LENR Is Real

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

Moderators: tonybarry, MSimon

Axil
Posts: 935
Joined: Fri Jan 02, 2009 6:34 am

Re: LENR Is Real

Postby Axil » Sun Jun 15, 2014 12:24 pm

What you all haven’t picked up on yet is the “impossible” result that Mizuno has demonstrated. A fixed volume of deuterium gas is converted into FOUR times the volume of hydrogen gas, protium(H1).

This is an endothermic nuclear reaction that is the exact opposite of the fusion that goes on inside the sun.

One would deduce that protons and neutrons of deuterium are being converted to protons of protium.

The COP of this Mizuno reaction is far greater than just something over one when we account for the power needed to transmute deuterium into H1.

Where is this power coming from?

This experiment also demonstrates nuclear action at a distance where gas is transmuted outside of the metal lattice.

It seems to me, any curious scientist would be interested in finding out what is at the bottom of this strange result.

ladajo
Posts: 6204
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 11:18 pm
Location: North East Coast

Re: LENR Is Real

Postby ladajo » Sun Jun 15, 2014 3:30 pm

Hey Parallel my invisible pink mute unicorn says hello! She has a full tummy of Scooby Snacks and is very happy today.

On this topic Simon and I are in full agreement. Even cordial ;)

(Hi Mike!)

Well, maybe to qualify, I think Rossi is 100% Full of shit at this point. I think Simon has him at about 99.9% But he is a smidge more critical than I on this one.

Axil,
I am interested in the reaction, and I do understand that Mizuno has some thoughts to that end.
Two things immediately jump out that bother me.
1.) Lots of Political Rhetoric in a suppossedly 'scientific' results release.
2.) As I look and play with the data presented, it is clear that the controllability and predictability of the output metrics is a little, ummm, dynamic. Not so predictable in simple terms. Lots more variation than I would think to demonstrate conclusive behaviour. One of the most obvious is the lack of rhyme or reason in the electrode v. reactor temps.

The more cynical part of me had a feeling at times while going over the data that suggested some of the entries were randomly entered, while others were purposefully entered. I am not making a judgement, just expressing what I felt.

I am also curious as to your comment on COP. What matters is real power in against measured power out. Ar you trying to say that there was power out that was not measured? Otherwise your comment does not make a lot of sense.

I am interested in seeing Mizuni goes next with it. It is worth watching. Unlike Rossi. 200 quatloos that Rossi is full of shit for any takers.

I am also curious to your statement (it seems of fact) that "people are replicating this test now". This I have not seen, cna you provide reference?
The development of atomic power, though it could confer unimaginable blessings on mankind, is something that is dreaded by the owners of coal mines and oil wells. (Hazlitt)
What I want to do is to look up C. . . . I call him the Forgotten Man. (Sumner)

Asterix
Posts: 85
Joined: Fri Feb 01, 2013 8:08 pm

Re: LENR Is Real

Postby Asterix » Sun Jun 15, 2014 7:16 pm

My view of this whole LENR/CF/CANR/whatever thing is it makes a great topic for discussion and baiting, but until we see a commercial verifiable product, it's so much speculation. In particular, if you want to see years of a discussion of LENR full of ad-homs going nowhere, consult the theeestory blog. Two years and 7000 posts later, nothing's been resolved and tempers have grown short. There's really no sense in recreating the discussion here.

This is after all, a Polywell forum.

Oh yeah, that "EESU" that the whole EEStory forum was about appears to be nothing more than speculation, including the "inventor's" claim that he could deliver vehicle-ready units in 2007. Give it a couple of months more for the dramatis personae to make their exit and it will be history. There are still a few left scratching around in the dung pile looking for a pony, but the posting frequency on the subject is dropping rapidly as reality begins to dawn.

The funny thing is that Weir was far more believable than Rossi. But he fooled 'em all by basically having invented nothing of value--although the believers still hope for that pony...

Axil
Posts: 935
Joined: Fri Jan 02, 2009 6:34 am

Re: LENR Is Real

Postby Axil » Mon Jun 16, 2014 1:48 am

http://www.infinite-energy.com/images/p ... ravens.pdf

Cold Fusion at NI Week 2013

Dennis Cravens and Rod Gimpel

Image


The demo was about as simple a demo as you can imagine.
It wasn’t designed to be a science experiment. It wasn’t
designed for exacting measurements. It was designed just to
make people realize there must be some effect we don’t
understand going on inside the simple brass balls. Many will
say you it needs more wires and exotic sensors, but a 4
degree signal above the bed the ball sits in and well above
the room temperature means by simple thermodynamics
that there must be some energy source inside. People can
argue about what it is, but the bottom line is something
strange is going on—something that cannot be easily
explained but just might change the world.

It was interesting that only two people had serious doubts
about the heat. It is just hard to argue with a 4 degree signal
that is hotter than its surroundings. Most of the questions
were targeted at: What can we do with it? When will it be
commercialized? What are you selling? Can you scale it up?
What would it cost? And my favorite: Can you make me a
charger for my Tesla car? The questions were refreshing since
we feared most people would doubt us or attack us. Perhaps
they were just being nice, but we think that the tide on public
acceptance of cold fusion is slowly changing. We came
away feeling that we had accomplished our real goal: To
make people think just perhaps cold fusion might be possible
and real. That alone was worth the expense and effort to
attend NI Week.

Axil
Posts: 935
Joined: Fri Jan 02, 2009 6:34 am

Re: LENR Is Real

Postby Axil » Mon Jun 16, 2014 2:27 am

ladajo wrote:
2.) As I look and play with the data presented, it is clear that the controllability and predictability of the output metrics is a little, ummm, dynamic. Not so predictable in simple terms. Lots more variation than I would think to demonstrate conclusive behaviour. One of the most obvious is the lack of rhyme or reason in the electrode v. reactor temps.


Controlling LENR reactions have been the major issue with engineering design.

I am also curious as to your comment on COP. What matters is real power in against measured power out. Ar you trying to say that there was power out that was not measured? Otherwise your comment does not make a lot of sense.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proton%E2%80%93proton_chain_reaction

Proton–proton chain reaction produces energy. The exact reverse of the Proton–proton reaction will require energy.

Mizuno is observing the reverse of the Proton–proton reaction which requires energy over and above the energy needed to produce heat.



I am interested in seeing Mizuni goes next with it.


Mizuno wants to build a 10 KW reactor.

I am also curious to your statement (it seems of fact) that "people are replicating this test now". This I have not seen, cna you provide reference?


https://mospace.umsystem.edu/xmlui/bitstream/handle/10355/36817/SimulationNuclearTransmutationPresentation.pdf?sequence=2


PS: Defkalion seems to be replicated here.

Carl White
Posts: 317
Joined: Mon Aug 24, 2009 10:44 pm

Re: LENR Is Real

Postby Carl White » Mon Jun 16, 2014 4:26 am

ladajo wrote:You really are a sad old man looking for purpose late in life.


I wish you'd knock off making these kind of juvenile taunts, ladajo. I suggest you respect parallel's right to his opinion, even if you personally think it's absurd. He's not harming anyone with it.

ladajo
Posts: 6204
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 11:18 pm
Location: North East Coast

Re: LENR Is Real

Postby ladajo » Mon Jun 16, 2014 1:28 pm

The point here you are missing is that I do respect his opinion.
He can believe in Rossi all he wants.

He spent some time not respecting mine, insisting I was trolling, when in fact all I was doing was pointing out inconsisitencies in Rossi's own story.

Given his behaviour and treatment of me and others who do not see Rossi as he does, I have decided he as a person is not worth credible respect.
That is why I think he is a sad old man seeking purpose. He has not made one valid nor cogent argument to support his position. It is a point of religion for him that Rossi is right and has it all figured out, and that anyone who thinks otherwise is going to hell.

If he wants to debate like a grown-up, I am all ears. But he is not capable, as he has demonstrated here and other places he posts.
Therefore I taunt him with a two fold hope;
1.) He will go away and take his Rossi Religion somewhere else.
2.) He will realize he is not listening too, nor actually giving any intellectual consideration to other points of view, and change the way he does things from emotionally based knee jerks to protect his saviour, into something more rational and considered.

Of the two, I think outcome one is more likely.

Pardon me, as I need to go feed my unicorn again, and then make some paper cut-out dolls.
The development of atomic power, though it could confer unimaginable blessings on mankind, is something that is dreaded by the owners of coal mines and oil wells. (Hazlitt)

What I want to do is to look up C. . . . I call him the Forgotten Man. (Sumner)

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

Re: LENR Is Real

Postby seedload » Mon Jun 16, 2014 2:50 pm

parallel wrote:seedload,
You and your fellows like ladajo and the emoticon child are just trolls, defined as being pathological and sadistic. Impervious to logic and science there is no point in showing how you are wrong. You will just parrot more lies from somewhere else.

What are you going to do if the Elforsk report proves the E-cAT? Deny the results of a national research organization and a peer reviewed paper? Won't be long now and we'll see you scurrying for cover.


Pretty sure there is no actual fountain of youth, but if I found it, yippy.
I am not going to win the Power Ball, but if I did, bully for me!
It's pretty unlikely that I will be hit in the head by a meteor tomorrow, but if it happens, bummer.
If the E-Cat is definitively shown to be real and legitimate then I will jump for joy.

I mean, the prospect of unlimited cheap energy for the entire world. It would be the greatest single contribution to mankind EVER! I would be ecstatic and I would marvel at the accomplishment.

But the ECAT won't be proved - you idiot.
Stick the thing in a tub of water! Sheesh!

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

Re: LENR Is Real

Postby seedload » Mon Jun 16, 2014 3:55 pm

Axil wrote:http://www.infinite-energy.com/images/pdfs/NIWeekCravens.pdf

Cold Fusion at NI Week 2013

Dennis Cravens and Rod Gimpel


Interesting. Thanks.
Stick the thing in a tub of water! Sheesh!

ladajo
Posts: 6204
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 11:18 pm
Location: North East Coast

Re: LENR Is Real

Postby ladajo » Mon Jun 16, 2014 4:39 pm

What are you going to do if the Elforsk report proves the E-cAT?


Anyone want to take stakes on what Parallel will do if the Elforsk report does not prove the Ecat?

Is this too obvious a bet? What about extreme odds?
The development of atomic power, though it could confer unimaginable blessings on mankind, is something that is dreaded by the owners of coal mines and oil wells. (Hazlitt)

What I want to do is to look up C. . . . I call him the Forgotten Man. (Sumner)

Stubby
Posts: 877
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2012 4:05 pm

Re: LENR Is Real

Postby Stubby » Tue Jun 17, 2014 12:56 am

ladajo wrote:
What are you going to do if the Elforsk report proves the E-cAT?


Anyone want to take stakes on what Parallel will do if the Elforsk report does not prove the Ecat?

Is this too obvious a bet? What about extreme odds?


4000 quatloos on parallel denouncing Elforsk if they do not agree with him.
Everything is bullshit unless proven otherwise. -A.C. Beddoe

Axil
Posts: 935
Joined: Fri Jan 02, 2009 6:34 am

Re: LENR Is Real

Postby Axil » Wed Jun 18, 2014 5:44 am

http://phys.org/news/2014-06-supercondu ... years.html



twisted 'pockets' of electrons cause superconductivity in high-Tc copper oxides.



I contend that twisted 'pockets' of electrons also produce the LENR reactions.

See

viewtopic.php?f=10&t=5429&start=15#p112918

Axil
Posts: 935
Joined: Fri Jan 02, 2009 6:34 am

Re: LENR Is Real

Postby Axil » Wed Jun 18, 2014 8:12 pm

http://phys.org/news/2014-06-quantum-me ... nable.html



New quantum mechanism to trigger the emission of tunable light at terahertz frequencies


There are those that believe that LENR is invalid because Gamma radiation is expected from a nuclear reaction, but in LENR, no such radiation is seen. This leads them to conclude that LENR is not possible. They may not understand that they may not know everything in every scientific field.



But this reference from Nano-optics shows that high frequency light can be down shifted to a lower frequency by a properly shaped Nano-cavity filled with the proper type of photon based subatomic quasiparticle.



In LENR, Gamma radiation is down shifted into the extreme ultra violet by densely packed electron based coherent and entangled quasiparticles called Surface Plasmon Polaritons (SPP).

take note:

Electrons are trapped in the structure and this confinement can be exploited to enhance their capacity to interact with light at given frequencies much lower than the laser frequency at which they are excited: the system emits light by interacting with "vacuum fluctuations" that permeate space, according to quantum theory.



Fano resonance takes two frequencies and mixes them together to form a third intermediate frequency, just like mixing cold water and hot water will produce warm water. The "vacuum fluctuations" and the gamma rays mix to produce XUV which is usually seen in LENR reactions.

See

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

This resonance behavior is a property of whispering gallery waves.

See

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whispering-gallery_wave

tomclarke
Posts: 1683
Joined: Sun Oct 05, 2008 4:52 pm
Location: London
Contact:

Re: LENR Is Real

Postby tomclarke » Thu Jun 19, 2014 8:35 am

The gap between nuclear and lattice energy scales is what makes LENR so implausible.

One side of this is the Coulomb barrier: stuff in lattices has energy of 10s of eV (else it would not be in the lattice!) whereas nuclear needs 10s of keV, assuming all sorts of reaction enhancements.

The Coulomb barrier is worse than it seems: the timescale of nuclear reactions means that the required energy must be available within a small volume (a single nucleus) there is no way for collective behaviour of multiple nuclei to participate in this because they are too far away.

The other side of this is that nuclear reactions, once they happen, have multiple paths all of which result in high energy released, and therefore high energy products. The energies here are MeV typically. Some paths also result in neutrons released which whether high or low energy are easily detected - solitary neutrons are a no-no and neutrons can only stop being solitary by transmuting elements.

The biggest problem for LENR is the lack of nuclear products. It is also the easiest way to detect LENR - if it were real the nuclear products produced, even at very low levels, could be detected and would be unambiguously nuclear in origin.

Now look at the ways round this:
You can look at electromagnetic resonances, or vibrational resonances, to push local energy up from characteristic 1eV.
You can look (as above) at ways that high energy reaction products can be caught in lattices. (Actually frequency division of photons is a really bad example of this: it is not easy to make happen and anyway does not reduce energy enough).

As an engineer look at the improbabilities here:
(1) find some way round the Coulomb barrier. Seems impossible but many such things turn out to be possible, so let us suppose this can be done.
(2) a mechanism to get rid of ALL reaction results.

This, from an engineering POV, is the problem. How could any such "product processing" method be so 100% reliable that results are never seen? Worse - all nuclear reactions have multiple reaction pathways, with different results: gammas, alphas, betas, neutrons. We need a whole set of "product processing" mechanisms all of which work 100% if the time.

And no such product processing method has been shown to exist, let alone one that works 100% of the time. We need at least 3 different product processing methods for neutrons, gammas and betas/alphas. All of which are tuned to work perfectly in every single LENR experiments.

Now, again as an engineer, look at the evidence. Work over 30 years has failed to find any reaction products. The simple solution for this is that there are no reaction products because there is no fusion. Theoretical work over the same period has failed to find any plausible mechanism for "product processing", except the W-L gamma shield. That does not wash because it would vanish as soon as the W-L slow neutron generation mechanism stopped, whereas nasty gammas from neutron capture intermediate product decay would continue for the half-life of whatever intermediate products you have.

As an engineer you reckon theories can have exceptions and a cast-iron proof something is impossible may not be real. But equally as an engineer you look at the lack of products and reckon LENR is not real.

The exception would be a magic mechanism that simultaneously allows nuclear reactions and prevents all reaction products from appearing (not just one product from one decay path). Such has never been hypothesised.

Changing hats, as a scientist you look at LENR and say it is no good because it does not predict anything definite (except reaction products - which we do not see!). Excess heat is a non-specific prediction. The main characteristic of LENR is that it is flakey and not reliable - rather like experimental error! A hypothesis which does not predict anything can never be disproved but is equally not much good. Ask what evidence could come from experiment that would disprove LENR and you will see what I mean! It can never be disproved, which explains why people who are both bad engineers and bad scientists go on chasing it.

tomclarke
Posts: 1683
Joined: Sun Oct 05, 2008 4:52 pm
Location: London
Contact:

Re: LENR Is Real

Postby tomclarke » Thu Jun 19, 2014 8:41 am

Oh - and Rossi is a known serial vapourware merchant (putting it at its most charitable) and liar! Quite separately from the plausibility of LENR.


Return to “News”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests