10KW LENR demonstrator (new thread)

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

Moderators: tonybarry, MSimon

MSimon
Posts: 14332
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:37 pm
Location: Rockford, Illinois
Contact:

Post by MSimon »

icarus wrote:Condensed Matter Fusion:

Several other groups have confirmed the production of helium-4 correlated with excess heat. But the most spectacular results came from the experiments of Yoshiaki Arata and Yue-Chang Zhang at Osaka University, Japan [10].

Instead of a solid palladium cathode, Arata and Zhang used powdered palladium, or palladium black, which greatly increased the absorption surface area for deuterium. The palladium black was placed inside a container kept under a vacuum at constant temperature for 2-3 days before deuterium or hydrogen gas was injected at a constant low flow rate until the powdered palladium was fully saturated with the deuterium/hydrogen.

Using palladium black with extremely small particle size (15 to 40 nm), a high fusion rate was obtained, amounting to >1015 4He2 atoms in the closed inner space of the cathode. In contrast, no 4He2 (or excess heat) was ever generated when hydrogen was used instead of deuterium, or when bulk palladium was used.

Arata and Zhang also developed other materials that better absorbed H2/D2. In one experiment, Pd particles of 5 nm were embedded inside a matrix of ZrO2. ZrO2 on its own does not absorb H2 or D2, but ZrO2-Pd easily absorbed about 3 D atoms per host Pd atom. Arata and Zhang proposed that the D atoms absorbed are effectively solidified as an ultrahigh density deuterium lump inside each octahedral space within the unit cell of the Pd host lattice. These “pycnodeuterium” (heavy deuterium) are dispersed to form a metallic deuterium lattice with body-centred cuboctahedron structure (see Fig. 2) [11].

http://www.i-sis.org.uk/coldFusionCondensedMatter.php
So where are the nickel results? Apples to apples. You are grasping at straws. BTW Rossi was not using D enhanced "water". At least he has made no claim of such. So far.
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.

icarus
Posts: 819
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2008 12:48 am

Post by icarus »

quixote wrote:Icarus, might be some relevant info and links for you.
viewtopic.php?t=1647&sid=394077751727d7 ... 40eccfd6b2
Thanks quixote, the signal to noise ratio around here is unbearable sometimes but I managed to find your post :)

Now would you happen to know what would happen if a proton fused with Fe-56?

It seems like resulting Cobalt-57 would have an excess of 5.516 MeV energy by my calcs, sound about right? Emission of energetic gamma?

MSimon
Posts: 14332
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:37 pm
Location: Rockford, Illinois
Contact:

Post by MSimon »

icarus wrote:More transmutation:

http://www.i-sis.org.uk/alchemistsDream.php

Yasuhiro Iwamura and colleagues at Mitsubishi’s Advanced Technology Research Center and colleagues have taken another approach to nuclear transmutation by concentrating on the direct transmutation of one element into another [10, 11].

They used D2 gas permeation through a sandwich of thin alternating layers of palladium (Pd) and CaO sitting on a bottom layer of bulk Pd. Permeation of deuterium is forced through the layers by exposing the top of the sandwich with a thin Pd film to D2 gas while the bottom is maintained under vacuum. On the D2 gas side, dissociative absorption causes the D2 molecules to separate into D atoms, which diffuse though the sandwich towards the vacuum side, where they emerge from the Pd metal, combine and are released as D2 gas (see Fig. 1). The element to be transmuted is deposited on the top Pd film of the Pd/CaO sandwich by electrolytic loading from a salt solution. Cesium (Cs), barium (Ba) and strontium (Sr) have been transmuted in this way. The analysis of elements was done in situ, without removing or disturbing the sandwich, using X-ray photoemission spectroscopy (XPS) directed at the topside of the sandwich
Pd + D. I see no nickel. But maybe Rossi has found a way to transmute Ni to Pd and H to D. That would be a real money maker. If it didn't cost too much.

And the process above emits X-rays. Rossi says no radiation.

Dr. B thought lattice conversion was possible. Maybe it is. But we are a long way into this and the experiments are still marginal at best. Even Miley says his results are not far off from noise. It may have uses. It may be of interest to scientists. So far it has not been reduced to engineering practice or significant energy production. Unless you believe energy fraudster has found something that others working in the field have not.

Compare this with progress in semiconductors from the late 20s to the mid 50s. By the mid 40s we had GHz rectifying semiconductors

http://www.computerhistory.org/semicond ... uctor.html

And by 1948 we had the junction transistor and by the early 50s FETs (first patented in the late 20s).
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.

icarus
Posts: 819
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2008 12:48 am

Post by icarus »

Rossi has not said no radiation, no matter how many times you repeat that it won't make it true .... and it isn't the first time it has been spoon fed to you either. And anyway you don't believe Rossi so he is probably lying about that to in your estimate.

Rossi has said no radiation above background outside the reactor (50? mm lead shielding) and also says that measuring gamma inside the reactor will give away some of his secrets (how does that sound like "no radiation" exactly?) ... Piantelli has said there is radiation and has cloud chamber tracks, etc to study it ... are you even making an effort to follow this or just throwing tomatos because you have nothing positive to contribute?

Luzr
Posts: 269
Joined: Sun Nov 22, 2009 8:23 pm

Post by Luzr »

MSimon wrote: Compare this with progress in semiconductors from the late 20s to the mid 50s. By the mid 40s we had GHz rectifying semiconductors

http://www.computerhistory.org/semicond ... uctor.html

And by 1948 we had the junction transistor and by the early 50s FETs (first patented in the late 20s).
With all respect, how many times I will have to read this story in this thread?

MSimon
Posts: 14332
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:37 pm
Location: Rockford, Illinois
Contact:

Post by MSimon »

Luzr wrote:
MSimon wrote: Compare this with progress in semiconductors from the late 20s to the mid 50s. By the mid 40s we had GHz rectifying semiconductors

http://www.computerhistory.org/semicond ... uctor.html

And by 1948 we had the junction transistor and by the early 50s FETs (first patented in the late 20s).
With all respect, how many times I will have to read this story in this thread?
As many times as you want to.
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.

MSimon
Posts: 14332
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:37 pm
Location: Rockford, Illinois
Contact:

Post by MSimon »

BTW it was a new link for here FWIW. You know. Evidence.
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.

quixote
Posts: 129
Joined: Fri Feb 05, 2010 8:44 pm

Post by quixote »

icarus wrote:Now would you happen to know what would happen if a proton fused with Fe-56?
Excuse the formatting.

Reaction Products Q-value (keV) Threshold (keV)
57Co+γ 6027.82 0.55 0.0 0.0

Some time ago, chrismb passed along a useful link for this sort of thing.

http://www.nndc.bnl.gov/qcalc/

What it doesn't show, I'm sorry to say, is the branching ratios. I've been trying to find that, but so far without luck.

Your math seems a little off. What I did is below.
The iron+proton reaction is:
56fe + p = 57co + γ
The observed weight of 57co:
56.9362914u
1u is 931.494MeV.

So putting it all together.

55.9349375u (fe56) + 1.00782503207u (p) - 56.9362914u (57co) = 0.00647113207u (γ)
0.00647113207u * 931.494 MeV = 6.02782069641258 MeV

Hopefully that's clear enough.

MSimon
Posts: 14332
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:37 pm
Location: Rockford, Illinois
Contact:

Post by MSimon »

icarus wrote:Rossi has not said no radiation, no matter how many times you repeat that it won't make it true .... and it isn't the first time it has been spoon fed to you either. And anyway you don't believe Rossi so he is probably lying about that to in your estimate.

Rossi has said no radiation above background outside the reactor (50? mm lead shielding) and also says that measuring gamma inside the reactor will give away some of his secrets (how does that sound like "no radiation" exactly?) ... Piantelli has said there is radiation and has cloud chamber tracks, etc to study it ... are you even making an effort to follow this or just throwing tomatos because you have nothing positive to contribute?
OK there is radiation. Any company that buys his device for use will then have to have it well inspected by the regulatory people for safety. And such inspections cannot be kept secret when health and safety are an issue.

So pray tell where is the evidence of regulatory compliance?

And it is true I'm not paying extremely close attention. I'm focusing on the GA144 chip which I actually have on my bench and am conducting experiments with and on.

I'm betting we will see that chip produced in the millions before Rossi gets his device produced in the thousands. In fact if Rossi has made an actual sale I'm betting that he will get his 3rd award for anomalous energy production courtesy of the Italian government. He may have done so well that he will get a lifetime achievement award that will include free room and board.

You still haven't explained how Rossi has transmuted Ni into Pd an H into D. Or are the substances used immaterial? Any metal, any H isotope and voila - energy. I suppose it could be like combustion. Lots of different materials can do it. Wonder why it has so rarely and with great difficulty been observed up to now.
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.

icarus
Posts: 819
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2008 12:48 am

Post by icarus »

MSimon: you're ramblings have become incoherent (who said anything about Ni -> Pd of H -> D transmutation?) and off topic (chips, really?) ... so I'll just stop encouraging you.

quixote: thanks muchly again. So I wasn't too far out but energy can definitely be released from proton + Fe-56 fusion, 6 MeV per reaction is not too shabby actually ... I wonder how the myth about Iron fusion being energetically negative got started?

I assume it is something to do with the stellar fusion processes that would only include calcs of fusion of like nuclei ... seems like many metal + proton fusions would also be exothermic, if achievable at all that is.

Luzr
Posts: 269
Joined: Sun Nov 22, 2009 8:23 pm

Post by Luzr »

<offtopic>
MSimon wrote: And it is true I'm not paying extremely close attention. I'm focusing on the GA144 chip which I actually have on my bench and am conducting experiments with and on.
So, you still believe in forth? :)
I'm betting we will see that chip produced in the millions before Rossi gets his device produced in the thousands.
You are most like wrong on this one. GA144 finding more than 100K customers is as likely as ecat being real.

You know. C was created around 70 and today we have Unix, Linux, Windows, Macs, GUI, Internet and all these nice things powered by C or its derivatives.

Forth was created about the same time and apart from some niche applications in eighties it is mostly forgotten today and runs nothing.

Only total lunatic would use forth today for anything real. You have missed 25+ years of software development...

MSimon
Posts: 14332
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:37 pm
Location: Rockford, Illinois
Contact:

Post by MSimon »

icarus wrote:MSimon: you're ramblings have become incoherent (who said anything about Ni -> Pd of H -> D transmutation?) and off topic (chips, really?) ... so I'll just stop encouraging you.

quixote: thanks muchly again. So I wasn't too far out but energy can definitely be released from proton + Fe-56 fusion, 6 MeV per reaction is not too shabby actually ... I wonder how the myth about Iron fusion being energetically negative got started?

I assume it is something to do with the stellar fusion processes that would only include calcs of fusion of like nuclei ... seems like many metal + proton fusions would also be exothermic, if achievable at all that is.
You quoted a couple of articles referencing Pd and D in support of Rossi's Ni and H. Or were they anomalous posts? It is hard to follow when you don't stick to a single line.

So let me ask again in a way I hope you can understand:

Any metal, any hydrogen isotope? Analogous to combustion. (from your comment above it seems you did get my objection after rubbishing it at the beginning of your note - but let us hit it one more time to be sure)

If so why is it so rarely and with great difficulty observed? After all humans have been playing with H and metals ever since alchemists started looking for the philosophers stone. And with rather more understanding since the late 1800s. When we had batteries for power sources and Geiger tubes since 1908 and X-ray detectors (film) since 1895.


So far the effect - if it exists - is weak and difficult to replicate.

And you do understand that shielding is probabilistic for X-rays. Some always gets through. I'm going to go back up thread and find the estimated thickness of the shielding and calculate/estimate the weight of it and see if the shelves were strong enough to hold it, the container was strong enough to ship it, and if the temperatures postulated would cause the lead to sag. Simple stuff.
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.

icarus
Posts: 819
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2008 12:48 am

Post by icarus »

MSimon:
Any metal, any hydrogen isotope? Analogous to combustion.
Is this a question or statement or what ?? In case I understand what you are asking, I'll answer ... Piantelli has said the reaction can take place with H gas (protons) and any of the transition metals elements. He has also said it can happen with deuteron gas but only if it is pure. Anecdote is hydrogen gas will poison a deuteron reaction and vice versa.

Out of pure interest and curiosity (I know, not allowed in these days of hierachy science), I went and looked at various products from such proton-metal reactions and decided only the even numbered transition metals had no long-lived radio-active products, so looked at only those. From there, I chose only to look at elements with spin 0+ nuclei (based on theory I'm working purely for my own benefit) .... so even numbered transition metals with spin 0+ nuclei largest fraction naturally occurring isotopes in fusion reaction with protons.

Is that what you were asking?

MSimon
Posts: 14332
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:37 pm
Location: Rockford, Illinois
Contact:

Post by MSimon »

The best I could do after searching the 10 previous pages is this:

viewtopic.php?p=72975#72975

Talking about 1 cm of lead halving the radiation. So 3.3 cm (roughly) reduces it by 10. 10 cm of lead by 1,000. (the material doesn't matter much since X-rays are reduced by mass - if the atomic numbers involved are above 15. Lead is convenient due to density). So let us go with a reduction of 1,000 to produce an acceptable level of X-rays. YMWV.

Rough estimate of the e-cat boxes - 30 cm by 40 cm by 60 cm.

Outer volume: 72,000 cc. Inner volume = 10 cm by 20 cm by 40 cm = 8,000 cc. Volume of lead = 64,000 cc. @ 10.66 g/cc which gives 682,240 grams. or 682.24 Kg of lead per e-cat. 35 e-cats = roughly 24 metric tons of lead shielding.
The maximum gross mass for a 20 ft (6.1 m) dry cargo container is 24,000 kg, and for a 40-ft (including the 2.87 m (9 ft 6 in) high cube container), it is 30,480 kg. Allowing for the tare mass of the container, the maximum payload mass is therefore reduced to approximately 22,000 kg for 20 ft (6.1 m), and 27,000 kg for 40 ft

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Containeri ... O_standard
So with shelves and everything he has that container fully loaded if it was a 40 ft. container. Overloaded if it was 20 ft.

Now you know my method. Run your own numbers. Show your work.
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.

icarus
Posts: 819
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2008 12:48 am

Post by icarus »

Now you know my method. Run your own numbers. Show your work.
Where did you start? You haven't got any number for the radiation you are stopping so you just said 10cm lead should do it? ... How does that work?

Post Reply