Axil, that is also a good point that might explain why the anomaly is so hard to reproduce – perhaps impossible without the superfluidic heat distribution you mention.. I do see degradation issues as boundary conditions vary that would eat away / sinter the geometry around the edges which is likely why Rossi is always throttling back on the COP and why these materials tend to degrade to the point where they have to be re-activated. Fran
From: Axil Axil [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Monday, October 06, 2014 12:21 PM To: vortex-l Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Rossi Report will come, old paradigm will depart If Bose Einstein condensation is involved, isothermal heat distribution would keep the MICRO powder at the same temperature as the coolest part of the reactor. When the reactor melts down, the entire pipe grows white hot, so there must be superfluidic heat distribution going on to distribute heat evenly. On Mon, Oct 6, 2014 at 11:52 AM, Roarty, Francis X <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: Bob, Good point regarding the sintering of Ni nano powder, perhaps some of the importance with respect to geometry and heat sinking is to keep temperatures beneath sintering threshold. IMHO nano powders are a robust form of skeletal catalyst that become over active to the point of deformation when enough appropriate gas atoms are loaded into the bulk material, both lattice and voids such that lockstep motion and fractional transitions are harnessed. I suspect that OU requires quickly wicking away the excess heat before deformation can occur while not inhibiting the reaction rate / keeping the environment balanced on the head of a pin. Fran From: Bob Higgins [mailto:[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>] Sent: Monday, October 06, 2014 11:09 AM To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Rossi Report will come, old paradigm will depart I use carbonyl Ni, the same as Rossi and Defkalion. Rossi adds his own treatment which he claims is cheap. Neither use nano-Ni. Will my treatment of this Ni work? Only time will tell. Results with the QSI nano-Ni have been disappointing. Also, nano-Ni is not durable - I.E, it will easily sinter into larger particles at high temperature (600C). If nano-Ni was found to be required, it will be painful to make something work at high temperature for long periods. Nano-Ni might be OK for hand warmers. Bob Higgins On Mon, Oct 6, 2014 at 8:34 AM, Jones Beene <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: From: Bob Higgins Sorry about your caffeine deficit, but 10g of Ni doesn't cost more than a barrel of oil. A kilogram of Ni powder I use was sent to me as a sample. No one would sample 100 barrels of oil. Ni is cheap. But did your sample work? ☺ Not being intentionally glib, but the nickel Rossi uses is somehow special and possibly costly – who knows? The QSI nickel nanopowder which gave a small amount of gain in the Ahern experiments costs about $20/gram as I remember. The Arata nickel powders are even pricier since they are spin cast. But yes – I agree that once the best powder is found - the volume price will come down with mass production. The disappointment for many will be that the Rossi effect, if it is limited to the one isotope - may not be the slam-dunk solution to the energy crisis which we all hoped that it would be. IOW 10 grams of nickel would give the equivalent heat of about a barrel of oil. That makes the bottom line problematic, since 10 grams of nickel powder will cost more than a barrel of oil… assuming this is accurate. (operating on a caffeine deficit) Jones
