have strong forces >>>>>> trying >>>>>> to heal itself.**** >>>>>> >>>>>> **** >>>>>> >>>>>> If nanocracks can heal, then how would the nanocrack form in the >>>>>> first place and what could keep the surfaces apart? I believe a wedge of >>>>>> atom(s) or molecule(s) is needed in the gap to keep the crack open, and >>>>>> perhaps to form it in the first place. That is why I am using >>>>>> nanoparticles that will alloy with Ni and then I am oxidizing the >>>>>> structure. I use iron oxide nanoparticles. I put down the oxide >>>>>> nanoparticles disposed all across the Ni micro-powder surface, reduce (or >>>>>> partly reduce) the surface so the iron nanoparticles can alloy with the >>>>>> Ni, >>>>>> and then go back and strongly oxidize the metals. When the iron >>>>>> oxidizes, >>>>>> it grows in volume and I hypothesize that it will wedge open a nanocrack. >>>>>> If the iron is then partly reduced it becomes an H2 splitting catalyst, >>>>>> right at the site of the crack.**** >>>>>> >>>>>> ** ** >>>>>> >>>>>> What a beautiful structure I imagine that to be – a nanocrack with a >>>>>> sweep of hydron boundary conditions with an H2 splitting catalyst at its >>>>>> mouth.**** >>>>>> >>>>>> ** ** >>>>>> >>>>>> Bob**** >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Dr. Peter Gluck >>>>> Cluj, Romania >>>>> http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Dr. Peter Gluck >>>> Cluj, Romania >>>> http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >> >
