10KW LENR Demonstrator?

Point out news stories, on the net or in mainstream media, related to polywell fusion.

Moderators: tonybarry, MSimon

Tom Ligon
Posts: 1871
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2007 1:23 am
Location: Northern Virginia
Contact:

Post by Tom Ligon »

If this gizmo can work reliably and reproducibly, it can and will be studied. The output will be unambiguous and they will have reaction products. If it is a scam, it won't hold up. If it is real, the critics will grumble for a while and then accept the evidence.

Thanks for posting that link to Dr. Bussard's lattice fusion paper. It will be interesting to see how close he was. He predicted nickel would be the best metal to use. He expected the electrode metal would undergo nuclear changes.

It is either alchemy or else they're releasing phlogiston. :?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phlogiston_theory

kunkmiester
Posts: 879
Joined: Thu Mar 12, 2009 3:51 pm
Contact:

Post by kunkmiester »

Here we have 15 amp main breaker (at 220Volt net). That's a whopping 3KW of available power.
That sounds like a cabin in the woods. Our house has doubled 60s for the house, with separate ones for the dryer and AC. That 120 amp circuit is further subdivided for the various lines running around the house. Most of those are 15-20 amps, possibly the breaker you were looking at.

One of the interesting things about the DPF was the idea you could build a self-contained unit about the size of a large chest freezer that would be able to power a house. One of the markets would be people who live out in the boonies who would have to pay 15K or so to get power lines run to their house. If you could make a fusion generator that cheap, there would be many customers, including the military.
Evil is evil, no matter how small

chrismb
Posts: 3161
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2008 6:00 pm

Post by chrismb »

Exothermic nuclear transformations of nickel-62 are impossible.

It is as if this person has chosen exactly the right isotope to disprove that there are nuclear reactions!

62Ni is the dead-bottom of the nucleon energy curve. It is the thermodynamic death isotope!

I posted a reply to that page. Seems to be moderated. They didn't print mine. Funny, that!

My posted note read;


>>>
Nickel-62 has the highest nucleon binding energy of any matter in the universe, at 8.7946MeV/nucleon *

Yet it seems to appear in the claims that 62Ni has some net nuclear-energy production possibility.

As 62Ni has the highest binding energy of all known matter, surely the only way to get energy from 62Ni is as a chemical reaction?

*(It isn't 56Fe - a common mistake! It is the binding energy that is the thermodynamic end-point, not the lowest per-nucleon mass of 56Fe. 56Fe has a higher proton:neutron ratio than 62Ni, this is why it has a lower per-nucleon mass. 56Fe binding energy is 8.79025MeV/nucleon.)


>>>

Skipjack
Posts: 6051
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 2:29 pm

Post by Skipjack »

Yeah, but the reaction is between hydrogen and Ni62 and not Ni62 and Ni62, if that matters.

Betruger
Posts: 2310
Joined: Tue May 06, 2008 11:54 am

Post by Betruger »

Chris if you mean the NextBigFuture article, your comment shows up, though differently worded. There's a small bit about patents and then
<<
The immediate problem I see with their claims is that they are saying [if I read it right] that they can get energy out of 62Ni. This is impossible. 62Ni has the highest nucleon binding energy of any isotope on the table. It is the bottom of the energy trough with respect to all known other matter. {No, it isn't 56Fe, as is so often claimed - 56Fe is the *lightest isotope per nucleon*. Most accounts of isotope energies get this confused.}

The only way to get energy out of 62Ni is by chemical means.

>>

With 2 replies to it:
Presumably they're claiming that the energy is released from the hydrogen nucleus binding into the nickel - so the average binding energy before is lower than the average afterwards. But excellent question.
- "Joffan"
While I was doing my calcs above, I mused about this too. Since I already am nearly always guilty of writing treatises (instead of comments), I left out the nuclear binding energy issue. However - and please folks, don't take this as "Goat is enthusiastic", for I remain quite skeptical - however the combined system nuclear binding energy is where the energy would come from. In other words, almost entirely from the loss of nuclear binding energy from the 1H or 2D being absorbed into the nucleus.

But it is early, and I may be way off. Frankly, I'm just in a holding pattern to see what really they're going to deliver. If the nuclear assay (esp. positron signature, then radiation in general, then increase in rare Cu isotopes, then also increase in rare Ni isotopes, and finally two distinct "main" post-shutdown radiation half-lives of 1 minute and 23 minutes) shows up per the natural isotope ratio of the 58,60Ni main species... which are necessary byproducts for "fusion" to be the underlying physics, then yes - they've stumbled into something unexpected, new to physics, and potentially extraordinary.

Yet, I detect in their prepress statements that they're wiggling around not actually detecting enough of the fusion signature to separate out the few kilowatts from a high-energy, low-rate nickel-hydrogen chemical reaction. It saddens this old goat, but we shall see.
- "Goatguy"

chrismb
Posts: 3161
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2008 6:00 pm

Post by chrismb »

Skipjack wrote:Yeah, but the reaction is between hydrogen and Ni62 and not Ni62 and Ni62, if that matters.
No, it doesn't matter at all. It's like trying to burn water in air. You can suggest that adding some oxygen will change the reaction, but it doesn't because water is already at the lowest energy state.

62Ni is the bottom of the nuclear heap. There is nowhere for it to go that isn't endothermic. All fusion of lighter isotopes that goes towards it is exothermic. All fission of heavier isotope, likewise.

chrismb
Posts: 3161
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2008 6:00 pm

Post by chrismb »

Betruger wrote:Chris if you mean the NextBigFuture article, your comment shows up, though differently worded.
I posted one on their website also; http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.c ... ment-19024

I can see the comment but it says 'awaiting moderation'. I guess that means it'll get canned again a second time.

I'll send it a 3rd time, of course! &c....

Betruger
Posts: 2310
Joined: Tue May 06, 2008 11:54 am

Post by Betruger »

Probably didn't make em feel warm enough. Looks like they're busy stirring as much positive expectation/attention as possible.

Skipjack
Posts: 6051
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 2:29 pm

Post by Skipjack »

Chrismb, I think you are right. At least what you are saying makes a lot of sense. We will see what happens tomorrow, but I just got a lot more skeptical even than I was before.
Someone go order the tar and feathers, please!!

Torulf2
Posts: 285
Joined: Fri Sep 21, 2007 9:50 pm
Location: Swedem

Post by Torulf2 »

The hydrogen fuse also.
If the hydrogen fusion makes more energy than is consumed by the Ni fusion you will have +energy.

bcglorf
Posts: 436
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2007 2:58 pm

Thanks for this

Post by bcglorf »

Giorgio wrote:My main reason for wanting to go there was exactly that one.

Unfortunately I will not be able to do so, as they refuse access to anyone that has not been selected beforhand by them.
Andrea Rossi
January 14th, 2011 at 6:43 AM

Sorry, the test in Bologna is restricted to a selected number of experts. You will be able to participate to the press conference online logging in the Journal Of Nuclear Physics.
Warm regards,
Andrea Rossi
#
Giorgio R.
January 14th, 2011 at 2:57 AM

Is it possible to attend to the presentation directly in your lab in Bologna?

So, I will be attending the online press conference like everyone else.
No one will really care about their test unless they have some real big name that is attending and supporting their claims.
Well, that makes it nice and clear that this most certainly is NOT a public demonstration. I look forward to further disappointment on this shortly, though I'd love nothing more than to be wrong.

Betruger
Posts: 2310
Joined: Tue May 06, 2008 11:54 am

Post by Betruger »

NBF has a pic of the test article and a link to an article from italian media.
I'm mirroring the pic here cause I expect NBF will downsize it (never seen him host anything but small/small-medium pics on his website).

Image
Click for full size picture.


edit - And now also a link to a transcript of a press conference held today in Italy; this transcript is in above-linked NBF article.
Last edited by Betruger on Fri Jan 14, 2011 6:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.

djolds1
Posts: 1296
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2007 8:03 am

Post by djolds1 »

icarus wrote:So have they lit a 100W lightbulb up yet with their "10kW" generator?

Giorgio, get a picture of that lightbulb glowing if you drop by .....

until I see the lightbulb I won't even bother reading the "scientific" guff ... there are just too many groups claiming these devices now to keep up with them all .... show me the lightbulb glowing and we'll take a look is the best they can hope for ....
There doesn't seem to be any problem with the proposed physics of the mechanism. This isn't "hydrinos."

EDIT: After reviewing chrismb's comments, I may be mistaken.
Vae Victis

Enginerd
Posts: 178
Joined: Sun Feb 07, 2010 5:29 am

Post by Enginerd »

Betruger wrote:NBF has a pic of the test article and a link to an article from italian media.
I'm mirroring the pic here cause I expect NBF will downsize it (never seen him host anything but small/small-medium pics on his website).
Well that picture answers my question as to how large the thing is -- seems to be pretty darn small. It would be very nice to get 10kW from such a small device. If this thing were to actually work you could conceivably power cars, houses, etc, with such a device. I remain skeptical of exactly how they manage to squeeze power out of Ni62. No doubt the universe is way more strange than any of us realize. But there ain't no such thing as a free lunch.

If this thing is really generating 10 kW in a smallish looking room, why are they wearing heavy winter coats?

happyjack27
Posts: 1435
Joined: Wed Jul 14, 2010 5:27 pm

Post by happyjack27 »

i've though about the possible reaction pathways for this, via the weak force, and come up with this: (time goes from left to right)

Code: Select all

d *--->---*----------->---* u
            \ W
              *------->---* e
              | v
e *--->-------*
                \ W
u *--->-----------*--->---* d
v = neutrino (assuming a neutrino is its own anti-particle)
the hydrogen nucleus is on the bottom (only the up quark shown)
a neutron from the nickel nuclei is on the top. (only a down quark shown)

it's kind of weird. it's like double beta decay with the bottom part flipped. it's essentially beta - decay of the nickel interacting with electron capture of the hydrogen. then the copper isotope absorbs the resulting free neutron.

the idea is the weak force's interaction range is too small to act directly between the nuclei of two separate atoms, so you need an intermediary(ies). and here the postulated intermediary(ies) is(are) a lepton, particulary a neutrino. i'm sure there are other diagrams with the same result, but this seemed the simplest/most intuitive.
Last edited by happyjack27 on Fri Jan 14, 2011 6:53 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Post Reply