10KW LENR Demonstrator?

[MSimon]

MSimon,

In a joint statement, Dr. K.V. Ramanujachary, Rowan University Meritorious Professor of Chemistry and Biochemistry, Dr. Amos Mugweru, Assistant Professor of Chemistry, and Dr. Peter Jansson P.E., Associate Professor of Engineering said, “In independent tests conducted over the past three months involving 10 solid fuels made by us from commercially-available chemicals, our team of engineering and chemistry professors, staff, and students at Rowan University has independently and consistently generated energy in excesses ranging from 1.2 times to 6.5 times the maximum theoretical heat available through known chemical reactions.”

I'll find the link to Jansson's report if it will make you happy.

Did that come from the pdf? Or some other place? Which is to say: got a link?

[GIThruster]

Tom Clark has mentioned several times that he's not familiar with any LENR experiments that have been successfully replicated, and neither am I. But if you read back to his post on the last page, and see what he's asking for, it's a shocking thing to realize these criteria he's laid out ARE satisfied by the BLP people. They DO have independent replication.

Their "independent replication" was paid in advance with few hundred thousands dollars donations:
http://www.rowan.edu/provost/grants/act ... forweb.pdf

So much for the word "independent"

Giorgio, I think we've had this go-'round several times before and I honestly don't want to be pressured to act as a BLP advocate. I'm not. I simply do not have the technical skills necessary to make my own judgement about what is a fantastically complex situation, and anyone with the skills would need to invest many hundreds if not thousands of hours to make an informed judgement.

My place is rather as philosopher, to look at the entire scientific process from outside. For instance, the issue of what amounts to a real "explanation" and what amounts to a real "replication".

Your observation that BLP paid Rowan to do the replication work is a worthy one, but in order to use it to try to invalidate the work at Rowan as not "independent", you have to assert that the people at Rowan are not trustworthy--which seems to me a fantastically vapid assertion. We're here talking about more than a dozen professors working at a university whose stated goals are, to turn Rowan into the premier engineering school in the world--certainly one to rival MIT and Oxford. These instructors reputations are at risk, and there's not a one of them who would throw away a decades long career, in order to promote bad science, no matter what they were paid and by whom. Try also to keep in mind, that when grants for experiments like this come into a university, the money does not go into the pockets of the professors supervising the work. They're already being paid by the university. The funds are used for other things, than lining the pockets of the PhD professors supervising, so the perverting influence you're intimating really does not exist--rather the contrary. These professors have their careers at risk, merely by reporting what they find.

As to MSimon's observation directly above--again quite so!--but remember, it is not the place of science to prove a claim. Science merely disproves alternatives, which is precisely what the Rowan replication achieved. You're therefore drawing a distinction without a difference. Anyone understanding scientific method, should consider the Rowan replication as powerful evidence, not of the BlackLight Process itself, but of the claim BLP is producing power from a reactor that cannot be explained by conventional means.

[parallel]

MSimon,

This is not the report I was looking for but will probably do.

What is most significant about this new work is that our Rowan University (RU) team was able to consistently generate anomalous heat through these reactions in our South Jersey Technology Park calorimeter laboratory in quantities ranging from 1.2 times to 6.5 times the maximum theoretical heat available through known exothermic reactions.

http://users.rowan.edu/~jansson/blackli ... er2009.pdf

[GIThruster]

removing a double-post. . .seems I clicked too many times.

[MSimon]

independently and consistently generated energy in excesses ranging from 1.2 times to 6.5 times the maximum theoretical heat available through known chemical reactions.

Any explanation of the wide variability? That seems odd. When you combine a mole of oxygen with two moles of hydrogen and measure the energy out you do not see such wide variations.

What ever is happening it is not understood because it is not under control.

I'd also like to see their discussion of possible chemical reactions and how they were ruled out. Was the heat of calcination accounted for (i.e. cement evolves heat upon curing) or ruled out?

[MSimon]

Science merely disproves alternatives, which is precisely what the Rowan replication achieved

The report I have read merely says the calorimeter is adequate.

[Giorgio]

Your observation that BLP paid Rowan to do the replication work is a worthy one, but in order to use it to try ti invalidate the work at Rowan as not "independent", you have to assert that the people at Rowan are not trustworthy--which seems to me a fantastically vapid assertion. We're here talking about more than a dozen professors working at a university whose stated goals are, to turn Rowan into the premier engineering school in the world--certainly one to rival MIT and Oxford.

Let's just say that these type of conflicting interests do not weight in favour of the scientific method.

[GIThruster]

Science merely disproves alternatives, which is precisely what the Rowan replication achieved

The report I have read merely says the calorimeter is adequate.

I was in correspondence with both Dr. Jansson and Dr. Eric Davis at Earthtech, when the experiment was just online. Earthtech had done an unsuccessful BLP replication years earlier, and found huge difficulties with BLP's calorimetery. Dr. Jansson therefore worked with Eric to ensure Rowan's calorimetery was up to snuff. It was and is--and that's a huge claim to make because measuring heat is much, much more complex than most engineers realize.

The claim that Rowan's calorimetery is "adequate" is supported by these kinds of issues, and the fact the entire process was open science for more than a year. I haven't been in touch with Eric or Peter in the last year or so, but so far as I know, there are no objections outstanding to the experimental protocols used at Rowan. Seems they did a VERY good job.

[GIThruster]

Your observation that BLP paid Rowan to do the replication work is a worthy one, but in order to use it to try ti invalidate the work at Rowan as not "independent", you have to assert that the people at Rowan are not trustworthy--which seems to me a fantastically vapid assertion. We're here talking about more than a dozen professors working at a university whose stated goals are, to turn Rowan into the premier engineering school in the world--certainly one to rival MIT and Oxford.

Let's just say that these type of conflicting interests do not weight in favour of the scientific method.

I can live with that. It's certainly an issue to be aware of.

[parallel]

Thanks GIThruster for putting it plainly. I do wonder if some of the naysayers believe labs are run by PhDs in gleaming white coats (halos faintly visible against a dark background) working just for the love of science.

MSimon,
Try following the link. There are several reports out there that say much the same thing. Rowan U. got varying amounts of anomalous heat with differing materials.

They have calibrated the calorimeter carefully and used both materials supplied by BLP and materials they bought themselves. They have repeated everything a number of times and concluded that the effect is real.

Jannson has invited anyone to come and have a look and said he would help any other institution that wanted to replicate the work. I find the evidence overwhelming for the effect not the theory.

[Axil]

Through experiment, Piantelli researched the cause of the nuclear activity in his process and came up with the following explanation (that I think is true):


From the 2010 Piantelli patent an important section is excerpted for your convenience as follows:

- an adsorption of the H- ions into the clusters, in particular the clusters that form the two or three crystal layers that are most close to the surface. The H- ions can just physically interact with the metal, or can chemically bond with it, in which case hydrides can be formed.

The H- ions can also be adsorbed into the lattice interstices, but adsorption at the grain edges, by trapping the ions into the lattice defects; replacement of an atom of the metal of clusters may also occur.

After such adsorption step, the H- ions interact with the atoms of the clusters, provided that a second activation threshold is exceeded, which is higher than the first threshold. By exceeding this second threshold, in accordance with the Pauli exclusion principle and with the Heisenberg uncertainty principle, the conditions are created for replacing electrons of metal atoms with H- ions, and, accordingly, for forming metal-hydrogen complex atoms. This event can take place due to the fermion nature of H- ion; however, since H- ions have a mass 1838 times larger than an electron mass, they tend towards deeper layers, and cause an emission of Auger electrons and of X rays. Subsequently, since the H- ion Bohr radius is comparable with the metal core radius, the H- ions can be captured by the metal core, causing a structural reorganization and freeing energy by mass defect; the H- ions can now be expelled as protons, and can generate nuclear reactions with the neighbouring cores. More in detail, the complex atom that has formed by the metal atom capturing the H- ion, in the full respect of the energy conservation principle, of the Pauli exclusion principle, and of the Heisenberg uncertainty principle, is forced towards an excited status, therefore it reorganizes itself by the migration of the H- ion towards deeper orbitals or levels, i.e. towards a minimum energy state, thus emitting Auger electrons and X rays during the level changes. The H- ion falls into a potential hole and concentrates the energy which was previously distributed upon a volume whose radius is about 10e-12 m into a smaller volume whose radius is about 5x10e-15 m.

At the end of the process, the H- ion is at a distance from the core that is comparable with the nuclear radius; in fact in the fundamental status of the complex atom that is formed by adding the H- ion, due to its mass that is far greater than the mass of the electron, the H- ion is forced to stay at such deep level at a distance from the core that is comparable with the nuclear radius, in accordance with Bohr radius calculation. As above stated, owing to the short distance from the core, a process is triggered in which the H- ion is captured by the core, with a structural reorganization and energy release by mass defect, similarly to what happens in the case of electron capture with structural reorganization and energy release by mass defect or in case of loss of two electrons, due to their intrinsic instability, during the fall process towards the lowest layers, and eventually an expulsion of the the H- ion takes place as a proton, as experimentally detected in the cloud chamber, and nuclear reactions can occur with other neighboring cores, said reactions detected as transmutations on the active core after the production of energy.

Rossi amplified this hydride compression effect

The H- ion falls into a potential hole and concentrates the energy which was previously distributed upon a volume whose radius is about 10e-12 m into a smaller volume whose radius is about 5x10e-15 m.

by forming clustered negative hydrogen ions where an single ion cluster contains many hydrogen atoms.

Now many hundreds more of protons enter into the hydride reaction. Rather than depend on the imprecise and uncontrolled action of chemical processes, the generation of those negative hydrogen ions and resulting protons is under positive control through the manual adjustment supported by the control box.

The work of Piantelli was replicated by Rossi who increased and improved on it.

[chrismb]

There are a LARGE number of people who have stated clearly that this is a scam, period, end of story.

Please repeat these statements.

There are people who might think it is 99% a scam, and post in ways consequent to that.

There are people here who think it might be 99% true, and post in ways consequent to that.

I don't think anyone has made any concrete statements.

I [and others] have stated that what Rossi has done is not science. No-one has made a statement of disagreement with that. But other than that...?

[Axil]

The Piantelli research is currently being replicated by NASA. End of the “no replication case”!!!

[MSimon]

MSimon,

This is not the report I was looking for but will probably do.

What is most significant about this new work is that our Rowan University (RU) team was able to consistently generate anomalous heat through these reactions in our South Jersey Technology Park calorimeter laboratory in quantities ranging from 1.2 times to 6.5 times the maximum theoretical heat available through known exothermic reactions.

http://users.rowan.edu/~jansson/blackli ... er2009.pdf

This report has revealed BLP proprietary recipes that demonstrate consistent heat gains from what their scientists state are the result of the formation of lower energy hydrogen. While this initial analysis is not intended to conclusively validate BLP’s lower energy hydrogen hypothesis our conclusions clearly are not in conflict with it.

I note they went to a LOT of trouble to keep the samples dry. Could water absorption and the chemical reactions that can accompany it account for the "extra" energy? Or a change in crystalline structure?

====

I'm with Feynman on this: "The easiest person to fool is yourself."

Which is why it is generally bad practice to have a coder/designer to try to fail his own design. I was sort of an exception to that. I was just as vicious when it came to testing my own stuff as I was when testing others work. I just HATED being shown up in a design review. In this case my fat opinion of myself helped get the rigor required.

[Axil]

Transmutation is PROOF that a nuclear process is occuring.