10KW LENR demonstrator (new thread)

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

Moderators: tonybarry, MSimon

icarus
Posts: 818
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2008 12:48 am

Postby icarus » Fri Dec 09, 2011 7:52 am

Nanoplasmonic "hotspots", i.e. localised sites of v. high fields are reported ... so holds some water thus far.

http://www.phog.physik.uni-muenchen.de/news/archive/2008_01_08/index.html

http://www.phy-astr.gsu.edu/stockman/data/Complexity_in_Nanoplasmonics_50_min.pdf

http://www.phog.physik.uni-muenchen.de/news/archive/2008_01_08/index.html

Now, next question is could the hotspots of these free electron density wave fields, i.e. resonant SPPs, "carry" the free protons with them into metal when the field rebounds? Seems like the Polywell is based around the protons following the electrons so maybe .... but how fast would the proton be going on the rebound?

Not so cold fusion after all ... nanoplasmonic hotspot fusion??

MSimon
Posts: 14330
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:37 pm
Location: Rockford, Illinois
Contact:

Postby MSimon » Fri Dec 09, 2011 9:14 am

icarus wrote:Nanoplasmonic "hotspots", i.e. localised sites of v. high fields are reported ... so holds some water thus far.

http://www.phog.physik.uni-muenchen.de/news/archive/2008_01_08/index.html

http://www.phy-astr.gsu.edu/stockman/data/Complexity_in_Nanoplasmonics_50_min.pdf

http://www.phog.physik.uni-muenchen.de/news/archive/2008_01_08/index.html

Now, next question is could the hotspots of these free electron density wave fields, i.e. resonant SPPs, "carry" the free protons with them into metal when the field rebounds? Seems like the Polywell is based around the protons following the electrons so maybe .... but how fast would the proton be going on the rebound?

Not so cold fusion after all ... nanoplasmonic hotspot fusion??


The Polywell still has the coulomb barrier to contend with. The analogy is very weak to non-existent.
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.

icarus
Posts: 818
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2008 12:48 am

Postby icarus » Fri Dec 09, 2011 10:25 am

MSimon wrote:
icarus wrote:Nanoplasmonic "hotspots", i.e. localised sites of v. high fields are reported ... so holds some water thus far.

http://www.phog.physik.uni-muenchen.de/news/archive/2008_01_08/index.html

http://www.phy-astr.gsu.edu/stockman/data/Complexity_in_Nanoplasmonics_50_min.pdf

http://www.phog.physik.uni-muenchen.de/news/archive/2008_01_08/index.html

Now, next question is could the hotspots of these free electron density wave fields, i.e. resonant SPPs, "carry" the free protons with them into metal when the field rebounds? Seems like the Polywell is based around the protons following the electrons so maybe .... but how fast would the proton be going on the rebound?

Not so cold fusion after all ... nanoplasmonic hotspot fusion??


The Polywell still has the coulomb barrier to contend with. The analogy is very weak to non-existent.


Well, polywell has to first overcome the Adminstratium barrier .... coulomb barrier was an engineering problem, so they said.
Electron plasma creating localised field conditions for accelerating protons ... if you can't see the analogy, well I can't help you much, probably nobody can.

MSimon
Posts: 14330
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:37 pm
Location: Rockford, Illinois
Contact:

Postby MSimon » Fri Dec 09, 2011 11:42 am

coulomb barrier was an engineering problem, so they said.


Not at all. ITER has the very same "problem". The engineering was in re: a method for a more controlled attack on the barrier. i.e. an accelerator vs thermal methods.

The projectiles (D, T, B11, H - ionized) were not shielded by an electron cloud. Merely accelerated by it.

The proposed shielding of protons by an accompanying electron cloud for LENR (if it is in fact a fact) is what makes LENR quite different from Polywell. Thus my point about weak analogy.

You might as well say a horse is like a bicycle. True at the grossest level - a method of transportation. Once you get into the details (wheels vs legs) they are rather radically different. Analogy wise it is more correct to say an auto is like a bicycle.

In the same respect ITER has a lot in common with Polywell. LENR not so much.
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.

KitemanSA
Posts: 6113
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 3:05 pm
Location: OlyPen WA

Postby KitemanSA » Fri Dec 09, 2011 1:59 pm

rcain wrote:
KitemanSA wrote:... pondering whether excitons (surface or otherwise) can be condensed into a massive quasi particle (super-fliud?) that can pick up a proton and guide it into a Ni nucleus.

I am concerned with ANY neutron explanation per-se... but a guided (screened?) proton seems plausible....


erm... how does that work exactly then Kite? :shock:

WAG:
    Ni lattice, (Hydrogen loaded) with "catalyst" dopant defects create "excitons".
    Excitons (now bosonic) condence into BEC (Tc ~500K+ depending on exciton density and "hole mass".)
    {then a miracle occurs}
    Resonance matched proton replaces "hole" in one (or more) location(s) of the BEC and is thus tightly coupled with a paired electron (still in BEC)
    Charge neutral (+-) pair {coulombicly equivalent to neutron until quite close to nucleus} approaches nucleus to within tunneling distance.
    Even nuecleon nuclei (bosonic characteristic too) uses proton for nuclear reaction and uses remaining electron (still condensed to exciton uni-state BEC) via internal conversion to dump energy. Odd nucleon isotopes not involved (non-bosonic). Proton rich isotpotes release binding energy excitation via proton ejection preferentially over internal conversion.
    Condensate particles share energy and distribute it throughout lattice with VERY low EM release.
Brown text optional?

"Fuel" contains Ni isotopes 58, 60, 61, 62, & 64.
Resultant reactions:
    58Ni (p,p) 58Ni. Disentangled proton interferes with BEC so the lower the incidence, the better.
    58Ni (p, IC) 59Cu : 59Cu ( ,EC) 59Ni*. Extremely low probablility path. *Radioactive
    60Ni (p,p) 60Ni. IBID
    60Ni (p,IC) 61Cu : 61Cu ( ,EC) 61Ni. Low probability path.
    61Ni. Non-reactive?
    62Ni (p,IC) 63Cu
    64Ni (p,IC) 65Cu

JoeP
Posts: 519
Joined: Sat Jun 25, 2011 5:10 am

Postby JoeP » Fri Dec 09, 2011 5:10 pm

Crawdaddy wrote:
JoeP wrote:Suppose an amateur wanted to replicate an E-Cat, and attempted to prepare Ni powder. What is a cheap way to do this and remove or convert the oxide?


You would need a high vacuum pump, like a turbo pump, or liquid nitrogen trapped diffusion pump.

I figure it would cost you about 10k to amass the requisite materials and apparatus to start experimenting.

Although apparently there is some dude claiming he has achieved a good result using lithium aluminum hydride as a source of hydrogen and as a means of reducing nickel... or something like that.


Bear with me on this (I'm a software engineer, not a chemist or a physicist) :) But I'm interested in the subject matter.

So...

I guess that the amateur LENR enthusiast will need to somehow grind nickel in the regular atmosphere. This will cause an oxide layer on all particles. This powder is then loaded in a vacuum chamber, and a turbo pump is used (and perhaps a cryopump afterwards). The powder is then heated or somehow energized to cause the oxygen to disassociate from the Ni. Then perhaps an inert gas like argon is pumped into the chamber, and the powder is quickly stored and sealed in a container.

Something like that?

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

Postby Enginerd » Fri Dec 09, 2011 6:03 pm

JoeP wrote:I guess that the amateur LENR enthusiast will need to somehow grind nickel in the regular atmosphere. This will cause an oxide layer on all particles. This powder is then loaded in a vacuum chamber, and a turbo pump is used (and perhaps a cryopump afterwards). The powder is then heated or somehow energized to cause the oxygen to disassociate from the Ni.


Such an amateur LENR enthusiast would likely not perform many experiments....

Nickel Powder Toxicology:
Acute Symptoms/Signs of exposure: Eyes: Stinging pain, watering of eyes, inflammation of eyelids and conjunctivitis. Skin:
Insensitivity to pain, feel of coolness or cold, skin looks white and feels hard and cold. Ingestion: Breath has sweet, organic
odor, mental confusion, drowsiness, nausea, vomiting and headache. Inhalation: Rapid irregular breathing, headache, fatigue,
mental confusion, nausea and vomiting, giddiness and poor judgment, convulsions and death.
"Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away."
--Philip K. Dick

rcain
Posts: 992
Joined: Mon Apr 14, 2008 2:43 pm
Contact:

Postby rcain » Fri Dec 09, 2011 6:13 pm

KitemanSA wrote:
rcain wrote:
KitemanSA wrote:... pondering whether excitons (surface or otherwise) can be condensed into a massive quasi particle (super-fliud?) that can pick up a proton and guide it into a Ni nucleus.

I am concerned with ANY neutron explanation per-se... but a guided (screened?) proton seems plausible....


erm... how does that work exactly then Kite? :shock:

WAG:
    Ni lattice, (Hydrogen loaded) with "catalyst" dopant defects create "excitons".
    Excitons (now bosonic) condence into BEC (Tc ~500K+ depending on exciton density and "hole mass".)

    ps. any Gama - or is that what you mean by ('dissipates' to?) very low EM
    {then a miracle occurs}
    Resonance matched proton replaces "hole" in one (or more) location(s) of the BEC and is thus tightly coupled with a paired electron (still in BEC)
    Charge neutral (+-) pair {coulombicly equivalent to neutron until quite close to nucleus} approaches nucleus to within tunneling distance.
    Even nuecleon nuclei (bosonic characteristic too) uses proton for nuclear reaction and uses remaining electron (still condensed to exciton uni-state BEC) via internal conversion to dump energy. Odd nucleon isotopes not involved (non-bosonic). Proton rich isotpotes release binding energy excitation via proton ejection preferentially over internal conversion.
    Condensate particles share energy and distribute it throughout lattice with VERY low EM release.
Brown text optional?

"Fuel" contains Ni isotopes 58, 60, 61, 62, & 64.
Resultant reactions:
    58Ni (p,p) 58Ni. Disentangled proton interferes with BEC so the lower the incidence, the better.
    58Ni (p, IC) 59Cu : 59Cu ( ,EC) 59Ni*. Extremely low probablility path. *Radioactive
    60Ni (p,p) 60Ni. IBID
    60Ni (p,IC) 61Cu : 61Cu ( ,EC) 61Ni. Low probability path.
    61Ni. Non-reactive?
    62Ni (p,IC) 63Cu
    64Ni (p,IC) 65Cu


WOOF! :o

so that is the Kiteman konjecture, in a nutshell.

just love step 4. what stops the proton just neutralising out in the BEC?

'resonance matched' - what does that look like?

ps. any Gama? - or is that what you mean by ('dissipates' to?) low EM?

pps. can your Konjecture also predict other/wider isotopical mixes in the outcomes - as for example has been reported in works of Miley, Piantilli, et al, iirc?

KitemanSA
Posts: 6113
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 3:05 pm
Location: OlyPen WA

Postby KitemanSA » Fri Dec 09, 2011 6:39 pm

Comments interspersed {thusly}
rcain wrote:
KitemanSA wrote:
rcain wrote:
KitemanSA wrote:... pondering whether excitons (surface or otherwise) can be condensed into a massive quasi particle (super-fliud?) that can pick up a proton and guide it into a Ni nucleus.

I am concerned with ANY neutron explanation per-se... but a guided (screened?) proton seems plausible....
erm... how does that work exactly then Kite? :shock:
{Stuff deleted for brevity:}
WOOF! :o

so that is the Kiteman konjecture, in a nutshell. {more like Konjecture II, Konjecture I was surface plasmon polaritons!}
just love step 4. what stops the proton just neutralising out in the BEC? {Dang good question, this may be what WL mean by heavy electron / ULMNeutron}

'resonance matched' - what does that look like?

[ASCII IMG]
/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
[/[/ASCII IMG]
?? :D


ps. any Gama? - or is that what you mean by ('dissipates' to?) low EM? {Technically, gamma, maybe; but in the low X-ray range?}

rcain
Posts: 992
Joined: Mon Apr 14, 2008 2:43 pm
Contact:

Postby rcain » Fri Dec 09, 2011 6:50 pm

:lol:

and how about the pps?

do you think your Konjecture could predict all the elements/isotopes they claim to have seen transmuted? (the various spectrum analyses results dotted around)?

maybe some sort of balancing act between endothemic and exothermic chains? (hence the historically unpredictable outputs).

KitemanSA
Posts: 6113
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 3:05 pm
Location: OlyPen WA

Postby KitemanSA » Fri Dec 09, 2011 7:11 pm

rcain wrote::lol:

and how about the pps?

do you think your Konjecture could predict all the elements/isotopes they claim to have seen transmuted? (the various spectrum analyses results dotted around)?

maybe some sort of balancing act between endothemic and exothermic chains? (hence the historically unpredictable outputs).
Sorry, thought it was a joke.

Heck dude, I'm speculatin here. PREDICT??? Not on your life. The only thing I predict is that if my Konjecture turns out to be right, I'll be more surprised than just about everyone! But it is fun and keeps me open to the possibilities.

When I read something that physicists say that is close, I get a warm-fuzzy. :wink:

rcain
Posts: 992
Joined: Mon Apr 14, 2008 2:43 pm
Contact:

Postby rcain » Fri Dec 09, 2011 7:18 pm

KitemanSA wrote:
rcain wrote::lol:

and how about the pps?

do you think your Konjecture could predict all the elements/isotopes they claim to have seen transmuted? (the various spectrum analyses results dotted around)?

maybe some sort of balancing act between endothemic and exothermic chains? (hence the historically unpredictable outputs).
Sorry, thought it was a joke.

Heck dude, I'm speculatin here. PREDICT??? Not on your life. The only thing I predict is that if my Konjecture turns out to be right, I'll be more surprised than just about everyone! But it is fun and keeps me open to the possibilities.

When I read something that physicists say that is close, I get a warm-fuzzy. :wink:


hehe - yes, that smiley laughy symbol was actually meant in a good way - i like the sound of your Konjecture II - (K2 for short perhaps).

thought of trying to knock it into shape with someone and get it publiched on Arxiv?
Last edited by rcain on Fri Dec 09, 2011 7:22 pm, edited 1 time in total.

JoeP
Posts: 519
Joined: Sat Jun 25, 2011 5:10 am

Postby JoeP » Fri Dec 09, 2011 7:20 pm

Enginerd wrote:
JoeP wrote:I guess that the amateur LENR enthusiast will need to somehow grind nickel in the regular atmosphere. This will cause an oxide layer on all particles. This powder is then loaded in a vacuum chamber, and a turbo pump is used (and perhaps a cryopump afterwards). The powder is then heated or somehow energized to cause the oxygen to disassociate from the Ni.


Such an amateur LENR enthusiast would likely not perform many experiments....

Nickel Powder Toxicology:
Acute Symptoms/Signs of exposure: Eyes: Stinging pain, watering of eyes, inflammation of eyelids and conjunctivitis. Skin:
Insensitivity to pain, feel of coolness or cold, skin looks white and feels hard and cold. Ingestion: Breath has sweet, organic
odor, mental confusion, drowsiness, nausea, vomiting and headache. Inhalation: Rapid irregular breathing, headache, fatigue,
mental confusion, nausea and vomiting, giddiness and poor judgment, convulsions and death.


Yeah, OK. So a glove-box, laminar airflow, and a respirator.
Maybe fine nickel power can simply be ordered.

It seems that once you have relatively pure Ni powder, the rest of the components seem very cheap to put together. Might be a fun thing to do in the garage :) Or more seriously, like Famulus is doing with Polywell.

I'd like to know what Rossi did (for the sake of argument, lets pretend he is either legit or deluded, but honestly). Somehow I do not see him using a high vacuum system in preparing these powders. Maybe he pointed it out somewhere on his blog.

MSimon
Posts: 14330
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 7:37 pm
Location: Rockford, Illinois
Contact:

Postby MSimon » Fri Dec 09, 2011 7:25 pm

I'd like to know what Rossi did (for the sake of argument, lets pretend he is either legit or deluded, but honestly). Somehow I do not see him using a high vacuum system in preparing these powders.


He has a secret lab in the jungles of South America.
Engineering is the art of making what you want from what you can get at a profit.

seedload
Posts: 1062
Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2008 8:16 pm

Postby seedload » Fri Dec 09, 2011 7:51 pm

JoeP wrote:Somehow I do not see him using a high vacuum system in preparing these powders. Maybe he pointed it out somewhere on his blog.


Once you are done sorting the atoms, putting them together in little tiny portions is easy.
Stick the thing in a tub of water! Sheesh!


Return to “News”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests