Proces to produce nickel from Nickel Carbonyl: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mond_process
On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 9:54 PM, Axil Axil <[email protected]> wrote: > I might be wrong. The are a large amount of "light elements" present. You > may be totally correct.: > > > On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 3:48 PM, Axil Axil <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Re: >> >> TABLE II >> >> XRF ANALYSIS OF NAE5 (BEFORE A TEST RUN) >> >> TEST ID: 07/18/12 #25 >> >> From the composition of the powder from the ICCF-17 DGT paper, no carbon >> is present. >> >> >> On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 3:44 PM, Axil Axil <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Thanks, I stand corrected. I see what you mean. They must remove the >>> carbon with oxygen and then the oxygen with hydrogen starting from the >>> commercial powder.. >>> >>> The presence of carbon will distort (increase) the curie temperature of >>> the powder. Therefore, Carbon must be removed. >>> >>> >>> On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 3:30 PM, Bob Higgins >>> <[email protected]>wrote: >>> >>>> The micrograph is of carbonyl Ni. Look it up. For example, Hunter >>>> Chemical AH50. Also, Vale T255. It is the same as what is shown in Kim's >>>> slides. Carbonyl is the process - the particles are pure Ni. >>>> On Aug 23, 2013 3:25 PM, "Axil Axil" <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> DGT has never mentioned the use of carbonyl. There powder is pure >>>>> nickel. The surface of the particles are processed with a proprietary >>>>> process to resurface the particle with a Rutile structure. >>>>> >>>>> Please show me a reference to the use of carbonyl in this process. >>>>> In fact, the use of carbonyl is incompatible with the rutile process. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 3:00 PM, Bob Higgins <[email protected] >>>>> > wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> 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 >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> >>> >> >
