Talk-Polywell.org

The Kiteman Konjecture

I started this search with the idea of finding a plausible physics based process to explain the claimed excess heat of the Rossi Reactor while also meeting some of the other apparent characteristics and known statements. I in no way claim that this is the Rossi process, just that … well, it may be. In truth, I would probably fall over faint if it turned out to be correct, but it wouldn’t upset my world view one iota.

[SPECULATION]

Start with an assumed nano-particulate Ni powder enriched in the higher isotopes, 62 and 64. One method for simple enrichment is postulated below.
Bathe in H2 gas. Heat as needed until hydrides form. I have not done any study to try to predict exactly what density of H in the Ni lattice is required, but I have chosen to do my limited numbers base on 1:1. Since these are supposed to be nano-particles, quick loading may be a matter of course.
Given a density of free electrons in the material (2 electrons per nickel, one from the last P orbital and one from the H), a plasmon with a frequency of about 3 Peta-Hertz, in the near to mid UV, can form. A plasmon is a “quantum of oscillation”. I take this to mean that a matrix of electrons start oscillating together at the same frequency. The heating of the lattice may be related to tuning the plasmon to a specific frequency as plasmon frequency is known to be temperature sensitive.
Apply UV laser light. (DPSS, quantum dot? I notice that the Rossi device has a rather long, water cooled segment BEFORE the apparent reactor chamber. This space may be used to hold and cool a UV laser.) When the frequencies of the UV laser and the plasmon coincide, they will interact to form a polariton. A polariton is a “quasi-particle”. I take this to mean that plasmon gets polarized and locked into a single matrix of electrons. I also take this to mean that the electrons are all oscillating in sync with the UV laser.
* Polaritons have an interesting characteristic. Unlike electrons and the quarks that make up nucleons, which are fermions, polaritons are bosons. Fermions are subject to Fermi-Dirac statistics which, among other things, is why there are specific, exclusive, orbital shells for electrons and it seems for nucleons too. To quote wikipedia, “by definition, fermions are particles which obey Fermi–Dirac statistics: when one swaps two fermions, the wavefunction of the system changes sign.[1] This "antisymmetric wavefunction" behavior implies that fermions are subject to the Pauli exclusion principle, i.e. no two fermions can occupy the same quantum state at the same time. This results in "rigidity" or "stiffness" of states that include fermions (atomic nuclei, atoms, molecules, etc.), so fermions are sometimes said to be the constituents of matter, while bosons are said to be the particles that transmit interactions (i.e. force carriers) or the constituents of electromagnetic radiation.”
* Electrons, being fermions, can’t normally wander around inside the filled electron shells of atoms. What this suggests is that since bosons are NOT subject to Pauli’s exclusion principle, the polariton, the lock-step matrix of electrons, CAN pass thru the electron shells. Indeed, since the charges are still active, the now polarized and cross linked plasmon might align itself with the nickel lattice such that the electrons are oscillating in line between pairs of nuclei.
* Supposing the active area of the reaction is highly loaded with H, and including the single electron of the outer shell of the nickel, this results in two electrons per NiH which, if aligned as assumed above, would set up the structure X{H-e-Ni-e}.
* Electrons starting at ~350k (~1.26E+05 m/sec) and oscillating at ~ 3PHz will displace about 5 pm which is of a near order to the radius of a nickel atom (124 pm) but perhaps not enough to have a desired effect.
Adjust the intensity of the UV input to heat the plasmon till the electron is reaching closer to the two nuclei. IF the electron in the polariton gets close enough to each nucleus it should exert a force on the H sufficient to attract it toward the Ni. The H should accelerate until it reaches the center of the oscillation of the electron. Inertia will take it further toward the Ni nucleus, and along with the slight residual shielding of the proton by the oscillating electron, might very well make it close enough to the Ni to be captured. Since the polariton electrons are conceptually getting VERY close to the newly excited nucleus, they could provide the particle for the shedding of the excitation energy. Indeed, if the {H-e-Ni-e} structure does exist, the polariton would provide not one but TWO electrons to carry away the excitation energy. If so, the remaining energy to be shed by gamma radiation may possibly be at or near the energy of the UV laser and dump itself into that beam. This may be the source of the energy spike phenomenon that has been reported. Alternatively, it may be in the soft to mid X-ray range and be the reason for the “2 cm of lead” shielding.
Naturally, being enclosed in a metal shell, the very high energy (even hyper-relativistic) electrons (not technically beta particles since they did not originate from a nucleon) would dump their energy into the surroundings as heat.

This MAY be how the Rossi machine works, if indeed it does.

Several things come to mind.

Ni isotopes have a “magic number” of protons which would mean they are all tightly bound into their shells. As a result, they shouldn’t be readily available to react to the presence of the conceptual polariton electrons. The neutrons on the other hand exceed the magic number and to a degree should be free to wander the surface. As the electrons approach the nucleus its charge might attract the wandering neutron via the nuclear equivalent of Van der Waal’s forces, aligning then with the electron/proton pair. Indeed, there may become a pile-up of local neutrons in line with the electrons. These neutrons, or piles of neutrons, may provide just the slight extra boost needed to make the reaction happen. It might also explain what Rossi meant by his “extra hooks” remark.
Since 61Ni is the middle of the pack of stable Ni isotopes, there may be something that buries the first 5 neutrons beyond the “magic number” in the nucleus for stability reasons. If so, this would leave 62Ni with one extra “hook” and 64Ni with three.
If this is indeed the case, it could help explain why the Cu ratio is near natural. The natural ratio of 62Ni to 64Ni is about 4:1. The enrichment process described below should cause a slight over enrichment of the heavier isotope. If the probability of reaction is also related to excess neutron count, the combination may very well result in closer to 70:30.
As for the lower mass Nickel isotopes, if they absorb a neutron, the Copper isotopes they would create would decay back to Ni by beta+ decay with half lives below 3.5 hours in every case.
Cu isotopes have one proton MORE than the magic number. If this proton is free to oscillate opposite to the polariton, it may provide sufficient additional coulomb forces to prevent or greatly minimize any additional proton absorption. This could explain why there is little if any Zinc detected.


Part of the whole issue is whether enrichment is plausible. I believe it may be not only plausible but fairly simple if you have expertise with micro and nano particles. The following is one possible scenario.

Buy Ni powder that is too big but of consistent particle size. If such in not available, then sift for size.
Introduce oversize particles into reformation chamber that:
1. melts the particles;
2. spins them to just below failure;
3. waits a bit while the heavier isotopes drift outwards;
4. disrupts the molten drop such that the outer, enriched parts fly outward and the remainder, depleted part drops down; and
5. captures the enriched drop in a manner to create the particle structure conditions you want while solidifying it.
If you want the surface to be crazed with micro-cracks, then a quick quench might achieve this. If a single crystal is more desired, a slow cooling may be needed.

The disruption might be accomplished in any of a number of ways, but my favorite is to touch the outer bulge of the oblate molten spheroid with small diameter laser dots. This process may require flickering to get the specific points to heat up. Since surface tension gets lower with heat, the heated spots should begin to extrude a stream of molten metal that would quickly nucleate into nano-drops. The remaining surface would pull the remainder of the original drop into a smaller drop and it would continue to fall down.
[/SPECULATION]

Please be nice!

I'm admittedly not familiar with this reasoning, so I won't pretent to know the likelyhood or endurance of such a system. But one question and comments. How much energy would the UV laser need to be to increase the frequency of the plasmons?(polaritons?) If the energy is too much, then while the physics would be interesting, it might still be a net energy loser.

Rossi stated input energy, presumably this is the input heating energy , but if there are other input energies- such as that required to power a laser, or an electrode, these inputs were not revealed. In some videos there are at least 5 heavy wires/ cables entering the device. Only one or at most two would be needed for a single heater. The others could be for other inputs, sensors, control cabling, decoys, etc. This ambiguity does not help the interpretation of the performance claims.

Dan Tibbets

Part of my conjecture is that while Rossi hasn't "lied" per-se, he may have misdirected when useful.
I have read he has TWO heaters. One that appears to be a simple ON/OFF bulk heater on the outside, and one that is internal.
My supposition is that the internal "heater" is the laser. After all, it heats the polariton so it is a heater, right? Maybe the internal heater is the laser and another bulk heater.

DT wrote:But one question and comments. How much energy would the UV laser need to be to increase the frequency of the plasmons?

I suppose I need to edit. The laser isn't speculated to change the FREQUENCY of the polariton, it changes it's amplitude of oscillation. It is what makes the electron matix move far enough to provide the bridge between the two nuclei. It is the basic density of the electrons that defines the frequency.
There may be a slight tuning effect, though this might be bad. I'll have to ponder it.

KitemanSA wrote: I take this to mean that a matrix of electrons start oscillating together at the same frequency. The heating of the lattice may be related to tuning the plasmon to a specific frequency as plasmon frequency is known to be temperature sensitive.

I get your point, you are looking at a system where a coherent oscillation is amplified by a "laser wakefield" effect, similar to the one discovered by Krushelnick and Malka.

But you are basing this on the idea that the lattice will enter a state of coherent oscillation at high temperature. Unfortunately I tend to remember a couple of papers stating that they found exactly the opposite.
Higher temperature forbid the forming of a coherent state. IMBW and I will need to look into some of my links, but you might want to start considering this issue.

Giorgio wrote:

KitemanSA wrote: I take this to mean that a matrix of electrons start oscillating together at the same frequency. The heating of the lattice may be related to tuning the plasmon to a specific frequency as plasmon frequency is known to be temperature sensitive.

I get your point, you are looking at a system where a coherent oscillation is amplified by a "laser wakefield" effect, similar to the one discovered by Krushelnick and Malka.

But you are basing this on the idea that the lattice will enter a state of coherent oscillation at high temperature. Unfortunately I tend to remember a couple of papers stating that they found exactly the opposite.
Higher temperature forbid the forming of a coherent state. IMBW and I will need to look into some of my links, but you might want to start considering this issue.

G: Thanks for your response.
I guess that depends on what you mean be "high temperature". I was thinking ~60°C. Does that mean "high temperature" to you? As far as I can tell, modifying the temperature with the external heater does little but perhaps add H to the matrix or maybe kick the Ni into a slightly higher valence count which increases the number of available free electrons per unit volume which increases the oscillatory frequency. This may be the mechanism by which Rossi tunes the system to get it started. It is consistent with the apparent process the units underwent during the demonstrations.

Only after the polariton is formed does the UV laser increase the polariton's temp. I haven't calculated the required temp at which the oscillation magnitude of the polariton electrons is great enough to provide the bridge. But I think it will not be "high temperature" by most fusioneer's definition.

I guess that is my next task. Calculate the polariton temperature!

Oh, and thanks for the names. I did my research on Wikipedia!

KitemanSA wrote: G: Thanks for your response.
I guess that depends on what you mean be "high temperature". I was thinking ~60°C. Does that mean "high temperature" to you?

I was thinking more to when the reactor reaches steady state operations. The coherent state must still be kept if you want to sustain the fusion process (according the WL (or similar) theory).
Hence "high temperatures" should be in the range of 300-400 'C, i.e. the temperature of the reaction chamber at steady state.

Giorgio wrote:

KitemanSA wrote: G: Thanks for your response.
I guess that depends on what you mean be "high temperature". I was thinking ~60°C. Does that mean "high temperature" to you?

I was thinking more to when the reactor reaches steady state operations. The coherent state must still be kept if you want to sustain the fusion process (according the WL (or similar) theory).
Hence "high temperatures" should be in the range of 300-400 'C, i.e. the temperature of the reaction chamber at steady state.

Then the question becomes "is that the heat of the nuclei or just the electrons"? By that I mean, do the nuclei get up to said temperature or just the polariton. At that temperature, if the Ni is involved, the high heat may futz with the Ni lattice and destroy the ability to align. But do the Ni nuclei actually increase in temperature that much? And secondly is "where does the SS temp of the Ni actually come to rest in a Rossi machine"?

The "steady state" would normally imply to me that the nuclei have become involved in that temperature though in fact this might not be the case. The process I have conjectured may not heat the nuclei much at all if the energy is dumped either via hyperrelativistic electrons to the ractor wall, or via the nuclear pumped UV laser light to the same place. Perhaps the "reactor" walls reach much higher temperatures than the Ni lattice. Perhaps that is part of the reason for the early H2O flow, keep the lattice at the right temperature.

Thanks for more things to think about.

KitemanSA wrote: By that I mean, do the nuclei get up to said temperature or just the polariton.

You can make this discrimination if the time frame involved is in the range of picoseconds. More than that and the temperature gradient will start to spread to the nuclei.

KitemanSA wrote:The process I have conjectured may not heat the nuclei much at all if the energy is dumped either via hyperrelativistic electrons to the ractor wall, or via the nuclear pumped UV laser light to the same place. Perhaps the "reactor" walls reach much higher temperatures than the Ni lattice. Perhaps that is part of the reason for the early H2O flow, keep the lattice at the right temperature.

I could give you reasons why there cannot be such a process, but assume it is real and that the heat is indeed deposited on the outside walls of the reactor and reaches 400'C. Than the inside can at best have a dT of 10-20'C, i.e. 380'C. Still too high to keep a coherent oscillation in anything we know, let alone a soup of a Nickel lattice in an hydrogen atmosphere.

That's why I never considered this route to be possible.

Kite, take a step back and think about this post again.
From my POV, we currently have the following Observations:
A man has a machine that produces an undefined amount of steam from an undefined amount of water with an undefined amount of energy going into it.
Your conclusion: Lasers

Sorry mate, but considering the facts, this does seem a pretty far leap to me.

Giorgio wrote:

KitemanSA wrote: By that I mean, do the nuclei get up to said temperature or just the polariton.

You can make this discrimination if the time frame involved is in the range of picoseconds. More than that and the temperature gradient will start to spread to the nuclei.

Now remember, it is conjectured that these electrons form a polariton which is a bosonic particle, not subject to exclusion principle. Unlike the fermionic electrons in the atoms of the Ni lattice, perhaps the polariton doesn't trade it's guided oscillatory energy so easily. And, IIRC, at these frequencies in the presence of a polariton, Ni is transparent to UV radiation. I'll have to think on this.

Then he wrote:

KitemanSA wrote:The process I have conjectured may not heat the nuclei much at all if the energy is dumped either via hyperrelativistic electrons to the reactor wall, or via the nuclear pumped UV laser light to the same place. Perhaps the "reactor" walls reach much higher temperatures than the Ni lattice. Perhaps that is part of the reason for the early H2O flow, keep the lattice at the right temperature.

I could give you reasons why there cannot be such a process, but assume it is real and that the heat is indeed deposited on the outside walls of the reactor and reaches 400'C. Than the inside can at best have a dT of 10-20'C, i.e. 380'C. Still too high to keep a coherent oscillation in anything we know, let alone a soup of a Nickel lattice in an hydrogen atmosphere.

This puzzles me. Why can't a sheath of water between the Ni lattice and the "specially formed walls" keep the high temperatures away from the lattice?

Then he wrote: That's why I never considered this route to be possible.

You do keep coming up with polite comments, for which I am very grateful. But perhaps I can intice you to think again?

Second question for you Giorio. Where did the 300-400C steady state come from?

KitemanSA wrote: This puzzles me. Why can't a sheath of water between the Ni lattice and the "specially formed walls" keep the high temperatures away from the lattice?

Because the Ni is deposited (or coated) over the reactor internal chamber (according what I understood). The water flows only outside and only gets in contact with the external walls of the reactor chamber.
Hence the thermal flow goes from the inside (MaxT) to the outside wall of the reactor chamber (MaxT-dT).
Even if we assume that the heat is deposited directly on the external walls as you suggested (which is a big leap of faith), the thermal gradient will tend to uniformly distribute over the reactor walls, with a MaxT on the external wall and a Maxt-dT on the inside of the chamber.
So, in a way or the other, the Ni lattice will be at steady state at a T equal or near to the working temperature of the reactor.

KitemanSA wrote: Second question for you Giorio. Where did the 300-400C steady state come from?

According Rossi you can get steam up to 500'C, hence the reactor temperature cannot be lower than that.
Just for sake of reasoning I reduced it to 300-400'C, but even 100'C will give you issues on maintaining a coherent oscillation of the Ni Lattice.

KitemanSA wrote:

Giorgio wrote: That's why I never considered this route to be possible.

You do keep coming up with polite comments, for which I am very grateful. But perhaps I can intice you to think again?

There are too many factors working against it.
If at least coherent oscillations had been observed in systems at high temperature I might concede the possibility of a doubt, but right now there are really too many holes to give it a chance.

Skipjack wrote:Kite, take a step back and think about this post again.
From my POV, we currently have the following Observations:
A man has a machine that produces an undefined amount of steam from an undefined amount of water with an undefined amount of energy going into it.
Your conclusion: Lasers

Sorry mate, but considering the facts, this does seem a pretty far leap to me.

No conclusion here. This is my conjecture of ONE way it MIGHT be happening. Read my intro. I'd fall over feint if it turns out true, but it COULD work (I think).

Giorgio wrote:

KitemanSA wrote: This puzzles me. Why can't a sheath of water between the Ni lattice and the "specially formed walls" keep the high temperatures away from the lattice?

Because the Ni is deposited (or coated) over the reactor internal chamber (according what I understood).

According to Axil? Any other source?

Then he wrote:The water flows only outside and only gets in contact with the external walls of the reactor chamber.

Source?

Then he wrote: Hence the thermal flow goes from the inside (MaxT) to the outside wall of the reactor chamber (MaxT-dT).

Assumption? Where did this come from?

Then he wrote: Even if we assume that the heat is deposited directly on the external walls as you suggested (which is a big leap of faith), the thermal gradient will tend to uniformly distribute over the reactor walls, with a MaxT on the external wall and a Maxt-dT on the inside of the chamber.
So, in a way or the other, the Ni lattice will be at steady state at a T equal or near to the working temperature of the reactor.

Ya know, I should look at the patent.

Then he wrote:

KitemanSA wrote: Second question for you Giorio. Where did the 300-400C steady state come from?

According Rossi you can get steam up to 500'C, hence the reactor temperature cannot be lower than that.

Geez I hpoe you can or Polywell will NEVER work with superconducting magnets.

Then he wrote: Just for sake of reasoning I reduced it to 300-400'C, but even 100'C will give you issues on maintaining a coherent oscillation of the Ni Lattice.

Source? Please? Is this the same folk you mentioned earlier?

KitemanSA wrote:

Giorgio wrote:

KitemanSA wrote: This puzzles me. Why can't a sheath of water between the Ni lattice and the "specially formed walls" keep the high temperatures away from the lattice?

Because the Ni is deposited (or coated) over the reactor internal chamber (according what I understood).

According to Axil? Any other source?

You really do not like me if you think that I can use Axil as a source .
This was stated by Rossi itself in one of his first TV interview. I missed it the first time I heard it but I catch it back a few weeks later while viewing it again.

KitemanSA wrote:

Then he wrote:The water flows only outside and only gets in contact with the external walls of the reactor chamber.

Source?

This was also mentioned by Rossi many times (that the reactor chamber was sealed) but you can get to it also by logic.
They are putting Hydrogen gas inside the reaction chamber and sealing off the valves. If water was allowed to enter the chamber the hydrogen will flow outside immediately.

KitemanSA wrote:

Then he wrote: Hence the thermal flow goes from the inside (MaxT) to the outside wall of the reactor chamber (MaxT-dT).

Assumption? Where did this come from?

Well, if you have a hot side the thermal gradient will move toward the cold side. Or maybe I am not understanding your doubt.

KitemanSA wrote:

Then he wrote:

KitemanSA wrote: Second question for you Giorio. Where did the 300-400C steady state come from?

According Rossi you can get steam up to 500'C, hence the reactor temperature cannot be lower than that.

Geez I hpoe you can or Polywell will NEVER work with superconducting magnets.

Oh come one, magnets are immersed into a cooling medium. Do you see any in the Rossi reactor? You can't really bring this as a counter argument.

KitemanSA wrote:

Then he wrote: Just for sake of reasoning I reduced it to 300-400'C, but even 100'C will give you issues on maintaining a coherent oscillation of the Ni Lattice.

Source? Please? Is this the same folk you mentioned earlier?

Yes, I am going by memory. As I said need to research it back.
But you can give me some source stating the opposite meantime