[Vo]:Experiment re nucleus.

[Mark Goldes]

This appeared at ZPEnergy.com today and may contain bits of interest.

WGUGLINSKI writes: Is there need a New Physics for explaining cold fusion ?

It seems most quantum theorists believe that there is no need a New Physics for 
explaining cold fusion occurrence.

For instance, the Widom-Larsen theory considers that there is no need a New 
Physics for explaining cold fusion.

Several times I told my opinion ...cold fusion requires a New Physics.

The experiment made by John Arrington shows that I am right. His experiments 
are showing the internal structure of nuclei:


http://www.inovacaotecnologica.com.br/noticias/noticia.php?artigo=nova-imagem-nucleo-atomo&id=010115120324

The berillyum nucleus defies what we know from current Nuclear Physics.

Look the first figure in that link. In the berillyium nucleus the central 2He4 
and the other nucleons are separated by a distance of 7fm.

But the strong force actuates in distances shorter than 2fm. Therefore, 
according to Nuclear Physics, the structure of berillyium is IMPOSSIBLE to 
exist.
In another words, the berillyum nucleus destroys the current nuclear models of 
Nuclear Physics.

According to the nuclear model of Quantum Ring Theory, in the lightest nuclei 
the distance between the central 2He4 and the other nucleons is between 6fm and 
7fm.

In the page 232 of the book QRT is calculated the nuclear magnetic momentum of 
the nucleus 3Li7, in which a deuteron gyrates about the central 2He4 with 
radius 6fm. Look at the link:
http://hexfloor.blogspot.com.br/

So, the structure of berillyum shown by Arrington experiments is proving that 
the nuclear models of Nuclear Physics are wrong. The nuclei existing in the 
nature have a structure that it is impossible to be explained by the laws 
discovered up to now in the field of Nuclear Physics (the strong nuclear force, 
itself, cannot keep the cohesion of the nuclei).

Therefore, as the nuclear model of Nuclear Physics is wrong, (as the structure 
of berillyum nucleus is pointing out) it makes no sense to try to explain cold 
fusion by keeping such a wrong model.

There is need a new nuclear model, as it is proposed in Quantum Ring Theory.


Mark Goldes
Co-founder, Chava Energy
CEO, Aesop Institute
301A North Main Street
Sebastopol, CA 95472

www.chavaenergy.com
www.aesopinstitute.org

707 861-9070
707 497-3551 fax

[Vo]:Fukushima pool #4 presents a potential nightmare

[Mark Goldes]

Former UN advisor: If No. 4 pool collapses I’ve been told “during 50 years, you 
cannot contain” 
Nuclear Expert: Fukushima spent fuel has 85 times more cesium than released at 
Chernobyl — “It would destroy the world environment and our civilization…"

http://akiomatsumura.com/2012/04/682.html


Mark Goldes
Co-founder, Chava Energy
CEO, Aesop Institute
301A North Main Street
Sebastopol, CA 95472

www.chavaenergy.com
www.aesopinstitute.org

707 861-9070
707 497-3551 fax

Re: [Vo]:more bad news

[Jouni Valkonen]

Peak oil will be severe problem and it may cause some problems if cold fusion 
is not going to come into rescue. It is no secret that current transportation 
systems are too heavily based on oil and there are no viable alternatives for 
oil.

On resource consumption, agriculture consumes more than 95 % of non-renewable 
resources  (i.e. top soil) and it could be fully replaced by vertical farming. 
Therefore any malthusian scenarios are false because they do not consider that 
what vertical farming has to offer. Vertical urban farming would also offset 
somewhat the dependency on oil, because agriculture consumes 20 percent on oil 
and in addition to that there is food transportation costs, that are eliminated 
if food is produced mostly on local vertical farms.

However what is a problem is that the economic structure is based more and more 
on supply of debt rather than increasing demand on the market. This may cause 
severe economic crisis in near future. Economic policy should be aimed on 
increasing demand, if we want to ensure the growth of purchasing power, that 
people has enough money to buy vertically cultivated food and have purchasing 
power to buy goods that are produced on recycled materials.

If we optimise the purchasing power of consumers, we effectively have the Star 
Trek economy. It is good to read Dan Pink's book Drive, then it will make very 
much of sense how much more effective Star Trek economy is where everyone has 
plenty, but not too much, indifferently on what they do. 

   —Jouni

Dan Pink on the surprising science of motivation
http://www.ted.com/talks/dan_pink_on_motivation.html

On 6 Apr 2012, at 22:14, Alain Sepeda  wrote:

> another malthusianst reasoning that will be proved false once again...
> I was convinced in 85 that it will hard to have transistor below 1µm... I 
> laugh today of my lack of imagination.
> 
> 2012/4/6 
> http://www.popsci.com/science/article/2012-04/new-research-tracks-40-year-old-prediction-world-economy-will-collapse-2030
> 

Re: [Vo]:Calorimetry versus Thermal imaging

[Abd ul-Rahman Lomax]

At 04:52 AM 4/6/2012, Guenter Wildgruber wrote:

friends,

this is just an idea I want to put into discussion.

The background is, that although LENR maybe proven, there is a gap 
between theory and experiment.

Apart from the experiment-setup itself, we have the diagnostic tools.
Which are
a) in-process:
a1) nuclear particle detection
a2) He_x detection
a3) calorimetry

b) after process:
b1) microscopic surface analysis of the reactant
b2) analysis of possible transmutations, nanospire/LeClair maybe an 
extreme case.


I see some difficulties in (a), although those give us realtime insight:
(a1): important, but maybe mainly absent
(a2): important, but difficult to detect, and often shifted to 
after-process analysis.

(a3): difficult with small reactors, hence highly disputed.

So my idea:
i1) Use a 'dry' process, i.e. no fluids over the reactant.
Fluids blur the process and make it difficult to observe, and force 
using debatable calorimetry.


The debate over calorimetry is a red herring. Calorimetry of cold 
fusion experiments (with PdD) can be confirmed by measuring helium. 
However, the chemistry of a PdD cathode, with loading created and 
maintained by electrolysis, is insanely complex. It seemed simply in 
1989. It was not and is not simple. Sure, there is an appeal to 
gas-loading work, but it typically is done under pressure and is not 
necessarily easy to observe either. The effective deuteirum pressure 
produced by electrolytic loading is pretty high



i2) make the reactant flat mm2's up to cm2's
i3) observe the reactant via Thermal imaging.


Thermal imaging of a cathode has been done. I'd hope to see it done more.


T.I. is sensitive enough to monitor the surface with 10um2 pixel size.
See e.g. thermal imaging of power semiconductors, which every 
manufacturer does on a routine basis.


Yeah.



What would be the advantage?
Well. Hopefully evident.
--real-time monitoring of heat-production, orders of magnitude 
better than calorimetry.


Yes, I've thought the same myself.

--spatial resolution (eg gradual variations of material properties 
and their response could be monitored)


It is possible to combine many experiments into one, with some caution.

--after-process analysis via SEM or other methods would profit from 
this real-time-identification of hot spots, And hot spots there are, 
I'm quite convinced. This is NOT a process, homogenous across the reactant.


Certainly not sometimes. Depends on the approach.

This ofcourse does not make the hopefuls happy, who wish their e-cat 
could be purchased next month.


Anyone who expects to purchase an e-cat next month might as well 
expect to win the lottery, it may be more probable. But, Guenter, I'm 
staying away from NiH entirely. I wish those who work with it every 
success in the world, but  we have far more experimental evidence 
wtih PdD. We know that the ash is helium and that the heat/helium 
ratio is consistent with deuterium -> helium. From a scientific point 
of view, we need to finish this work and elucidate the mechanism. 
Frankly, before I'd turn to NiH, myself, I'd start looking at 
Vysotskii's work with biological transmutation, he's done some 
stunning work, convincing on the face. But not replicated. Some of it 
could be cheap to replicate.



But would narrow the gap between theory and experimental evidence/practice.
And we need that!
There is enough worry out there, that this is a potentially 
dangerous process to require, that the theory-practice-gap should be 
closed. Relying on say Rossi's statements or what some 
administrative branch says about safety, does not make me feel comfortable.



What do You think?


I think that relying on anything Rossi says is nuts. If he says the 
time of day, I'd want to check my watch or phone. He has richly 
earned this lack of credibility, some of us think that it's 
deliberate (and that could make some commercial sense).


If I had to guess, I'd guess that he found a reaction that was fairly 
strong. Sometimes. Not reliable. Not ready for commercial 
application. But that's a guess, and I'd not invest anything based on 
that guess, without seeing some independent confirmation of solid results.


There are scientists who, if they said they'd found a way to enhance 
the reaction with refried beans, I might rush out and stock up. 
Because they would not say that if it weren't so. Rossi is not a 
scientist, he's made that abundantly clear. 

Re: [Vo]:Stimulation of LENR using dual lasers, creative engineering needed

[Abd ul-Rahman Lomax]

I want to thank Guenter for thinking about this and taking the time 
to write it out. Comments interspersed.


At 01:58 AM 4/6/2012, Guenter Wildgruber wrote:




Von: Daniel Rocha 
An: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Gesendet: 4:13 Freitag, 6.April 2012
Betreff: Re: [Vo]:Stimulation of LENR using dual lasers, creative 
engineering needed




> Maybe it is the case of cooling the experiment with liquid 
nitrogen, to avoid self interference with the experiment.

> 8THz blackbody is a peak around 140K, so 71K is far away from that peak.

This sounds like too low a temperature.
My two cents:
1) using a blackbody to generate the 15&22THz will produce a small 
power-density per area. My estimate is, that it will be in the 10 to 
100uW  range per mm2, depending on the bandwidth. Remember that this 
radiation cannot be focused. So the target power-density can be at 
most the source power-density.
2) another idea would be the coating of the (blackbody-source) with 
molecules, which resonate at the desired frequencies.
Something akin to this here: "Laser spectroscopy and mass 
spectrometry of doped clusters"

http://fys.kuleuven.be/vsm/nano/master.php?mastercat=5
3) If You think about (2) a bit, You get the impression, that it is 
more effective to heat the target (NiH-reactant) directly, and let 
the target do the sorting out of the frequencies via resonance. 
22THz -> approx 15um wavelength.


Okay, let me be clear that I'm asking about the use of dual laser 
stimulation with PdD experiments. I have no evidence that this 
approach is effective, at all, with NiH. Maybe, maybe not. I'd assume 
the frequencies would be different.


The dual laser approach was designed to produce the beat frequency on 
the gold-plated surface of the electrolytic cathode. There are a 
number of experimental characteristics that have been inferred. (I'm 
writing this from memory and might get some detals wrong.) The laser 
power used is higher than necessary to see the effect. The threshold 
power has not been explored. The spot size does not seem to matter, 
within what has been tried. Expanding the spot size (same power over 
larger area) did not have an effect.


A magnetic field is used. The laser stimulation does not appear to be 
effective without the magnetic field.


The cathode is primarily heated through the electrolytic current. 
Laser heating is small compared to that.


The reaction is, however, sensitive to heat; increasing the 
temperature increases excess power.



( Provided that the radiation need not be coherent or narrowband, ofcourse).
Which also gives an indication for the minimum/optimum-size of the 
particles/crystals.

Surprisingly large! Not nano!


At this point this work is generating indications, and some 
surprising ones. Not proof. While the work is openly being published, 
it has not been replicated. I'm aware of one replication attempt that 
failed; but it is not clear how close to the protocol the attempt 
hewed. Cold fusion is famous for this: change one little thing, and 
it doesn't work, and it can be almost impossible to keep *everything* 
the same. That's why helium measurements are so important.


My general impression is, that this dual-laser stimulation maybe 
results in a more pronounced effect, but is not necessary. Simple 
heating basically will do the job also.


Apparently not. Under the conditions set up, there is no XP to speak 
of without the dual laser stimulation. It turns on the reaction, 
heating does not. Heating increases the reaction if it's turned on.



Plus maybe some RF-pulses (Godes/Brillouin, catalyst, secret sauce, whatever.)
Which would be consistent with the other LENR-experiments.


One of the goals I've been promoting is easily reproducible 
experiments, standard cells, if you will. If there is a design that 
can be cheaply reproduced, exactly, and that reliably shows a LENR 
effect, it becomes a base from which to test many different 
variations. I was originally working with codep, the Galileo 
protocol, and do need to finish up that work, but I was invited to 
look at this dual laser work, and found that there are elements here 
of high interest.


For the science.


This is my common-sense-back of the napkin approach.
Laser-based stimulation in any case would be a costly solution.
Sufficient: maybe, necessary: not.


Dual laser stimulation is costly, true, and there are other ways to 
obtain the reaction; however, the goal here is not cheap power. The 
goal is reliably reproducible research. A laser system might be 
shared among many experiments. The work so far only observes the 
effect of laser stimulation over fairly short time periods, mostly. 
Letts wants to see how much power increases when he turns on the 
lasers. It does appear reasonably stable.


Variations on the protocol will be tested, I'm sure. A deposited wire 
cathode may be used, which may be easier to prepare and more uniform. 
My approach is generally to attempt to scale experiments down, that's 
important w

Re: [Vo]:Calorimetry versus Thermal imaging

[Jojo Jaro]

Guenter, 

Your idea of Thermal Imaging is worthwhile, but is severly limited by available 
technologies.

For instance, I could not find a reasonably priced and easilty available Sight 
Glass pipe fitting that is rated for 1000 psi and 1000K; otherwise, I would 
immediately implement a camera monitoring system for my reactor.  If you know 
of where I could find such a Sight Glass, or better still, a camera or Thermal 
Imager that can be placed "inside" the reactor; please let me know.


Jojo

Re: [Vo]:Is positive/practical LENR the ultimate catastrophe?

[Jojo Jaro]

I may begin to agree with you if Americans in this forum remotely represent 
"Joe Q. Public" Americans at large in the society.

Clearly, the sampling of Americans in this forum as well as the experssed 
purpose of this forum should make it clear that members of this forum are NOT 
representative of Americans in General.  

Americans in this forms are clearly smarter and more educated than Americans at 
large, and the purpose of this forum is clearly for the purpose of speculation 
- for allowing one's imaginations to run wild.  Surely, discussions about 
flying cars and nuclear drones in this forum should not be taken to imply that 
these very same Americans are oblivious to other uses of free energy.  Doing so 
would be akin to taking a smooth part of a teenager's face as proof that the 
rest of the face is pimple-free. 

How many people here seriously think Jed Rothwell is unaware of the other uses 
of free energy just because he decided to engage in a discussion about flying 
cars?  Or that Axil is oblivious to other uses of LENR just because he engaged 
in discussions about nuclear drones.

I believe your frustration is misdirected.


Jojo 
An "American" in this Forum



  - Original Message - 
  From: Guenter Wildgruber 
  To: vortex-l@eskimo.com 
  Sent: Saturday, April 07, 2012 6:31 AM
  Subject: [Vo]:Is positive/practical LENR the ultimate catastrophe?


   Americans basically are the least well prepared towards a paradisic future, 
which is a chimera of projected hopes.
  Ghost riders in the sky.

   

  The spurious topics of flying cars, nuclear drones and such confirm my 
position, that Americans have -if at all- basically silly ideas about what to 
do with excess energy.


  Now connect this to LENR  etc.
  Americans maybe hope for that. But mentally the y are unprpered

  Infuriated:
  G.





--

Re: [Vo]:Is positive/practical LENR the ultimate catastrophe?

[Jed Rothwell]

Guenter Wildgruber  wrote:

Being a cultivated Dystopian, -sorry- I actually cannot see anything else
> than a dystopian future SQUARED, if we do not get rid of some
> preconceptions, which are deeply ingrained into our -especially American-
> minds.
> Which is the idea of  'better' future, derived as an increment from the
> status quo.
>
> What possibly is the argument for a better future, triggered by a
> disruptive technology?
>

Please see my book for this argument:

http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/RothwellJcoldfusiona.pdf

The dystopian scenario is described in chapter 19, "Making Things Worse . .
."

Please do not flatter yourself that you were the first to think of these
things. You are not. Nor am I. Arthur C Clarke thought of everything. See
"Profiles of the Future." It begins with a tribute to Hugo Gernsback, "who
thought of everything."

Roger Bacon did not think of everything, but he thought of a remarkable
number of things.

Clarke and I are not fools or Pollyannas who assume that things will surely
come out well.

- Jed

[Vo]:Robot aircar taxies and ground taxies would provide "another degree of freedom"

[Jed Rothwell]

In the thread about airplanes that convert to cars, Craig Haynie <
cchayniepub...@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> It's another degree of freedom. For those of us who are private pilots,
> we have a tremendous range of territory at our finger tips. We can fly
> 1,000 miles for a weekend trip, but many airports don't have rental cars
> readily available, and the terms of the lease are such that it's
> impractical to rent a car for a short period of time.


I see your point. Okay, let us think about how this might work in the
future with a combination of fully automatic taxis, both VTOL air cars and
ground automobiles. These would not be air cars that transition to ground
vehicles. They would be two separate vehicles, both designed for the
purpose.

Assume that air cars go about as fast as today's Cirrus aircraft, 400 km/h.
While you're at it, assume they have built-in parachutes for the entire
aircraft, like the Cirrus. We are talking about the distant future. The
vehicles are completely automated. Parents think nothing of sending a
six-year-old child up in one by herself. You could send one empty with no
one on board carrying a package, or send one empty a hundred kilometers to
some isolated place to pick up your Aunt Minnie.

Assume that ground vehicles go up to 290 km/h in tunnels, or on surface
roads at 30 km/h.

I am talking about conditions starting 50 to 100 years from now, continuing
for the next 300 years or so. I can't begin to predict the shape of
technology thousands of years in the future. That's futile. I do not
postulate anything we have not already discovered. Nothing like
anti-gravity. Let us stick to wheeled vehicles, maglev, and aircraft that
the Wright brothers would understand, plus -- of course -- advanced
robotics and cold fusion.

Suppose I am in Atlanta Georgia and I have business in Emmitsburg MD, 950
km north. Assume that people do not allow private air cars to land just
anywhere, because they are disruptive. They make a lot of noise and wind
and they kill wildlife. Assume they can only land at designated locations
such as shopping malls that offer air service. Emmitsburg is a small town.
You sometimes see crop dusting helicopters in the fields today. Naturally
they have helicopter ambulances. But I do not think people would want small
VTOL aircraft taking off and landing in the surrounding area on a regular
basis.

In this scenario, I drive a short distance to some local mall that offers
air taxi service. I take an air taxi to Gettysburg, PA. in about 2 hours,
20 minutes. An automated ground taxi is waiting for me there. There are
probably no taxis available in Gettysburg today, but there will be in the
future because many elderly people in that area who do not get out often
will not want to bother owning an automobiles. As I said, you will have the
option to call a robot taxi that comes to your door in 15 min. which you
can use all day if you like. These vehicles will be cheaper in any town
will have a few of them available any time. Even people who own their own
cars will want a few of them within 30 minutes in case their car needs
repair, or friends & relatives come from out of town and everyone wants to
go out somewhere, or in case you buy a bunch of furniture and you need the
equivalent of a pickup truck. The cars resemble today's Zipcar more than a
taxi -- the difference being you don't have to drive. Even if you are blind
you can go anywhere you like by yourself.

North of Gettysburg there our many Amish people who prefer not to own their
own automobiles, because that disrupts their communities. They use taxi
service and buses today. They are not opposed to the technology *per se*,
but rather to the effects of it. I expect there will be Amish people
hundreds of years in the future.

Anyway, I get a taxi in Gettysburg and it drives 10 min. to Emmitsburg and
drops me off. Or, for an additional fee, I tell it park somewhere nearby
and come back later in the day when I call. I spend the day doing whatever
it is I went there for. Visiting Aunt Minnie I suppose. Or lecturing at Mt.
St. Mary's University. There is not a lot to do in Emmitsburg.

In the evening I take another taxi to the Cozy Restaurant in Thurmont,
which I highly recommend. (Really!)

Suppose there is a shopping mall north of Frederick MD which is closer than
going back to Gettysburg. After supper I would head south in the ground
taxi, go to the shopping mall, and take an air taxi back to Atlanta.

There are no round-trip tickets to worry about. You can go from point to
point by whatever means is most convenient. You change your itinerary on
the spur of the moment. You don't have to worry about where you leave the
car. The car takes itself back to wherever it should go. There are no
vehicles to reserve ahead of time, and no fixed schedule set by the
airlines. If you have too many cocktails at the Cozy Restaurant, you may
feel a little airsick but there is not such thing as DUI because no ever
drives, except bicycles and ho

[Vo]:Is positive/practical LENR the ultimate catastrophe?

[Guenter Wildgruber]

Well.

 
This might sound counterintuitive to the crowd.
 
But I seriously think about that.
Our society is so deformed by propaganda and consumerism, that it is not
evident, how society would come to its senses, so to say, from day1 to day2.
 
The eminent person in this list,  aware of this problem is Peter Gluck from 
Romania,
not the US of A. who has a grandiose mind, whereas  a surprising number of 
ignoramuses, in the epistemic sense,
reside in the US of A.

 
So just imagine, what the ignoramuses in the global driver's seat would do?
I dare not to imagine.

Being a cultivated Dystopian, -sorry- I actually cannot see anything else than a
dystopian future SQUARED, if we do not get rid of some preconceptions, which
are deeply ingrained into our -especially American- minds.
Which is the idea of  'better' future, derived as an increment from the status 
quo.
 
What possibly is the argument for a better future, triggered by a disruptive 
technology? 

 
This is completely ridiculous! 

Why?
If you do not know this by default, I will explain.
 Americans basically are the least well prepared towards a paradisic
future, which is a chimera of projected hopes.
Ghost riders in the sky.
 
  

The spurious topics of flying cars, nuclear drones and such confirm my
position, that Americans have -if at all- basically silly ideas about what to
do with excess energy.

Now connect this to LENR  etc.
Americans maybe hope for that. But mentally the y are unprpered

Infuriated:
G.
 

Re: [Vo]:Future transportation with cold fusion and robots

[Jed Rothwell]

I wrote:


> VTOL aircraft traffic can be high density and eventually it will be fully
> automated.
>

Conventional fossil fuel VTOL can have higher traffic density than regular
aircraft because the aircraft can slow down or hover before landing,
whereas regular airplanes have to keep moving in a holding pattern. I think
airplanes in a holding pattern are at least 5 km apart. (3 nautical miles?)

Cold fusion VTOL can have higher density than fossil fuel ones because they
could hover indefinitely. For example, when bad weather backs up traffic
over an airport, incoming aircraft could hover above the rain clouds, in
static horizontal arrays with the aircraft much closer together than
today's airplanes flying a holding pattern.

You would not want them in a vertical array.

Traffic density would also be higher because VTOL do not have to move
horizontally before reaching cruising altitude. They would go straight up.
Some of them do not do this nowadays because it wastes fuel. They
transition to horizontal flight as soon as they are clear of the ground,
instead of going straight up.

Suppose there were 10 aircraft taking off in one timeslot, all heading in
different directions. They could all rise from the tarmac at the same time,
as long as they rose from widely separated gates. After they reach cruising
altitude they would fan out in different directions. The trick would be to
have a westbound flight take off from the west side of the airport, so it
does not have to cross paths with an eastbound flight. They would both rise
straight up, then head away from the airport in opposite directions.

Airplanes would take off an land a few hundred meters from the terminal
gates they use. They would not need runways. The runway is the worst
bottleneck.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Future transportation with cold fusion and robots

[Guenter Wildgruber]

 Von: Jed Rothwell 
An: vortex-l@eskimo.com 
Gesendet: 22:48 Freitag, 6.April 2012
Betreff: Re: [Vo]:Future transportation with cold fusion and robots
 


>I think that is a really, really bad idea.

The reason I'm not very sympathetic to LENR or any 'infinite energy' ideas, is 
that too many idiots out there would be doing the wrong things.
(what is 'wrong'?, You could ask. but the answer to this question is quite easy 
/to me at least.)

So I positively hope that this whole LENR thing is complete bogus.

The reason, why I'm engaged in this, is that I/my group does not want to be in 
the backseat, if this turns out to be real, and finally the idiots take over, 
and ultimately ruin the planet.

This would be the absolute worst case!

Hans im Glueck. You know. All told already >200years ago.
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hans_in_Luck";

Guenter.

Re: [Vo]:Future transportation with cold fusion and robots

[Jed Rothwell]

Drowning Trout  wrote:

>
> -Assuming a straight global backbone ET3 track, the speeds could reach up
> to 2000mph . . .


I think that is a really, really bad idea. If something goes wrong with the
control system for few milliseconds, the train would collide with the wall
and both the train and the tunnel would be vaporized. It might take weeks
or months to repair. If the tunnel was underwater (as some proposed systems
would be) the entire tunnel would fill with water. You cannot have
emergency airlocks or compartments with trains going through that fast.

A disaster with an airplane kills only the passengers and crew. It does not
disable the whole transportation system.



> , offering faster travel than aircraft or any other method.
>

That is Mach 4. There have been military airplanes faster than that. There
is no reason why commercial aircraft cannot be made that fast, especially
when cold fusion makes the cost of fuel negligible.


-Extremely energy/resource efficient
>

This would make no difference with cold fusion. It would save a few dollars
in fuel every year.



> -High density computer automated traffic
>

VTOL aircraft traffic can be high density and eventually it will be fully
automated.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Future transportation with cold fusion and robots

[Jed Rothwell]

Vorl Bek  wrote:


> A slur such as 'surly' surely does not apply to the great majority
> of drivers.
>

Perhaps you have not taken many taxies in Atlanta or New York City.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Stimulation of LENR using dual lasers, creative engineering needed

[Daniel Rocha]

The boundary do not have more than 100 atoms. I think it wouldn't be able
to sustain so much charge.

2012/4/6 Axil Axil 

>  The long term accumulation and concentration of electrostatic charge
> (1,000 to 2,000 electrons) is one major cause of cold fusion. Phonon
> resonance may produce this accumulation and concentration but it is not the
> only cause. Charge may accumulate near the interface bounderies of two
> metals as setup and used by ahern.
>
>
>
> This ahern cause many be rooted in the formation of ion crystals like a
> Arata, Mills and Rossi.
>
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Stimulation of LENR using dual lasers, creative engineering needed

[Guenter Wildgruber]

 Von: Axil Axil 
An: vortex-l@eskimo.com 
Gesendet: 20:33 Freitag, 6.April 2012
Betreff: Re: [Vo]:Stimulation of LENR using dual lasers, creative engineering 
needed
 

>To the highest possible extent, the lattice should be devoid of flaws to 
>minimize random phonon reflections(RPR). RPR will disrupt the phonon resonance 
>pattern that the lattice heat stimulant is producing. A flawed lattice could 
>be the reason for inconsistent results in many experiments. 
Obviously, micro powder will not work in this type of phonon system which seeks 
to establish a phonon resonance pattern.


Axil, 
do you have a sound argument for that?
CF eg Ahern, who argues that: 
 
citation:
...
In conclusion, perhaps the most important use for Energy Localization will be
in the field of Lattice Assisted Nuclear Energy. We have already noted that
superconductors have enormous anharmonic vibrational modes.  Palladium
hydride is a superconducting system that already has enormous vibrational modes
for the hydrogen isotopes. By processing palladium powders  in the 4-10 nm
size regime produce enormous anharmonic vibrational modes of the palladium
lattice that get superimposed on the anharmonic hydrogen vibrations leading to
a amplification of the hydrogen modes. Energy localization is superimposed over
the already delocalized motion of this superconducting system.  
...
->comment on p 13 of his ppt-presentation
"Energy Localization-- The key to Understanding Energy in Nanotechnology
& Nature"

Not that I find this very authoritative, but it is a statement, which is
consistent with an implicit one, i.e. that larger crystal sectors (>10k
atoms) are more effective in producing extreme local amplitudes/temperatures,
if they are NONHOMOGENOUS. The probability of aharmonic 'temperature' extremes
(excuse the sloppy diction) would be higher, if the crystal-structure would be
nonideal.

You can make a probabilistic analysis of different-size crystal-clusters and
see eg with which (negligible) probability the coulomb barrier is approached.
Nonideal structures help a bit in raising  the probability of local
'temperature-extremes', but never seem to  to approach the
coulomb-barrier.

This maybe a pointless exercise, but I find it useful nevertheless.
 
(2nd disclaimer: there is definitely a sort of scientist,
which is cornered for some reason or other, and puts out more and more extreme
claims, until his reputation implodes. Peer reviewing is the opposite It
fosters scientific conservatism, downto outright sklerosis) 

Guenter

Re: [Vo]:Stimulation of LENR using dual lasers, creative engineering needed

[Axil Axil]

The long term accumulation and concentration of electrostatic charge (1,000
to 2,000 electrons) is one major cause of cold fusion. Phonon resonance may
produce this accumulation and concentration but it is not the only cause.
Charge may accumulate near the interface bounderies of two metals as setup
and used by ahern.



This ahern cause many be rooted in the formation of ion crystals like a
Arata, Mills and Rossi.



On Fri, Apr 6, 2012 at 3:59 PM, Daniel Rocha  wrote:

> So, the cause of CF is probably  not phonon resonance. Otherwise, how
> could small grains used by ahern, with around 1000 atoms could produce
> heat? Or maybe, that's a reason why phonon resonance works better with such
> small clusters? Such small particles tend to organize
> themselves, spontaneously,  in regular polyhedra, to maximize
> the energy binding of the grain.
>
>
> 2012/4/6 Axil Axil 
>
>> To the highest possible extent, the lattice should be devoid of flaws to
>> minimize random phonon reflections(RPR). RPR will disrupt the phonon
>> resonance pattern that the lattice heat stimulant is producing. A flawed
>> lattice could be the reason for inconsistent results in many experiments.
>>
>> Obviously, micro powder will not work in this type of phonon system which
>> seeks to establish a phonon resonance pattern.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Apr 6, 2012 at 2:17 PM, Daniel Rocha wrote:
>>
>>> That is another alternative, though, why not heat it with ultrasound?
>>> BTW, does the experimenters take care in figuring how the material was
>>> produced in  relation to its lattice structure? Maybe the experiments do
>>> not go right so frequently because they rely on stimulate the lattice in
>>>  specific directions and, because of this, they end up being randomly
>>> successful...
>>>
>>> 2012/4/6 Abd ul-Rahman Lomax 
>>>
  However, I'm not clear if the far infrared would penetrate the windows
 and electrolyte.


  2012/4/5 
 <fz**nidar...@aol.com
> >
>
> Why not use a carbon dioxide laser?
>
>
> At 04:05 PM 4/5/2012, Daniel Rocha wrote:
> >The problem would be the output. The low energy
> >tail would have also a very low power. I think a
> >specialized equipment for that band is required...
>


>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Daniel Rocha - RJ
>>> danieldi...@gmail.com
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Daniel Rocha - RJ
> danieldi...@gmail.com
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Stimulation of LENR using dual lasers, creative engineering needed

[Daniel Rocha]

So, the cause of CF is probably  not phonon resonance. Otherwise, how could
small grains used by ahern, with around 1000 atoms could produce heat? Or
maybe, that's a reason why phonon resonance works better with such small
clusters? Such small particles tend to organize themselves, spontaneously,
 in regular polyhedra, to maximize the energy binding of the grain.

2012/4/6 Axil Axil 

> To the highest possible extent, the lattice should be devoid of flaws to
> minimize random phonon reflections(RPR). RPR will disrupt the phonon
> resonance pattern that the lattice heat stimulant is producing. A flawed
> lattice could be the reason for inconsistent results in many experiments.
>
> Obviously, micro powder will not work in this type of phonon system which
> seeks to establish a phonon resonance pattern.
>
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, Apr 6, 2012 at 2:17 PM, Daniel Rocha wrote:
>
>> That is another alternative, though, why not heat it with ultrasound?
>> BTW, does the experimenters take care in figuring how the material was
>> produced in  relation to its lattice structure? Maybe the experiments do
>> not go right so frequently because they rely on stimulate the lattice in
>>  specific directions and, because of this, they end up being randomly
>> successful...
>>
>> 2012/4/6 Abd ul-Rahman Lomax 
>>
>>>  However, I'm not clear if the far infrared would penetrate the windows
>>> and electrolyte.
>>>
>>>
>>>  2012/4/5 
>>> <fz**nidar...@aol.com
 >

 Why not use a carbon dioxide laser?


 At 04:05 PM 4/5/2012, Daniel Rocha wrote:
 >The problem would be the output. The low energy
 >tail would have also a very low power. I think a
 >specialized equipment for that band is required...

>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Daniel Rocha - RJ
>> danieldi...@gmail.com
>>
>>
>


-- 
Daniel Rocha - RJ
danieldi...@gmail.com

Re: [Vo]:Calorimetry versus Thermal imaging

[Guenter Wildgruber]

Von: Harry Veeder 
An: Guenter Wildgruber  
Gesendet: 20:27 Freitag, 6.April 2012
Betreff: Re: [Vo]:Calorimetry versus Thermal imaging
 
>Thermal imaging is more *intuitive*  than thermocouples and
>caloritmetric calculations, and that makes it more impressive. It is
>the next best thing to being able to feel the warm water or the heat
>radiation with your own hand.

>Harry

You are ofcourse right in a sense.
T.I. is good at measuring RELATIVE DIFFERENCES, not an AVERAGE ABSOLUTE.
(I
 was once involved in measuring absolutes/relatives in the mK/uK range 
in a Spacelab experiment-'High Precision Thermostat', 'HPT'. This was a tough 
one. So rest assured that I approximately know what I'm talking about. 
See here: http://papers.sae.org/881024/)
But if You agree on the general idea of 'hot spots' in LENR, T.I. opens up a 
whole new dimension.

Compare this to a (SMD) resistor: There are
 no hot spots. At least if it is properly designed.
I would expect sort of a sparkling effect in the case of LENR, with 
time-varying hot spots.

Definitely not the continuous heating of a resistive surface.

Guenter

Re: [Vo]:Future transportation with cold fusion and robots

[Drowning Trout]

I know I've already mentioned Evacuated Tube Transports in another topic
(similar to SwissMetro), but I feel the benefits of such a system have not
been fully realized.
ETT could easily be built with current existing technologies, its just a
matter of engineering, and gathering resources (expensive).

-Assuming a straight global backbone ET3 track, the speeds could reach up
to 2000mph, offering faster travel than aircraft or any other method.
-Extremely energy/resource efficient
-High density computer automated traffic

I would imagine it would be more economical to build above ground, and its
only a 5ft diameter tube, comparable to building an oil pipeline.

Global shipping trade and traveling could be largely reduced with
distributed hubs across the world, and as Jed said autonomous cars/taxis
for local travel.

http://www.et3.com/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=03kVU2FYl6U   (Highly recommend)

I would like to see more educated debates about this technology, weighing
in on the pros and cons of adopting such a system.

Re: [Vo]:more bad news

[Alain Sepeda]

another malthusianst reasoning that will be proved false once again...
I was convinced in 85 that it will hard to have transistor below 1µm... I
laugh today of my lack of imagination.

2012/4/6 

>
> http://www.popsci.com/science/article/2012-04/new-research-tracks-40-year-old-prediction-world-economy-will-collapse-2030

Re: [Vo]:Stimulation of LENR using dual lasers, creative engineering needed

[Axil Axil]

To the highest possible extent, the lattice should be devoid of flaws to
minimize random phonon reflections(RPR). RPR will disrupt the phonon
resonance pattern that the lattice heat stimulant is producing. A flawed
lattice could be the reason for inconsistent results in many experiments.

Obviously, micro powder will not work in this type of phonon system which
seeks to establish a phonon resonance pattern.





On Fri, Apr 6, 2012 at 2:17 PM, Daniel Rocha  wrote:

> That is another alternative, though, why not heat it with ultrasound? BTW,
> does the experimenters take care in figuring how the material was produced
> in  relation to its lattice structure? Maybe the experiments do not go
> right so frequently because they rely on stimulate the lattice in  specific
> directions and, because of this, they end up being randomly successful...
>
> 2012/4/6 Abd ul-Rahman Lomax 
>
>>  However, I'm not clear if the far infrared would penetrate the windows
>> and electrolyte.
>>
>>
>>  2012/4/5 
>> <fz**nidar...@aol.com
>>> >
>>>
>>> Why not use a carbon dioxide laser?
>>>
>>>
>>> At 04:05 PM 4/5/2012, Daniel Rocha wrote:
>>> >The problem would be the output. The low energy
>>> >tail would have also a very low power. I think a
>>> >specialized equipment for that band is required...
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Daniel Rocha - RJ
> danieldi...@gmail.com
>
>

[Vo]:more bad news

[fznidarsic]

http://www.popsci.com/science/article/2012-04/new-research-tracks-40-year-old-prediction-world-economy-will-collapse-2030

Re: [Vo]:Stimulation of LENR using dual lasers, creative engineering needed

[Daniel Rocha]

That is another alternative, though, why not heat it with ultrasound? BTW,
does the experimenters take care in figuring how the material was produced
in  relation to its lattice structure? Maybe the experiments do not go
right so frequently because they rely on stimulate the lattice in  specific
directions and, because of this, they end up being randomly successful...

2012/4/6 Abd ul-Rahman Lomax 

>  However, I'm not clear if the far infrared would penetrate the windows
> and electrolyte.
>
>
>  2012/4/5 <fz**nidar...@aol.com
>> >
>>
>> Why not use a carbon dioxide laser?
>>
>>
>> At 04:05 PM 4/5/2012, Daniel Rocha wrote:
>> >The problem would be the output. The low energy
>> >tail would have also a very low power. I think a
>> >specialized equipment for that band is required...
>>
>
>


-- 
Daniel Rocha - RJ
danieldi...@gmail.com

Re: [Vo]:Stimulation of LENR using dual lasers, creative engineering needed

[Daniel Rocha]

But the experiment was done in the MHz range...

2012/4/6 

> Did that.
>
>  http://www.angelfire.com/scifi2/zpt/chapterb.html#Pg6
>
> Maybe it is the case of cooling the experiment with liquid nitrogen, to
> avoid self interference with the experiment. 8THz blackbody is a peak
> around 140K, so 71K is far away from that peak.
>
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Daniel Rocha 
> To: vortex-l 
> Sent: Thu, Apr 5, 2012 10:13 pm
> Subject: Re: [Vo]:Stimulation of LENR using dual lasers, creative
> engineering needed
>
>  Maybe it is the case of cooling the experiment with liquid nitrogen, to
> avoid self interference with the experiment. 8THz blackbody is a peak
> around 140K, so 71K is far away from that peak.
>
>
>  2012/4/5 Abd ul-Rahman Lomax 
>
>> At 12:30 PM 4/5/2012, Daniel Rocha wrote:
>>
>>>  If you are not concerned with a narrow broad band, you could use a
>>> blackbody emission. According to Wien's displacement law, 14.8THz to
>>> 22.5THz,
>>>
>>>  >> Frequency-dependent_**formulation
>>> >http://en.**wikipedia.org/wiki/Wien%27s_**displacement_law#Frequency-**
>>> dependent_formulation
>>>
>>> gives 251K to 387K.
>>>
>>
>> The frequencies of interest are far infrared, or sometimes called
>> mid-infrared. Blackbody emissions certainly exist in the range, but are are
>> at low levels and are not coherent.
>>
>> I've been speculating, though, as an aside, that the erratic results of
>> cold fusion might have to do with the presence or absence of environmental
>> THz radiation. I don't know if anyone looked for this, and don't place a
>> lot of weight on the idea
>>
>>


-- 
Daniel Rocha - RJ
danieldi...@gmail.com

Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation

[Axil Axil]

There are a number of constrains we must meet to get a positive result. One
of these constrains is that the reaction takes place in a lattice
comprising an even atomic numbered host metallic element.



Gold will not work with an atomic number of 79. Tungsten at 74, Platinum at
78, nickel at 28, palladium at 46 will work.




On Fri, Apr 6, 2012 at 12:58 PM,  wrote:

>
> Abd,
>
> It is not obvious what you want to falsify.
>
> The paper by Pendry -
>
> "Low Frequency Plasmons in Thin Wire Structures" - JB Pendry
> http://www.cmth.ph.ic.ac.uk/photonics/Newphotonics/pdf/wires.pdf
>
> - presents very simple calculation (based on wires array geometry) of
> nanowire surface conduction electron effective mass, and hence effective
> momentum. An important question is whether these "heavy electrons"
> actually scatter gammas consistent with their theoretical momenta.
>
> Why not irradiate a quasi-ballistic conductor like Au nanowire  to create
> a small number of gamma-emitters (Au-isotopes).  Shouldn't gamma energies
> and directions change as current flow is modulated?  If not, is the
> calculated effective electron momentum incorrect, are the electron surface
> density or scattering cross-sections too low, or is my interpretation
> wrong?
>
> Lou Pagnucco
>
>
> Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
>
> >
> > The hypothesized electron patches must be 100%
> > effective for a range of gamma energies, and
> > specifically for those from expected neutron
> > activation. Indeed, one of the ways to test this
> > would be to use actual neutron activation! Perhaps with a beam of
> > neutrons.
> >
> > But it may be possible to design a gamma source
> > that would fit the bill, my guess.
> >
> > I am *not* recommending this research, except for
> > those who become critically concerned -- or,
> > alternatively, who are inspired by W-L theory and
> > wish to pursue the necessary falsification effort.
>
>
>

Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation

[pagnucco]

Abd,

It is not obvious what you want to falsify.

The paper by Pendry -

"Low Frequency Plasmons in Thin Wire Structures" - JB Pendry
http://www.cmth.ph.ic.ac.uk/photonics/Newphotonics/pdf/wires.pdf

- presents very simple calculation (based on wires array geometry) of
nanowire surface conduction electron effective mass, and hence effective
momentum. An important question is whether these "heavy electrons"
actually scatter gammas consistent with their theoretical momenta.

Why not irradiate a quasi-ballistic conductor like Au nanowire  to create
a small number of gamma-emitters (Au-isotopes).  Shouldn't gamma energies
and directions change as current flow is modulated?  If not, is the
calculated effective electron momentum incorrect, are the electron surface
density or scattering cross-sections too low, or is my interpretation
wrong?

Lou Pagnucco


Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:

>
> The hypothesized electron patches must be 100%
> effective for a range of gamma energies, and
> specifically for those from expected neutron
> activation. Indeed, one of the ways to test this
> would be to use actual neutron activation! Perhaps with a beam of
> neutrons.
>
> But it may be possible to design a gamma source
> that would fit the bill, my guess.
>
> I am *not* recommending this research, except for
> those who become critically concerned -- or,
> alternatively, who are inspired by W-L theory and
> wish to pursue the necessary falsification effort.

Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation

[Guenter Wildgruber]

 Von: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax 
An: vortex-l@eskimo.com; vortex-l@eskimo.com 
Gesendet: 19:37 Freitag, 6.April 2012
Betreff: RE: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation
 
> If we look carefully at the new territory, we may find many beasts. Assuming 
> there is only one is narrow. Maybe. Maybe not.

You are nearing Whitehead:
...
The main tenets of Whitehead's metaphysics were summarized in his most 
accessible work, Adventures of Ideas (1933), where he also defines his 
conceptions of beauty, truth, art, 
adventure, and peace. He believed that "there are no whole truths; all 
truths are half-truths. It is trying to treat them as whole truths that 
plays the devil."
...

G.

RE: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation

[Abd ul-Rahman Lomax]

At 09:55 PM 4/5/2012, pagnu...@htdconnect.com wrote:


You are right - I did not intend to sound dogmatic.


Great.



I am beginning to wonder whether a couple of different phenomena, perhaps
sharing a common denominator, are occurring - depending on experimental
materials and procedures.  Nature may be getting a little perverse here.


Pons and Fleischmann discovered a new territory, and a fabulous beast 
living there. If we look carefully at the new territory, we may find 
many beasts. Assuming there is only one is narrow. Maybe. Maybe not.



The Wendt-Irion exploding wire experiment did appear to produce Helium.
Their original paper is -
"EXPERIMENTAL ATTEMPTS TO DECOMPOSE TUNGSTEN AT HIGH TEMPERATURES"
- Amer. Chem. Soc. 44 (1922)
http://www.uf.narod.ru/science/WendtIrion.pdf

Would this provide some link between CF and LENR if reproduced?


It could. However, it's a stretch to assume that techniques which get 
that hot will be the same as techniques relying on effects involving 
a lattice and that aren't known to exist at higher temperatures. So 
my starting assumption would be that they are different as to 
environment and mechanism.


However, it's possible that *in the process of vaporization" 
something is forced that is similar to what happens at lower 
temperatures. More likely, we might see "channeled fusion," i.e, hot 
fusion with an increased cross-section because of particle channelling.


The FPHE doesn't behave like hot fusion, as to product. I prefer to 
use the term "cold fusion," then for temperatures below the melting 
point of metals. But, as mentioned, one might be seeing a 
transitional effect. The metal hasn't melted yet, except maybe for part of it.


There were other observations, published and not, which hinted at 
LENR. They were explained away as error, once a *possible* error was 
identified. It was not necessarily shown that there was *actual error.*


Some scientists observed phenomena and didn't report it, a good 
example is Mizuno, who saw very substantial mysterious heat in highly 
loaded PdD, and just shrugged it off, until he later saw Pons and 
Fleischmann's announcement. Then he understood what he'd seen.


These were anecdotes, and not easily reproducible, they were rare. 

[Vo]:Terahertz stimulation - there is a possible way to use cryogenics

[Jones Beene]

As Günter and Abd suggest - chilling Ni-H is probably not going to work in
typical LENR cells for a myriad of reasons, slanted more towards the
practical than towards the theoretical. 

BUT that conclusion is based on specific assumptions that can possibly be
circumvented. At least we should consider the option. For instance - if we
were to be assured that some kind of double frequency coherent irradiation,
using THz frequencies from at least one bright coherent source and one very
cold target - was indeed able to couple extremely well to Pd-D, then that
would be the starting point for proceeding in a completely different way. 

Note: this all comes from a liberal interpretation of "Stimulation of
Optical Phonons in Deuterated Palladium" Letts, D. and P.L. Hagelstein.
ICCF-14 International. 2008. Washington, DC.
http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/LettsDstimulatio.pdf
http://www.iscmns.org/CMNS/JCMNS-Vol3.pdf -- page 59 et seq. (PDF page 65)

For the sake of argument then, let's say we find that 15 and 22 THz are
ideal for this plan using palladium due to its thermal characteristics in
the blackbody range of these frequencies.  Typically with Pd-D we have
assumed some kind of electrolysis for the rest of the input energy - and
that is where the incompatibility lies with cryogenics, so let's ditch the
electrolysis. Completely.

OK - here is a potential redesign, where instant continuous irradiation of
very cold nanoparticle pellets would be combined with direct conversion to
electricity. The concept is based on roughly on the well-known Lawrence
Livermore techniques of ICF and Laser implosion fusion, or any one of
several techniques for Inertial Confinement Fusion (pellet fusion) developed
elsewhere at a cost of billions.

However- instead of imploding deuterium pellets to fuse at thermonuclear
temperatures, using massive laser banks (check out this billion dollar
boondoggle): 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nova_%28laser%29
... we will attempt to apply a tiny fraction of that energy in the THz
range, and expect a proportionately acceptable fraction of the net energy
(number of fusion events) still enough to use a direct converter. 

What we are essentially doing is borrowing from one of the most heavily
researched fusion techniques in the world, where literally billions have
been spend on automating the process of taking small pellets of fuel and
aligning them continuously in the middle of converging coherent photon
beams. 

Instead of giant lasers banks, however, and a single ignition chamber, now
we have perhaps a hundred tabletop beam sources, along with their ignition
chambers, and getting 50 times fewer fusion events per shot but the same net
energy at a tenth the overhead. This cryo technique could be very cost
effective since having cryogenic fuel at the correct coldness provide a
portion of the needed input energy.

The big gain on the bottom line is that instead of such a plant costing tens
of billions, the cost now is tens of millions and the cost per watt is far
less - since overhead is the killer of ICF.

Doable? Who am I kidding? 

Of course this idea will go nowhere fast ! In short - this plan is doomed
because it is too sensible and will waste far too little money to keep the
staff at LANL fully employed doing war simulations on the side. 

And in any event, since the concept comes direct from the bowels of a
fringe-fizzix site, and one associated with ... heaven forbid... cold
fusion. No way!

<>

Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy presentation

[Abd ul-Rahman Lomax]

At 09:40 PM 4/5/2012, Eric Walker wrote:


On Thu, Apr 5, 2012 at 4:36 PM, Abd ul-Rahman 
Lomax <a...@lomaxdesign.com> wrote:


Gamma sources could be placed so that gammas 
pass through the supposedly active heavy 
electron patches, and, if W-L theory is real, 
drastic attenuation should be seen. That 
attentuation should not be seen with controls. 
W-L theory requires 100% absorption of the gamma 
energies that would be generated from neutron 
absorption, so this should not be difficult to detect.



I was thinking about this for an experiment as 
well. Â But how would you establish a negative 
finding? Â What if you got some variable such as 
the frequency wrong, causing the hypothesized electron patches not to work?


The hypothesized electron patches must be 100% 
effective for a range of gamma energies, and 
specifically for those from expected neutron 
activation. Indeed, one of the ways to test this 
would be to use actual neutron activation! Perhaps with a beam of neutrons.


But it may be possible to design a gamma source 
that would fit the bill, my guess.


I am *not* recommending this research, except for 
those who become critically concerned -- or, 
alternatively, who are inspired by W-L theory and 
wish to pursue the necessary falsification effort. 

Re: [Vo]:Stimulation of LENR using dual lasers, creative engineering needed

[Abd ul-Rahman Lomax]

At 09:30 PM 4/5/2012, Daniel Rocha wrote:

The idea was doing something cheap, right?


Yes. Cheap carbon dioxide laser? If we could get direct stimulation 
in the range of 8 - 22 ThZ, great! That would replace the two visible 
light lasers. However, I'm not clear if the far infrared would 
penetrate the windows and electrolyte.




2012/4/5 <fznidar...@aol.com>
Why not use a carbon dioxide laser?


At 04:05 PM 4/5/2012, Daniel Rocha wrote:
>The problem would be the output. The low energy
>tail would have also a very low power. I think a
>specialized equipment for that band is required...

Re: [Vo]:Stimulation of LENR using dual lasers, creative engineering needed

[Guenter Wildgruber]

 Von: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax 
An: vortex-l@eskimo.com; vortex-l@eskimo.com 
Gesendet: 17:40 Freitag, 6.April 2012
Betreff: Re: [Vo]:Stimulation of LENR using dual lasers, creative  engineering 
needed
 
>Unfortunately, the reactions are known to be temperature-dependent. I.e., if a 
>reaction is going to happen, increasing the temperature (within limits) 
>increases the reaction rate. 

Yes.
We should  differentiate this area -as a tool -as an area of EXCITATION- as 
soon as possible from the area of DETECTION.
It is RESONANCE effects, which make the classical continuum obsolete, by some 
unknown orders of magnitude.
We should have known that since the Fraunhofer-lines, right?

Unfortunately, some particles are termed 'cold', which aren't. Common sense 
does not apply there.
Although normally being an advocate of common sense, I would keep this out of 
consideration in this case.
Which is, in an epistemological sense, quite difficult. 

Just an example:
Exciting an item in the low THZ regime (say 10THz) actually implies a COOLING , 
which puts the whole issue out of the whole thermodynamic
calculations, because the Boltzmann equations apply to continua, and not 
resonance-peaks.
Anyway.
Think yourself.

Guenter.

Re: [Vo]:Future transportation with cold fusion and robots

[Vorl Bek]

> 
> They have human drivers so they are expensive. The drivers are
> often surly...

A slur such as 'surly' surely does not apply to the great majority
of drivers.

[Vo]:Future transportation with cold fusion and robots

[Jed Rothwell]

I covered this subject in the book. Here are some updated thoughts about
various systems.

*Telecommuting*

Still the best answer for most work-related transportation needs. I predict
this will be the best solution forever. At least on one planet. Obviously
would not work well between the Earth and Mars. It would be difficult from
the Earth to the Moon because of the time delay.

I recommend small satellite offices rather than working from home.


*Automobiles*

Progress in self driving automobiles is occurring much faster than I
imagined it would. I think it is essential to have self driving automobiles
as soon as possible. This will greatly reduce the number of accidents and
it will improve the flow of traffic. People do not realize the potential
for the latter. The thing is, fully computerized cars will cooperate with
one another better than human drivers ever could. They will "know" the
intentions of all other cars. Thus, for example, you could eliminate many
traffic lights and replace them with stop signs. A car approaching an
intersection would receive a signal from an oncoming car warning at that
the oncoming car intends to turn in front. Or he would receive a signal
saying that the car intends to stop and wait for another car to cross.
Where there are still traffic signals, all of the vehicles could
communicate with a traffic signal to arrange optimum wait times.

I predict that the bulk of transportation will be met with automobiles far
into the future. That is, individual, ground-based wheeled-vehicles that
transport people or freight from door to door. Some of the may be much
smaller than today's automobiles. For example vehicles that deliver
groceries or mail may be the size of a shopping cart.

I predict that taxies will become much more popular than they are today in
many places including suburbs. They will resemble today's Zip cars more
than what you think of as a taxi now. That is, you will call one on your
cell phone or computer and it will show up at the door when you need it.
The problems with today's taxies are:

They have human drivers so they are expensive. The drivers are often surly
or they drive like kamikaze pilots. Robot vehicles will eliminate this.

Taxies are often late coming. This is partly because traffic is so
unpredictable today. Future traffic control systems, underground roads, and
robot drivers will reduce this problem.

Taxies are often dirty, or poorly maintained. In the future they will be
cleaned up after every passenger by a robot, and thoroughly cleaned at the
end of each day. They will be kept in perfect operating condition by robot
labor. I expect that many other machines, houses, and infrastructure will
also be kept in better condition than today.

The advantages of using taxies in the future will be:

This reduces the parking problem. The taxi takes you to your destination
and then drives a way to pick up some other person. It is not left downtown
all day long taking up space. This problem can also be reduced by having
self driving cars drop you off at your destination and then drive a
considerable distance to an underground parking lot, or even back to your
house until you are ready to go home.

It reduces cost of ownership. It spreads the cost among many people.

The cost of ownership of automobiles will also be greatly reduced because
automobile accident insurance will not be needed. Robot vehicle accidents
will be extremely rare. Probably about as rare as today's commercial
aircraft accidents. When robot vehicles have accidents it will probably be
front page news. The cost of such accidents will be covered by society as a
whole. They will be so rare it will not be worth bothering with individual
insurance policies. This is how air travel works today. Every ticket comes
with built-in insurance, which probably costs a few cents.

This also reduces the hassles of owning a vehicle. Many of these hassles
will be reduced anyway, because the vehicle will largely maintain itself.
When it is time for routine maintenance, the vehicle will drive itself to
the dealership in the middle of the night. Robots will test it, change the
lubrication, rotate the tires and so on. The car will be back at your house
before morning.

By the way, I do not expect tires will be pneumatic. If they are they will
have permanent pockets of air like a sponge.


*Air cars and VTOL aircraft*

I stick to the predictions I made in my book.

Small VTOL air cars

I do not think these will be as popular as some people predict, because
they will be disruptive. I do not want to see cities and towns with many
vehicles cluttering up the airspace everywhere you look. I predict the
things will only be used at a few places around cities. Perhaps where we
now have shopping malls. A stream of vehicles go up and down in five or 10
locations in a major city would not be so bad. Having vehicles take off and
land in any neighborhood anywhere in the city would be disruptive. VTOL
aircraft may be quiet in the

Re: [Vo]:Stimulation of LENR using dual lasers, creative engineering needed

[Guenter Wildgruber]

 Von: "fznidar...@aol.com" 
An: vortex-l@eskimo.com 
Gesendet: 15:07 Freitag, 6.April 2012
Betreff: Re: [Vo]:Stimulation of LENR using dual lasers, creative engineering 
needed
 

Did that. 

http://www.angelfire.com/scifi2/zpt/chapterb.html#Pg6 

Maybe it is the case of cooling the experiment with liquid nitrogen, to avoid 
self interference with the experiment. 8THz blackbody is a peak around 140K, so 
71K is far away from that peak. 
This is so strange that I stopped reading at the first paragraph.
Maybe I should take a walk and then read another paragraph.
Maybe this is the problem with all our misundestandings, right?

Everything, which does not fall into our filter-bandwidth of acceptibility 
lands in the trashbin.

My inner philosopher does some headscratching.
'I' --whoever the hell that guy is-- try to keep him educated about his 
judgements.

Guenter.

Re: [Vo]:Stimulation of LENR using dual lasers, creative engineering needed

[Abd ul-Rahman Lomax]

At 09:13 PM 4/5/2012, Daniel Rocha wrote:
Maybe it is the case of cooling the experiment with liquid nitrogen, 
to avoid self interference with the experiment. 8THz blackbody is a 
peak around 140K, so 71K is far away from that peak.


Unfortunately, the reactions are known to be temperature-dependent. 
I.e., if a reaction is going to happen, increasing the temperature 
(within limits) increases the reaction rate. The FPHE is not seen at 
liquid nitrogen temperatures. It's possible that an understanding of 
why this is so is being developed. 

Re: [Vo]:Stimulation of LENR using dual lasers, creative engineering needed

[fznidarsic]

Did that.


http://www.angelfire.com/scifi2/zpt/chapterb.html#Pg6 

Maybe it is the case of cooling the experiment with liquid nitrogen, to avoid 
self interference with the experiment. 8THz blackbody is a peak around 140K, so 
71K is far away from that peak.





-Original Message-
From: Daniel Rocha 
To: vortex-l 
Sent: Thu, Apr 5, 2012 10:13 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Stimulation of LENR using dual lasers, creative engineering 
needed


Maybe it is the case of cooling the experiment with liquid nitrogen, to avoid 
self interference with the experiment. 8THz blackbody is a peak around 140K, so 
71K is far away from that peak.






2012/4/5 Abd ul-Rahman Lomax 

At 12:30 PM 4/5/2012, Daniel Rocha wrote:


If you are not concerned with a narrow broad band, you could use a blackbody 
emission. According to Wien's displacement law, 14.8THz to 22.5THz,


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wien%27s_displacement_law#Frequency-dependent_formulation

gives 251K to 387K.


The frequencies of interest are far infrared, or sometimes called mid-infrared. 
Blackbody emissions certainly exist in the range, but are are at low levels and 
are not coherent.

I've been speculating, though, as an aside, that the erratic results of cold 
fusion might have to do with the presence or absence of environmental THz 
radiation. I don't know if anyone looked for this, and don't place a lot of 
weight on the idea




 

Re: [Vo]:Calorimetry versus Thermal imaging

[Guenter Wildgruber]

 Von: Guenter Wildgruber 
An: "vortex-l@eskimo.com"  
Gesendet: 11:52 Freitag, 6.April 2012
Betreff: [Vo]:Calorimetry versus Thermal imaging
 
This is a typical example:
"Surface Analysis of hydrogen loaded nickel alloys"
(google that)

This basically is a good (well, who knows exactly?) analysis, BUT is 
off-process, and it's design is not fit for real-time-analysis.
But it could be redesigned  just to do what I propose.

Guenter

[Vo]:Calorimetry versus Thermal imaging

[Guenter Wildgruber]

friends,

this is just an idea I want to put into discussion.

The background is, that although LENR maybe proven, there is a gap between 
theory and experiment.
Apart from the experiment-setup itself, we have the diagnostic tools. 

Which are
a) in-process:
a1) nuclear particle detection
a2) He_x detection
a3) calorimetry

b) after process:
b1) microscopic surface analysis of the reactant
b2) analysis of possible transmutations, nanospire/LeClair maybe an extreme 
case.

I see some difficulties in (a), although those give us realtime insight:
(a1): important, but maybe mainly absent
(a2): important, but difficult to detect, and often shifted to after-process 
analysis.
(a3): difficult with small reactors, hence highly disputed.

So my idea:
i1) Use a 'dry' process, i.e. no fluids over the reactant.
Fluids blur the process and make it difficult to observe, and force using 
debatable calorimetry.

i2) make the reactant flat mm2's up to cm2's
i3) observe the reactant via Thermal imaging.
T.I. is sensitive enough to monitor the surface with 10um2 pixel size.
See e.g. thermal imaging of power semiconductors, which every manufacturer does 
on a routine basis.

What would be the advantage?
Well. Hopefully evident.
--real-time monitoring of heat-production, orders of magnitude better than 
calorimetry.

--spatial resolution (eg gradual variations of material properties and their 
response could be monitored)
--after-process analysis via SEM or other methods would profit from this 
real-time-identification of hot spots, And hot spots there are, I'm quite 
convinced. This is NOT a process, homogenous across the reactant.


This ofcourse does not make the hopefuls happy, who wish their e-cat could be 
purchased next month.
But would narrow the gap between theory and experimental evidence/practice.
And we need that!
There is enough worry out there, that this is a potentially dangerous process 
to require, that the theory-practice-gap should be closed. Relying on say 
Rossi's statements or what some administrative branch says about safety, does 
not make me feel comfortable.


What do You think?

Guenter