[Vo]:Re: Dog Bone Project

[Mark Jurich]

FYI:

The explosion occurs at approximately the 3:00:43 mark of the 4:00:04 video.

Mark Jurich

-Original Message- 
From: Craig Haynie

Sent: Thursday, February 05, 2015 10:23 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Dog Bone Project

They just ran a test with a live rossi core, and the reactor exploded
and broke just as it entered the range where they were expecting the
LENR effect to begin. Temp was around 1010C or thereabouts, around 3:45
on the clock.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?annotation_id=channel%3A54c999f4--21a4-96a5-001a1142f4ec&feature=iv&src_vid=bK6d3t4lSjM&v=eP9l356ymg8

So, the test is over. No good result.

Craig

Re: [Vo]:Re: Dog Bone Project

[Peter Gluck]

This can be actually good, a sign of powerful energy release. Not very
probable- I understand it was a reactor with fuel (?)
If other 2 cases happen: active cells explode, dummy cells not-  we cant
start to be happy- but with doubts.

Let's see the details
 Peter

Peter

On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 10:00 AM, Mark Jurich  wrote:

> FYI:
>
> The explosion occurs at approximately the 3:00:43 mark of the 4:00:04
> video.
>
> Mark Jurich
>
> -Original Message- From: Craig Haynie
> Sent: Thursday, February 05, 2015 10:23 PM
> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
> Subject: Re: [Vo]:Dog Bone Project
>
> They just ran a test with a live rossi core, and the reactor exploded
> and broke just as it entered the range where they were expecting the
> LENR effect to begin. Temp was around 1010C or thereabouts, around 3:45
> on the clock.
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?annotation_id=channel%
> 3A54c999f4--21a4-96a5-001a1142f4ec&feature=iv&src_
> vid=bK6d3t4lSjM&v=eP9l356ymg8
>
> So, the test is over. No good result.
>
> Craig
>
>


-- 
Dr. Peter Gluck
Cluj, Romania
http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com

Re: [Vo]:about some LENR initiatives; problems and progress

[Peter Gluck]

thank you so much- great idea- in part inspired by the molten tin idea
this will be AXIL DIXIT for today in the Blog

Peter

On Thu, Feb 5, 2015 at 11:56 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:

> Peter's instinct about liquid tin as a heat transfer medium is well
> founded, but in the context of the Hot cat reactor architecture as it
> currently stands, the integration of the current Hot cat with the well
> known and mature heat pipe technology is a better engineering solution.
>
> A heat pipe is a amazing and highly efficient heat-transfer device that
> combines the principles of both thermal conductivity of liquid metal with
> its phase transition to efficiently manage the transfer of heat between two
> solid interfaces.
>
> At the hot interface of a heat pipe, a liquid metal in contact with a
> thermally conductive solid surface turns into a vapor by absorbing heat
> from that surface. The vapor then travels along the heat pipe at supersonic
> speeds to the cold interface and condenses back into a liquid  that
> releases the latent heat. The liquid then returns to the hot interface
> through either capillary action of a patterned inner surface of the pipe to
> repeat in a continual cycle. Due to the very high heat transfer
> coefficients for boiling and condensation, heat pipes are highly effective
> thermal conductors. The effective thermal conductivity varies with heat
> pipe length, and can approach 100 kW/(cm2) for long heat pipes which is 200
> times more powerful in comparison with copper.
>
> Using the heat pipe concept, the Hot-Cat industrial plant could be
> designed to function in a completely passive mode without any moving parts
> or computers. The key to this design is to use a small diameter lithium
> moly or zirconium heat pipe (2cm) to remove high temperature heat from the
> reactor core. A lithium heat pipe operates in the heat range between 900C
> and 1700C. This powerful implimentation of the heat pipe has a heat
> transfer capability many thousands of times grater than boiling water. In
> detail, the heat transfer capacity moves heat at  125 kilowatts per square
> centimeter of surface area. Such heat transfer power could literally cool
> the surface of the Sun.
>
> Unlike Rossi's system, such a system would operate as an sealed isolated
> unit in a vacuum with the core of the Hot cat at ambient pressure.
>
> How to select the right heat pipe for a given application.
>
>
> https://www.enertron-inc.com/pdf/thermal_design_guildines/How-to-select-a-heat-pipe.pdf
>
> A CO2 turbine generator the size of a bread box could be integrated into
> the heat pipe Hot cat to generate electric power. Alternatively, a closed
> cycle liquid metal magnetohydrodynamic generator (MHD generator) could do
> the job without any moving parts.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetohydrodynamic_generator
>
> Rossi will face devastating competition from advanced power plant designs
> when the mystery of the Hot-Cat core is resolved.
>
> On Thu, Feb 5, 2015 at 11:35 AM, Peter Gluck 
> wrote:
>
>> Dear Friends,
>>
>> I hope you will like this:
>>
>>
>> http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2015/02/lenr-initiatives-present-and-future.html
>>
>> not only because it is a bit shorter than usual.
>>
>> Please send me DIKW's- you have access to and I not!
>> Thanks!
>> Peter
>>
>>
>> --
>> Dr. Peter Gluck
>> Cluj, Romania
>> http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
>>
>
>


-- 
Dr. Peter Gluck
Cluj, Romania
http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com

Re: [Vo]:Dog Bone Project

[Terry Blanton]

On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 1:23 AM, Craig Haynie  wrote:

> So, the test is over. No good result.

Are you kidding?  They successfully replicated results experienced by
both Rossi and Parkhomov. 

Re: [Vo]:Dog Bone Project

[ChemE Stewart]

Weaponiized! Yeah!

On Friday, February 6, 2015, Terry Blanton  wrote:

> On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 1:23 AM, Craig Haynie  > wrote:
>
> > So, the test is over. No good result.
>
> Are you kidding?  They successfully replicated results experienced by
> both Rossi and Parkhomov. 
>
>

[Vo]:Dogbone BANG Geiger Counter Spiked

[James Bowery]

Watch the Dogbone BANG run  in
HD to see these data points.

Geiger counter readings:
6:14:13, 8e-6
6:16:46, 9e-6
6:17:15, 3.3e-4
a few seconds later BANG

The pressure went down initially from 0.7 to 0.5 the back up to 0.9 but at
no point did the "PSI" exceed 1.0 so if that was measuring the build up of
gas pressure energy, there wasn't enough to do anything like what we saw.
It might have been a rapid conflagration of LiH coming in contact with
atmospheric O2 if there was a breach just prior to the BANG but there was
no indication of such a breach that I could see.

Re: [Vo]:Dogbone BANG Geiger Counter Spiked

[Blaze Spinnaker]

favorite quote so far:

"Anyone know what that is supposed to smell like?"
"uhh.. death."

On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 7:32 AM, James Bowery  wrote:

> Watch the Dogbone BANG run 
> in HD to see these data points.
>
> Geiger counter readings:
> 6:14:13, 8e-6
> 6:16:46, 9e-6
> 6:17:15, 3.3e-4
> a few seconds later BANG
>
> The pressure went down initially from 0.7 to 0.5 the back up to 0.9 but at
> no point did the "PSI" exceed 1.0 so if that was measuring the build up of
> gas pressure energy, there wasn't enough to do anything like what we saw.
> It might have been a rapid conflagration of LiH coming in contact with
> atmospheric O2 if there was a breach just prior to the BANG but there was
> no indication of such a breach that I could see.
>

[Vo]:MFMP explosion: success, failure or both and more?

[Peter Gluck]

Dear Friends,

I have published:

http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2015/02/we-have-vaporized-reactor-lenr-explosion.html

Where speculation is prohibited, creativity dies.

Peter





-- 
Dr. Peter Gluck
Cluj, Romania
http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com

Re: [Vo]:Dogbone BANG Geiger Counter Spiked

[Mark Jurich]

It is my opinion that the Pressure Transducer was not working during this run, 
at all.  Consider Charles’ Law for an Ideal Gas ( Pressure proportional to 
Temperature).  In other words, P = kT, where k is some arbitrary constant (Yes, 
you can start with the Ideal Gas Law, PV = nRT if you want to.).  Now let’s 
increase the Temperature from 273 K to 1273 K (increase of > 4.6 times) ... 
Where was the pressure increase of 4.6 times during the run?  Was the vessel 
evacuated before the run? ... I don’t think it was.  If it was, what was the 
vacuum reading attained during evacuation?  I didn’t see any data that 
reflected that.

... In a previous run, we did see a Pressure Transducer that seemed to be 
“alive”, albeit a bit noisy...

... Just some thoughts.

Mark Jurich

From: James Bowery 
Sent: Friday, February 06, 2015 7:32 AM
To: vortex-l 
Subject: [Vo]:Dogbone BANG Geiger Counter Spiked

Watch the Dogbone BANG run in HD to see these data points.


Geiger counter readings: 
6:14:13, 8e-6
6:16:46, 9e-6
6:17:15, 3.3e-4
a few seconds later BANG


The pressure went down initially from 0.7 to 0.5 the back up to 0.9 but at no 
point did the "PSI" exceed 1.0 so if that was measuring the build up of gas 
pressure energy, there wasn't enough to do anything like what we saw. It might 
have been a rapid conflagration of LiH coming in contact with atmospheric O2 if 
there was a breach just prior to the BANG but there was no indication of such a 
breach that I could see.

Re: [Vo]:Dogbone BANG Geiger Counter Spiked

[Mark Jurich]

The Radiation Count Plot showed nothing strange through the whole incident.  
High Voltage Particle Instrumentation is very sensitive to noise, especially 
during explosions.  Any anomaly in Geiger Counting at the time of the explosion 
needs to address this.  A common technique is to run 2 (or more) different 
counting channels (interleaved).  If both (more) channels “burp” at the same 
time, then one can get serious about something occurring (as long as there is 
good isolation between the channels).

... Just some more thought.

Mark Jurich


From: James Bowery 
Sent: Friday, February 06, 2015 7:32 AM
To: vortex-l 
Subject: [Vo]:Dogbone BANG Geiger Counter Spiked

Watch the Dogbone BANG run in HD to see these data points.


Geiger counter readings: 
6:14:13, 8e-6
6:16:46, 9e-6
6:17:15, 3.3e-4
a few seconds later BANG


The pressure went down initially from 0.7 to 0.5 the back up to 0.9 but at no 
point did the "PSI" exceed 1.0 so if that was measuring the build up of gas 
pressure energy, there wasn't enough to do anything like what we saw. It might 
have been a rapid conflagration of LiH coming in contact with atmospheric O2 if 
there was a breach just prior to the BANG but there was no indication of such a 
breach that I could see.

[Vo]:Re: Dogbone BANG Geiger Counter Spiked

[Mark Jurich]

I wrote:

  Now let’s increase the Temperature from 273 K to 1273 K (increase of > 4.6 
times)

should read:

  Now let’s increase the Temperature from 300 K to 1273 K (increase of > 4.2 
times)

300 K is roughly Room Temperature.

Mark Jurich


From: Mark Jurich 
Sent: Friday, February 06, 2015 8:19 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com 
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Dogbone BANG Geiger Counter Spiked

It is my opinion that the Pressure Transducer was not working during this run, 
at all.  Consider Charles’ Law for an Ideal Gas ( Pressure proportional to 
Temperature).  In other words, P = kT, where k is some arbitrary constant (Yes, 
you can start with the Ideal Gas Law, PV = nRT if you want to.).  Now let’s 
increase the Temperature from 273 K to 1273 K (increase of > 4.6 times) ... 
Where was the pressure increase of 4.6 times during the run?  Was the vessel 
evacuated before the run? ... I don’t think it was.  If it was, what was the 
vacuum reading attained during evacuation?  I didn’t see any data that 
reflected that.

... In a previous run, we did see a Pressure Transducer that seemed to be 
“alive”, albeit a bit noisy...

... Just some thoughts.

Mark Jurich

From: James Bowery 
Sent: Friday, February 06, 2015 7:32 AM
To: vortex-l 
Subject: [Vo]:Dogbone BANG Geiger Counter Spiked

Watch the Dogbone BANG run in HD to see these data points.


Geiger counter readings: 
6:14:13, 8e-6
6:16:46, 9e-6
6:17:15, 3.3e-4
a few seconds later BANG


The pressure went down initially from 0.7 to 0.5 the back up to 0.9 but at no 
point did the "PSI" exceed 1.0 so if that was measuring the build up of gas 
pressure energy, there wasn't enough to do anything like what we saw. It might 
have been a rapid conflagration of LiH coming in contact with atmospheric O2 if 
there was a breach just prior to the BANG but there was no indication of such a 
breach that I could see.

RE: [Vo]:Dogbone BANG Geiger Counter Spiked

[Jones Beene]

From: James Bowery 

Ø  Geiger counter readings: 

 

6:14:13, 8e-6

6:16:46, 9e-6

6:17:15, 3.3e-4

Ø  a few seconds later BANG

 

 

Apparently, a tiny burst of either background radiation or internally generated 
radiation preceded the event.

 

Perhaps we should be looking at the timing of sunspots or a cosmic ray burst ??

 

 

Re: [Vo]:Dog Bone Project

[Craig Haynie]

Short segment showing the explosion.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dDfRaDY2R_A&feature=youtu.be

Craig

Re: [Vo]:Re: Dogbone BANG Geiger Counter Spiked

[Mark Jurich]

YAM (Yet Another Mistake):

I wrote:

   Consider Charles’ Law for an Ideal Gas

should read:

   Consider Amontons' Law for an Ideal Gas

(named after Guillaume Amontons)

Mark Jurich


From: Mark Jurich 
Sent: Friday, February 06, 2015 8:37 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com 
Subject: [Vo]:Re: Dogbone BANG Geiger Counter Spiked

I wrote:

  Now let’s increase the Temperature from 273 K to 1273 K (increase of > 4.6 
times)

should read:

  Now let’s increase the Temperature from 300 K to 1273 K (increase of > 4.2 
times)

300 K is roughly Room Temperature.

Mark Jurich


From: Mark Jurich 
Sent: Friday, February 06, 2015 8:19 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com 
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Dogbone BANG Geiger Counter Spiked

It is my opinion that the Pressure Transducer was not working during this run, 
at all.  Consider Charles’ Law for an Ideal Gas ( Pressure proportional to 
Temperature).  In other words, P = kT, where k is some arbitrary constant (Yes, 
you can start with the Ideal Gas Law, PV = nRT if you want to.).  Now let’s 
increase the Temperature from 273 K to 1273 K (increase of > 4.6 times) ... 
Where was the pressure increase of 4.6 times during the run?  Was the vessel 
evacuated before the run? ... I don’t think it was.  If it was, what was the 
vacuum reading attained during evacuation?  I didn’t see any data that 
reflected that.

... In a previous run, we did see a Pressure Transducer that seemed to be 
“alive”, albeit a bit noisy...

... Just some thoughts.

Mark Jurich

From: James Bowery 
Sent: Friday, February 06, 2015 7:32 AM
To: vortex-l 
Subject: [Vo]:Dogbone BANG Geiger Counter Spiked

Watch the Dogbone BANG run in HD to see these data points.


Geiger counter readings: 
6:14:13, 8e-6
6:16:46, 9e-6
6:17:15, 3.3e-4
a few seconds later BANG


The pressure went down initially from 0.7 to 0.5 the back up to 0.9 but at no 
point did the "PSI" exceed 1.0 so if that was measuring the build up of gas 
pressure energy, there wasn't enough to do anything like what we saw. It might 
have been a rapid conflagration of LiH coming in contact with atmospheric O2 if 
there was a breach just prior to the BANG but there was no indication of such a 
breach that I could see.

RE: [Vo]:Dog Bone Project

[Orionworks - Steven Vincent Johnson]

Good show,

Thanks, Craig.

Regards,
Steven Vincent Johnson
svjart.orionworks.com
zazzle.com/orionworks

> Short segment showing the explosion.

> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dDfRaDY2R_A&feature=youtu.be

> Craig

Re: [Vo]:Dog Bone Project

[Axil Axil]

Did anybody else pick this up? When the explosive sequene begins at 2:30
with a bang, the radiation counter goes wild. The counter seems to
correspond with a color change in the center of the tube from white to
scarlet that proceeds left to right on the underside of the alumina tube
until all the white area is replaced by scarlet color. This correspondence
between the g-counter and the color change process seems to lasts until
2:34 when both the color change and the counter activity stops together.

There seems to be a change in state happening inside the tube between 2:30
and 2:34 corresponding to a large production in gamma radiation. What was
the maximum gamma level detected? Was it 1.02 GeV? That is electron
positron radiation as reported by Rossi?.

On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 12:15 PM, Craig Haynie 
wrote:

> Short segment showing the explosion.
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dDfRaDY2R_A&feature=youtu.be
>
> Craig
>
>

RE: [Vo]:Dog Bone Project

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

At 2:29/2:30 into the short segment posted by Craig, it looks like the 
right-side end-plug, or whatever is sticking out that end, blows out.  And I 
use that term specifically since one also sees some hint of a pressure release. 
 Whether that release is at an appropriate level is apparently debatable...
-mark iverson

-Original Message-
From: Orionworks - Steven Vincent Johnson [mailto:orionwo...@charter.net] 
Sent: Friday, February 06, 2015 9:25 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Dog Bone Project

Good show,

Thanks, Craig.

Regards,
Steven Vincent Johnson
svjart.orionworks.com
zazzle.com/orionworks

> Short segment showing the explosion.

> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dDfRaDY2R_A&feature=youtu.be

> Craig

Re: [Vo]:Dog Bone Project

[James Bowery]

The pressure release hypothesis is inconsistent with the "PSI" read out in
the video, which never reaches 1.0.

On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 12:39 PM, MarkI-ZeroPoint 
wrote:

> At 2:29/2:30 into the short segment posted by Craig, it looks like the
> right-side end-plug, or whatever is sticking out that end, blows out.  And
> I use that term specifically since one also sees some hint of a pressure
> release.  Whether that release is at an appropriate level is apparently
> debatable...
> -mark iverson
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Orionworks - Steven Vincent Johnson [mailto:orionwo...@charter.net]
> Sent: Friday, February 06, 2015 9:25 AM
> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
> Subject: RE: [Vo]:Dog Bone Project
>
> Good show,
>
> Thanks, Craig.
>
> Regards,
> Steven Vincent Johnson
> svjart.orionworks.com
> zazzle.com/orionworks
>
> > Short segment showing the explosion.
>
> > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dDfRaDY2R_A&feature=youtu.be
>
> > Craig
>
>

RE: [Vo]:Dog Bone Project

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

Do you believe the sensor, or your eyes?

-mi

 

From: James Bowery [mailto:jabow...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Friday, February 06, 2015 10:42 AM
To: vortex-l
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Dog Bone Project

 

The pressure release hypothesis is inconsistent with the "PSI" read out in the 
video, which never reaches 1.0.

 

On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 12:39 PM, MarkI-ZeroPoint  wrote:

At 2:29/2:30 into the short segment posted by Craig, it looks like the 
right-side end-plug, or whatever is sticking out that end, blows out.  And I 
use that term specifically since one also sees some hint of a pressure release. 
 Whether that release is at an appropriate level is apparently debatable...
-mark iverson


-Original Message-
From: Orionworks - Steven Vincent Johnson [mailto:orionwo...@charter.net]
Sent: Friday, February 06, 2015 9:25 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Dog Bone Project

Good show,

Thanks, Craig.

Regards,
Steven Vincent Johnson
svjart.orionworks.com
zazzle.com/orionworks

> Short segment showing the explosion.

> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dDfRaDY2R_A 
>  
> &feature=youtu.be

> Craig

 

Re: [Vo]:Dog Bone Project

[James Bowery]

I believe they should check their sensor.

On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 12:58 PM, MarkI-ZeroPoint 
wrote:

> Do you believe the sensor, or your eyes?
>
> -mi
>
>
>
> *From:* James Bowery [mailto:jabow...@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Friday, February 06, 2015 10:42 AM
> *To:* vortex-l
> *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:Dog Bone Project
>
>
>
> The pressure release hypothesis is inconsistent with the "PSI" read out in
> the video, which never reaches 1.0.
>
>
>
> On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 12:39 PM, MarkI-ZeroPoint 
> wrote:
>
> At 2:29/2:30 into the short segment posted by Craig, it looks like the
> right-side end-plug, or whatever is sticking out that end, blows out.  And
> I use that term specifically since one also sees some hint of a pressure
> release.  Whether that release is at an appropriate level is apparently
> debatable...
> -mark iverson
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Orionworks - Steven Vincent Johnson [mailto:orionwo...@charter.net]
> Sent: Friday, February 06, 2015 9:25 AM
> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
> Subject: RE: [Vo]:Dog Bone Project
>
> Good show,
>
> Thanks, Craig.
>
> Regards,
> Steven Vincent Johnson
> svjart.orionworks.com
> zazzle.com/orionworks
>
> > Short segment showing the explosion.
>
> > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dDfRaDY2R_A&feature=youtu.be
>
> > Craig
>
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Dog Bone Project

[David Roberson]

It is premature to assume that the explosion was caused by the Rossi effect.  
The temperature was rising smoothly a few seconds before it occurred, but there 
seemed to be some indication of a very rapid rise immediately before everything 
went haywire.

According to my simulations this might be due to this system acting like a type 
2 or 3 positive thermal feedback device.   In that case, the temperature inside 
the core would have passed the threshold where the negative resistance region 
begins.  Once entered, the internal temperature will rapidly rise as additional 
heat energy is released at an ever increasing rate.  This rapid rise will not 
cease until the device self destructs or, if they happen to be fortunate,  
reaches a temperature at which the heat energy escapes at a rate that exceeds 
its production rate.

The geometry of the test device is the main variable that can be used to solve 
this problem properly.  Of course, if the amount of fuel is reduced, the 
overall system can be reduced to type 1 operation.  In that case there is no 
negative resistance region and any desired operating temperature can be 
established by adjusting the input drive level.

I believe that it is important to establish exactly what caused the failure 
before anyone knows how to best proceed.  If the cause can not be accurately 
determined, then it would be prudent to reduce the amount of core fuel to 
ensure type 1 behavior.  We can generally obtain useful data from a system that 
remains in operation throughout the test procedure.

Dave

 

 

 

-Original Message-
From: MarkI-ZeroPoint 
To: vortex-l 
Sent: Fri, Feb 6, 2015 1:39 pm
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Dog Bone Project


At 2:29/2:30 into the short segment posted by Craig, it looks like the 
right-side end-plug, or whatever is sticking out that end, blows out.  And I 
use 
that term specifically since one also sees some hint of a pressure release.  
Whether that release is at an appropriate level is apparently debatable...
-mark iverson

-Original Message-
From: Orionworks - Steven Vincent Johnson [mailto:orionwo...@charter.net] 
Sent: Friday, February 06, 2015 9:25 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Dog Bone Project

Good show,

Thanks, Craig.

Regards,
Steven Vincent Johnson
svjart.orionworks.com
zazzle.com/orionworks

> Short segment showing the explosion.

> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dDfRaDY2R_A&feature=youtu.be

> Craig


 

Re: [Vo]:Dog Bone Project

[Axil Axil]

Bob Greenyer   Obvious

• 40 minutes ago


The pressure sensor was not connected. this can be seen visually. The core
was shown in pictures earlier in the evening on Facebook.

On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 1:58 PM, MarkI-ZeroPoint 
wrote:

> Do you believe the sensor, or your eyes?
>
> -mi
>
>
>
> *From:* James Bowery [mailto:jabow...@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Friday, February 06, 2015 10:42 AM
> *To:* vortex-l
> *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:Dog Bone Project
>
>
>
> The pressure release hypothesis is inconsistent with the "PSI" read out in
> the video, which never reaches 1.0.
>
>
>
> On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 12:39 PM, MarkI-ZeroPoint 
> wrote:
>
> At 2:29/2:30 into the short segment posted by Craig, it looks like the
> right-side end-plug, or whatever is sticking out that end, blows out.  And
> I use that term specifically since one also sees some hint of a pressure
> release.  Whether that release is at an appropriate level is apparently
> debatable...
> -mark iverson
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Orionworks - Steven Vincent Johnson [mailto:orionwo...@charter.net]
> Sent: Friday, February 06, 2015 9:25 AM
> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
> Subject: RE: [Vo]:Dog Bone Project
>
> Good show,
>
> Thanks, Craig.
>
> Regards,
> Steven Vincent Johnson
> svjart.orionworks.com
> zazzle.com/orionworks
>
> > Short segment showing the explosion.
>
> > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dDfRaDY2R_A&feature=youtu.be
>
> > Craig
>
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Dog Bone Project

[Jed Rothwell]

David Roberson  wrote:

It is premature to assume that the explosion was caused by the Rossi
> effect.  The temperature was rising smoothly a few seconds before it
> occurred, but there seemed to be some indication of a very rapid rise
> immediately before everything went haywire.
>

My guess is that temperature spike was caused by the thermocouple
malfunctioning at the moment of the explosion. The spike showed up on the
screen after the explosion I think.

If this were the Rossi effect I would expect to see the temperature
gradually rise above the calibration point, rather than suddenly spiking
like that. Maybe not though. Rossi has observed runaway heat excursions,
that reportedly frightened him.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Dog Bone Project

[Jed Rothwell]

I wrote:


> The spike showed up on the screen after the explosion I think.
>

Yup. In the video above, "Bang!" The explosion occurs at 2:31. The spike
appears at 2:49. If the spike were already on the screen when the explosion
occurred I might suspect that it was the beginning of an anomalous reaction.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Dog Bone Project

[H Veeder]

After the explosion there is a small white spot that persists after
most of the tube ceases to glow white.
Is that lens flare or a residual hot spot in the reactor?

Harry

On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 1:58 PM, MarkI-ZeroPoint  wrote:
> Do you believe the sensor, or your eyes?
>
> -mi
>
>
>
> From: James Bowery [mailto:jabow...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Friday, February 06, 2015 10:42 AM
> To: vortex-l
> Subject: Re: [Vo]:Dog Bone Project
>
>
>
> The pressure release hypothesis is inconsistent with the "PSI" read out in
> the video, which never reaches 1.0.
>
>
>
> On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 12:39 PM, MarkI-ZeroPoint 
> wrote:
>
> At 2:29/2:30 into the short segment posted by Craig, it looks like the
> right-side end-plug, or whatever is sticking out that end, blows out.  And I
> use that term specifically since one also sees some hint of a pressure
> release.  Whether that release is at an appropriate level is apparently
> debatable...
> -mark iverson
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Orionworks - Steven Vincent Johnson [mailto:orionwo...@charter.net]
> Sent: Friday, February 06, 2015 9:25 AM
> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
> Subject: RE: [Vo]:Dog Bone Project
>
> Good show,
>
> Thanks, Craig.
>
> Regards,
> Steven Vincent Johnson
> svjart.orionworks.com
> zazzle.com/orionworks
>
>> Short segment showing the explosion.
>
>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dDfRaDY2R_A&feature=youtu.be
>
>> Craig
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Dog Bone Project

[Bob Higgins]

That is probably the targeting laser spot for the Williamson pyrometer.

On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 1:17 PM, H Veeder  wrote:

> After the explosion there is a small white spot that persists after
> most of the tube ceases to glow white.
> Is that lens flare or a residual hot spot in the reactor?
>
> Harry
>

Re: [Vo]:Dog Bone Project

[Axil Axil]

At 2.29 a white spot appears in the field of scarlet but the power going
through the coil is still nominal. This means that the reaction is not
caused by a short circuit in the heater element.

The area of white expands throughout the 2.30 timeframe and at the end of
that time period, the power to the heater surges as the heater begins to
short out. The exploding sound occurs at the end of 2:30. The area of white
is at its maximum at the end of 2.30 and begins to return to scarlet
stating at 2:31. The power going through the heater is at its maximum at
2:32 until 2.34. The power is minimized at 2:35. The heater is completely
shorted at 2:55 with 0 current flow.

On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 3:17 PM, H Veeder  wrote:

> After the explosion there is a small white spot that persists after
> most of the tube ceases to glow white.
> Is that lens flare or a residual hot spot in the reactor?
>
> Harry
>
> On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 1:58 PM, MarkI-ZeroPoint 
> wrote:
> > Do you believe the sensor, or your eyes?
> >
> > -mi
> >
> >
> >
> > From: James Bowery [mailto:jabow...@gmail.com]
> > Sent: Friday, February 06, 2015 10:42 AM
> > To: vortex-l
> > Subject: Re: [Vo]:Dog Bone Project
> >
> >
> >
> > The pressure release hypothesis is inconsistent with the "PSI" read out
> in
> > the video, which never reaches 1.0.
> >
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 12:39 PM, MarkI-ZeroPoint 
> > wrote:
> >
> > At 2:29/2:30 into the short segment posted by Craig, it looks like the
> > right-side end-plug, or whatever is sticking out that end, blows out.
> And I
> > use that term specifically since one also sees some hint of a pressure
> > release.  Whether that release is at an appropriate level is apparently
> > debatable...
> > -mark iverson
> >
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Orionworks - Steven Vincent Johnson [mailto:orionwo...@charter.net
> ]
> > Sent: Friday, February 06, 2015 9:25 AM
> > To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
> > Subject: RE: [Vo]:Dog Bone Project
> >
> > Good show,
> >
> > Thanks, Craig.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Steven Vincent Johnson
> > svjart.orionworks.com
> > zazzle.com/orionworks
> >
> >> Short segment showing the explosion.
> >
> >> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dDfRaDY2R_A&feature=youtu.be
> >
> >> Craig
> >
> >
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Dog Bone Project

[Bob Higgins]

Ryan Hunt reports that the failure mode was NOT the compression fitting
giving way under pressure - the fitting remained intact.  This experiment
was of the "easier Parkhomov" design, posted previously where the seal was
made with a compression fitting, in this case with the use of a soft
aluminum ferrule at the suggestion of Alan Goldwater.  Alan's tests
suggested the compression fitting would hold and it did!  Using the
compression fitting is a real win because it completely avoids the
problematic sealing of the ends with cement while providing an opportunity
to instrument the reaction vessel.

When this failure occurred, it appeared to be a raw ceramic body failure.
This could easily have come from too much pressure coming from a too large
charge of LiAlH4 for the vacant volume inside the apparatus.  MFMP will
extract that volume information and relate it to the weight of LiAlH4 that
was added, as being a benchmark for too much LiAlH4.  The tube used was
1/4" OD, but at the moment, I am not sure if it was a 4mm ID tube or a 1/8"
ID tube.  The Parkhomov tube had an ID of half of its OD.

Bob Higgins

On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 11:39 AM, MarkI-ZeroPoint 
wrote:

> At 2:29/2:30 into the short segment posted by Craig, it looks like the
> right-side end-plug, or whatever is sticking out that end, blows out.  And
> I use that term specifically since one also sees some hint of a pressure
> release.  Whether that release is at an appropriate level is apparently
> debatable...
> -mark iverson
>

Re: [Vo]:Dog Bone Project

[Blaze Spinnaker]

Be careful not to get the integrity too strong, otherwise you could have a
real pipe bomb on your hands..

On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 12:59 PM, Bob Higgins 
wrote:

> Ryan Hunt reports that the failure mode was NOT the compression fitting
> giving way under pressure - the fitting remained intact.  This experiment
> was of the "easier Parkhomov" design, posted previously where the seal was
> made with a compression fitting, in this case with the use of a soft
> aluminum ferrule at the suggestion of Alan Goldwater.  Alan's tests
> suggested the compression fitting would hold and it did!  Using the
> compression fitting is a real win because it completely avoids the
> problematic sealing of the ends with cement while providing an opportunity
> to instrument the reaction vessel.
>
> When this failure occurred, it appeared to be a raw ceramic body failure.
> This could easily have come from too much pressure coming from a too large
> charge of LiAlH4 for the vacant volume inside the apparatus.  MFMP will
> extract that volume information and relate it to the weight of LiAlH4 that
> was added, as being a benchmark for too much LiAlH4.  The tube used was
> 1/4" OD, but at the moment, I am not sure if it was a 4mm ID tube or a 1/8"
> ID tube.  The Parkhomov tube had an ID of half of its OD.
>
> Bob Higgins
>
> On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 11:39 AM, MarkI-ZeroPoint 
> wrote:
>
>> At 2:29/2:30 into the short segment posted by Craig, it looks like the
>> right-side end-plug, or whatever is sticking out that end, blows out.  And
>> I use that term specifically since one also sees some hint of a pressure
>> release.  Whether that release is at an appropriate level is apparently
>> debatable...
>> -mark iverson
>>
>

Re: [Vo]:Dog Bone Project

[Bob Higgins]

Ryan confirmed that the tube used was of the original Dogbone design with a
4mm ID and a 6.35mm (1/4") OD.  This has a wall thickness of only 1.18mm
compared to Parkhomov's 2.5mm wall thickness.  For the strength of the tube
used, the amount of LiAlH4 inserted was just too much.

Fortunately they were all behind a safety shield.  This should be a lesson
to all replicators.

Bob Higgins

On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 2:02 PM, Blaze Spinnaker 
wrote:

> Be careful not to get the integrity too strong, otherwise you could have a
> real pipe bomb on your hands..
>
> On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 12:59 PM, Bob Higgins 
> wrote:
>
>> Ryan Hunt reports that the failure mode was NOT the compression fitting
>> giving way under pressure - the fitting remained intact.  This experiment
>> was of the "easier Parkhomov" design, posted previously where the seal was
>> made with a compression fitting, in this case with the use of a soft
>> aluminum ferrule at the suggestion of Alan Goldwater.  Alan's tests
>> suggested the compression fitting would hold and it did!  Using the
>> compression fitting is a real win because it completely avoids the
>> problematic sealing of the ends with cement while providing an opportunity
>> to instrument the reaction vessel.
>>
>> When this failure occurred, it appeared to be a raw ceramic body
>> failure.  This could easily have come from too much pressure coming from a
>> too large charge of LiAlH4 for the vacant volume inside the apparatus.
>> MFMP will extract that volume information and relate it to the weight of
>> LiAlH4 that was added, as being a benchmark for too much LiAlH4.  The tube
>> used was 1/4" OD, but at the moment, I am not sure if it was a 4mm ID tube
>> or a 1/8" ID tube.  The Parkhomov tube had an ID of half of its OD.
>>
>> Bob Higgins
>>
>> On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 11:39 AM, MarkI-ZeroPoint 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> At 2:29/2:30 into the short segment posted by Craig, it looks like the
>>> right-side end-plug, or whatever is sticking out that end, blows out.  And
>>> I use that term specifically since one also sees some hint of a pressure
>>> release.  Whether that release is at an appropriate level is apparently
>>> debatable...
>>> -mark iverson
>>>
>>
>

Re: [Vo]:Dog Bone Project

[Axil Axil]

There must be a some sort of reaction component to this explosion because
the gamma counter when wild for a few seconds. Gammas are produced by
nuclear causes.

On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 4:13 PM, Bob Higgins 
wrote:

> Ryan confirmed that the tube used was of the original Dogbone design with
> a 4mm ID and a 6.35mm (1/4") OD.  This has a wall thickness of only 1.18mm
> compared to Parkhomov's 2.5mm wall thickness.  For the strength of the tube
> used, the amount of LiAlH4 inserted was just too much.
>
> Fortunately they were all behind a safety shield.  This should be a lesson
> to all replicators.
>
> Bob Higgins
>
>
> On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 2:02 PM, Blaze Spinnaker 
> wrote:
>
>> Be careful not to get the integrity too strong, otherwise you could have
>> a real pipe bomb on your hands..
>>
>> On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 12:59 PM, Bob Higgins 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Ryan Hunt reports that the failure mode was NOT the compression fitting
>>> giving way under pressure - the fitting remained intact.  This experiment
>>> was of the "easier Parkhomov" design, posted previously where the seal was
>>> made with a compression fitting, in this case with the use of a soft
>>> aluminum ferrule at the suggestion of Alan Goldwater.  Alan's tests
>>> suggested the compression fitting would hold and it did!  Using the
>>> compression fitting is a real win because it completely avoids the
>>> problematic sealing of the ends with cement while providing an opportunity
>>> to instrument the reaction vessel.
>>>
>>> When this failure occurred, it appeared to be a raw ceramic body
>>> failure.  This could easily have come from too much pressure coming from a
>>> too large charge of LiAlH4 for the vacant volume inside the apparatus.
>>> MFMP will extract that volume information and relate it to the weight of
>>> LiAlH4 that was added, as being a benchmark for too much LiAlH4.  The tube
>>> used was 1/4" OD, but at the moment, I am not sure if it was a 4mm ID tube
>>> or a 1/8" ID tube.  The Parkhomov tube had an ID of half of its OD.
>>>
>>> Bob Higgins
>>>
>>> On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 11:39 AM, MarkI-ZeroPoint 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 At 2:29/2:30 into the short segment posted by Craig, it looks like the
 right-side end-plug, or whatever is sticking out that end, blows out.  And
 I use that term specifically since one also sees some hint of a pressure
 release.  Whether that release is at an appropriate level is apparently
 debatable...
 -mark iverson

>>>
>>
>

[Vo]:Re: the entirety of the quantum condition exists within a subset of Newtonian mechanics... The Quantum Condition and an Elastic Limit, free full text, 2014 Frank Znidarsic PE: Rich Murray 2015.

[Frank Znidarsic]

Thanks Rich.  


I have read of Jones Bennie's comment where he speculates that transformer 
action lies at the heart of the cold fusion phenomena.  This is very close to 
my logic, however, I have come up with a velocity associated with the 
transformer action.  The product of the nm dimension and the terahertz 
stimulation is 1 million meters per second.  This is Jones' transformer 
described in more detail.   So what is the 1 million meters per second?  Its 
the velocity of sound in the nucleus.  Once we know this we can derive the 
entirety of the quantum condition without and cold fusion.  My paper has no 
cold fusion in it.


Jones has also commented about a strong paramagnetic effect.  This idea is on 
track but too limited.  We must understand that magnetic fields are not a 
conserved property of the universe.  They come and go as needed.  It's the 
magnetic component of the strong nuclear force (the spin orbit force) that's at 
work in cold fusion.  I believe that Jones has the right idea but the wrong 
force.


We have also discussed interpretations of quantum physics.  These are the 
Copenhagen and the pilot wave.  A new one emerges as a result of the transform 
action.  Transformers match the impedance of a system.  The interpretation to 
arrive out of Jones' transformer the impedance matching interpenetration of 
quantum physics.  One one photon emerges from a quantum transition.  That 
implies that the quantum transition occurs in a single step without bounce.  
How do you match impedance of a line?  With a transformer, of course.






Frank Znidarsic



-Original Message-
From: Rich Murray 
To: vortex-L ; Frank Znidarsic ; Rich 
Murray 
Sent: Thu, Feb 5, 2015 10:51 pm
Subject: the entirety of the quantum condition exists within a subset of 
Newtonian mechanics... The Quantum Condition and an Elastic Limit, free full 
text, 2014 Frank Znidarsic PE: Rich Murray 2015.02.05



the entirety of the quantum condition exists within a subset of Newtonian 
mechanics... The Quantum Condition and an Elastic Limit, free full text, 2014 
Frank Znidarsic PE: Rich Murray 2015.02.05
http://rmforall.blogspot.com/2015/02/the-entirety-of-quantum-condition.html





"This author suggests that this extension analysis may demonstrate that the 
entirety of the quantum condition exists within a subset of Newtonian 
mechanics."


http://benthamopen.com/CHEM/VOLUME/1/



http://benthamopen.com/FULLTEXT/CHEM-1-21


Open Chemistry Journal 
ISSN: 1874-8422 ― Volume 1, 2014



The Quantum Condition and an Elastic Limit


Frank Znidarsic P.E.
Registered Professional Engineer, State of Pennsylvania


Abstract


Charles-Augustin de Coulomb introduced his equations over two centuries ago. 


These equations quantified the force and the energy of interacting electrical 
charges.


The electrical permittivity of free space was factored into Coulomb’s equations.


A century later James Clear Maxwell showed that the velocity of light emerged 
as a consequence this permittivity. 


These constructs were a crowning achievement of classical physics.


In spite of these accomplishments, the philosophy of classical Newtonian 
physics offered no causative explanation for the quantum condition. 


Planck’s empirical constant was interjected, ad-hoc, into a description of 
atomic scale phenomena. 


Coulomb’s equation was re-factored into the terms of an elastic constant and a 
wave number. 


Like Coulomb’s formulation, the new formulation quantified the force and the 
energy produced by the interaction of electrical charges.


The Compton frequency of the electron, the energy levels of the atoms, the 
energy of the photon, the speed of the atomic electrons, and Planck’s constant, 
spontaneously emerged from the reformulation. 


The emergence of these quantities, from a classical analysis, extended the 
realm of classical physics into a domain that was considered to be exclusively 
that of the quantum.


Keywords: Atomic radii, photoelectric effect, Planck’s constant, the quantum 
condition.


Article Information 
Identifiers and Pagination:


Year: 2014
Volume: 1
First Page: 21
Last Page: 26
Publisher Id: CHEM-1-21
DOI: 10.2174/1874842201401010021
Article History:


Received Date: 26/06/2014
Revision Received Date: 28/07/2014
Acceptance Date: 02/09/2014
Electronic publication date: 28/11/2014
Collection year: 2014


© Frank Znidarsic P.E.; Licensee Bentham Open. 


Open-Access License: This is an open access article licensed under the terms of 
the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License 
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits unrestricted, 
non-commercial use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the 
work is properly cited.




* Address correspondence to this author at
481 Boyer St, Johnstown Pa 15906, USA;
Tel: 814 505 4638; 
E-mail: fznidar...@aol.com




1. INTRODUCTION


One school of thought holds that the universe is constructed of continuous 
stuff.


Newton’s law

Re: [Vo]:Dog Bone Project

[Bob Higgins]

I would be hesitant to ascribe a transient radiation detection as
necessarily due to LENR.  When the reactor exploded, there could have been
fracto-fusion which is known to produce a pulse of neutrons.  Also, when
the tube exploded, it shattered the silicon carbide heater that they were
using, no doubt momentarily creating an electrical plasma as the AC source
arc'ed over the initial fracture.  Such an electromagnetic anomaly could
have induced an error in the reading.  There are lots of other
possibilities, and LENR is just one of them.

On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 2:18 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:

> There must be a some sort of reaction component to this explosion because
> the gamma counter when wild for a few seconds. Gammas are produced by
> nuclear causes.
>
> On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 4:13 PM, Bob Higgins 
> wrote:
>
>> Ryan confirmed that the tube used was of the original Dogbone design with
>> a 4mm ID and a 6.35mm (1/4") OD.  This has a wall thickness of only 1.18mm
>> compared to Parkhomov's 2.5mm wall thickness.  For the strength of the tube
>> used, the amount of LiAlH4 inserted was just too much.
>>
>> Fortunately they were all behind a safety shield.  This should be a
>> lesson to all replicators.
>>
>> Bob Higgins
>>
>>

Re: [Vo]:Dog Bone Project

[James Bowery]

Bizarre that they would think to hide behind an explosion shield -- which
is rational given prior pressure excursions -- but would not think to hook
up the pressure sensor.

On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 1:13 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:

> Bob Greenyer   Obvious
> 
> • 40 minutes ago
> 
>
> The pressure sensor was not connected. this can be seen visually. The core
> was shown in pictures earlier in the evening on Facebook.
>
> On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 1:58 PM, MarkI-ZeroPoint 
> wrote:
>
>> Do you believe the sensor, or your eyes?
>>
>> -mi
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* James Bowery [mailto:jabow...@gmail.com]
>> *Sent:* Friday, February 06, 2015 10:42 AM
>> *To:* vortex-l
>> *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:Dog Bone Project
>>
>>
>>
>> The pressure release hypothesis is inconsistent with the "PSI" read out
>> in the video, which never reaches 1.0.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 12:39 PM, MarkI-ZeroPoint 
>> wrote:
>>
>> At 2:29/2:30 into the short segment posted by Craig, it looks like the
>> right-side end-plug, or whatever is sticking out that end, blows out.  And
>> I use that term specifically since one also sees some hint of a pressure
>> release.  Whether that release is at an appropriate level is apparently
>> debatable...
>> -mark iverson
>>
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Orionworks - Steven Vincent Johnson [mailto:orionwo...@charter.net]
>> Sent: Friday, February 06, 2015 9:25 AM
>> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
>> Subject: RE: [Vo]:Dog Bone Project
>>
>> Good show,
>>
>> Thanks, Craig.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Steven Vincent Johnson
>> svjart.orionworks.com
>> zazzle.com/orionworks
>>
>> > Short segment showing the explosion.
>>
>> > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dDfRaDY2R_A&feature=youtu.be
>>
>> > Craig
>>
>>
>>
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Dog Bone Project

[Axil Axil]

There is a second or two delay from the time of increased heat production
and the production of radiation. A facto-fusion event would produce  the
simultaneous onset of the heat/radiation occurrence.

On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 4:25 PM, Bob Higgins 
wrote:

> I would be hesitant to ascribe a transient radiation detection as
> necessarily due to LENR.  When the reactor exploded, there could have been
> fracto-fusion which is known to produce a pulse of neutrons.  Also, when
> the tube exploded, it shattered the silicon carbide heater that they were
> using, no doubt momentarily creating an electrical plasma as the AC source
> arc'ed over the initial fracture.  Such an electromagnetic anomaly could
> have induced an error in the reading.  There are lots of other
> possibilities, and LENR is just one of them.
>
> On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 2:18 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:
>
>> There must be a some sort of reaction component to this explosion because
>> the gamma counter when wild for a few seconds. Gammas are produced by
>> nuclear causes.
>>
>> On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 4:13 PM, Bob Higgins 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Ryan confirmed that the tube used was of the original Dogbone design
>>> with a 4mm ID and a 6.35mm (1/4") OD.  This has a wall thickness of only
>>> 1.18mm compared to Parkhomov's 2.5mm wall thickness.  For the strength of
>>> the tube used, the amount of LiAlH4 inserted was just too much.
>>>
>>> Fortunately they were all behind a safety shield.  This should be a
>>> lesson to all replicators.
>>>
>>> Bob Higgins
>>>
>>>

Re: [Vo]:Dog Bone Project

[Bob Higgins]

I wouldn't call that bizarre, I would call that a sense of
self-preservation kicking in.

Remember that these fellows have come together for only a limited time to
run these experiments.  It could be that the appropriate plumbing was not
readily available to hook up the pressure sensor in a way that did not open
up a large gas volume.  The volume inside the Parkhomov alumina tube is
really small.  Maintaining that small volume is important to generate the
high pressures as the LiAlH4 decomposes.  To use the long tube (so as to
get the compression fitting away from the heat), almost all of the volume
must be filled with alumina rod and then what is connected on the end to
the compression fitting must also be minimum volume.  Otherwise, the
pressure measured would not be representative of what it was inside
Parkhomov's reactor.  I am working on plumbing to make such measurements
using 1/16" stainless tubing having a 0.006" bore with appropriately small
other fittings to minimize the dead gas volume in the plumbing.

What I particularly don't like about just using a cap on the end is that
the really high pressure is likely to remain even after the reactor cools
to room temperature.  How do you bleed out the gas to open the tube safely?

My objective is to measure the pressure over the course of the reaction,
have a way to capture the product gas in a sample cylinder for analysis,
and have a way to bleed off any remaining pressure when cool.

Bob Higgins

On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 2:41 PM, James Bowery  wrote:

> Bizarre that they would think to hide behind an explosion shield -- which
> is rational given prior pressure excursions -- but would not think to hook
> up the pressure sensor.
>
> On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 1:13 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:
>
>> Bob Greenyer   Obvious
>> 
>> • 40 minutes ago
>> 
>>
>> The pressure sensor was not connected. this can be seen visually. The
>> core was shown in pictures earlier in the evening on Facebook.
>>
>> On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 1:58 PM, MarkI-ZeroPoint 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Do you believe the sensor, or your eyes?
>>>
>>> -mi
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *From:* James Bowery [mailto:jabow...@gmail.com]
>>> *Sent:* Friday, February 06, 2015 10:42 AM
>>> *To:* vortex-l
>>> *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:Dog Bone Project
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> The pressure release hypothesis is inconsistent with the "PSI" read out
>>> in the video, which never reaches 1.0.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 12:39 PM, MarkI-ZeroPoint 
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> At 2:29/2:30 into the short segment posted by Craig, it looks like the
>>> right-side end-plug, or whatever is sticking out that end, blows out.  And
>>> I use that term specifically since one also sees some hint of a pressure
>>> release.  Whether that release is at an appropriate level is apparently
>>> debatable...
>>> -mark iverson
>>>
>>>
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: Orionworks - Steven Vincent Johnson [mailto:orionwo...@charter.net
>>> ]
>>> Sent: Friday, February 06, 2015 9:25 AM
>>> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
>>> Subject: RE: [Vo]:Dog Bone Project
>>>
>>> Good show,
>>>
>>> Thanks, Craig.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Steven Vincent Johnson
>>> svjart.orionworks.com
>>> zazzle.com/orionworks
>>>
>>> > Short segment showing the explosion.
>>>
>>> > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dDfRaDY2R_A&feature=youtu.be
>>>
>>> > Craig
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>

Re: [Vo]:Dog Bone Project

[James Bowery]

So the short answer is that rather than not thinking to hook up the
pressure sensor, the they thought to not do so given the exigencies of
their particular situation.

On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 3:57 PM, Bob Higgins 
wrote:

> I wouldn't call that bizarre, I would call that a sense of
> self-preservation kicking in.
>
> Remember that these fellows have come together for only a limited time to
> run these experiments.  It could be that the appropriate plumbing was not
> readily available to hook up the pressure sensor in a way that did not open
> up a large gas volume.  The volume inside the Parkhomov alumina tube is
> really small.  Maintaining that small volume is important to generate the
> high pressures as the LiAlH4 decomposes.  To use the long tube (so as to
> get the compression fitting away from the heat), almost all of the volume
> must be filled with alumina rod and then what is connected on the end to
> the compression fitting must also be minimum volume.  Otherwise, the
> pressure measured would not be representative of what it was inside
> Parkhomov's reactor.  I am working on plumbing to make such measurements
> using 1/16" stainless tubing having a 0.006" bore with appropriately small
> other fittings to minimize the dead gas volume in the plumbing.
>
> What I particularly don't like about just using a cap on the end is that
> the really high pressure is likely to remain even after the reactor cools
> to room temperature.  How do you bleed out the gas to open the tube safely?
>
> My objective is to measure the pressure over the course of the reaction,
> have a way to capture the product gas in a sample cylinder for analysis,
> and have a way to bleed off any remaining pressure when cool.
>
> Bob Higgins
>
>
> On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 2:41 PM, James Bowery  wrote:
>
>> Bizarre that they would think to hide behind an explosion shield -- which
>> is rational given prior pressure excursions -- but would not think to hook
>> up the pressure sensor.
>>
>> On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 1:13 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:
>>
>>> Bob Greenyer   Obvious
>>> 
>>> • 40 minutes ago
>>> 
>>>
>>> The pressure sensor was not connected. this can be seen visually. The
>>> core was shown in pictures earlier in the evening on Facebook.
>>>
>>> On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 1:58 PM, MarkI-ZeroPoint 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 Do you believe the sensor, or your eyes?

 -mi



 *From:* James Bowery [mailto:jabow...@gmail.com]
 *Sent:* Friday, February 06, 2015 10:42 AM
 *To:* vortex-l
 *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:Dog Bone Project



 The pressure release hypothesis is inconsistent with the "PSI" read out
 in the video, which never reaches 1.0.



 On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 12:39 PM, MarkI-ZeroPoint 
 wrote:

 At 2:29/2:30 into the short segment posted by Craig, it looks like the
 right-side end-plug, or whatever is sticking out that end, blows out.  And
 I use that term specifically since one also sees some hint of a pressure
 release.  Whether that release is at an appropriate level is apparently
 debatable...
 -mark iverson


 -Original Message-
 From: Orionworks - Steven Vincent Johnson [mailto:
 orionwo...@charter.net]
 Sent: Friday, February 06, 2015 9:25 AM
 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
 Subject: RE: [Vo]:Dog Bone Project

 Good show,

 Thanks, Craig.

 Regards,
 Steven Vincent Johnson
 svjart.orionworks.com
 zazzle.com/orionworks

 > Short segment showing the explosion.

 > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dDfRaDY2R_A&feature=youtu.be

 > Craig



>>>
>>>
>>
>

[Vo]:Re: Dog Bone Project

[Mark Jurich]

FYI:

MFMP might also want to use this plumbing setup to pump out the headspace at 
the start of the run, pulling 30” of vacuum on it, to remove any 
nitrogen/oxygen/etc.

Mark Jurich


From: Bob Higgins 
Sent: Friday, February 06, 2015 1:57 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com 
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Dog Bone Project

I wouldn't call that bizarre, I would call that a sense of self-preservation 
kicking in.   

Remember that these fellows have come together for only a limited time to run 
these experiments.  It could be that the appropriate plumbing was not readily 
available to hook up the pressure sensor in a way that did not open up a large 
gas volume.  The volume inside the Parkhomov alumina tube is really small.  
Maintaining that small volume is important to generate the high pressures as 
the LiAlH4 decomposes.  To use the long tube (so as to get the compression 
fitting away from the heat), almost all of the volume must be filled with 
alumina rod and then what is connected on the end to the compression fitting 
must also be minimum volume.  Otherwise, the pressure measured would not be 
representative of what it was inside Parkhomov's reactor.  I am working on 
plumbing to make such measurements using 1/16" stainless tubing having a 0.006" 
bore with appropriately small other fittings to minimize the dead gas volume in 
the plumbing.

What I particularly don't like about just using a cap on the end is that the 
really high pressure is likely to remain even after the reactor cools to room 
temperature.  How do you bleed out the gas to open the tube safely?

My objective is to measure the pressure over the course of the reaction, have a 
way to capture the product gas in a sample cylinder for analysis, and have a 
way to bleed off any remaining pressure when cool.

Bob Higgins


On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 2:41 PM, James Bowery  wrote:

  Bizarre that they would think to hide behind an explosion shield -- which is 
rational given prior pressure excursions -- but would not think to hook up the 
pressure sensor.

  On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 1:13 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:

Bob Greenyer Obvious • 40 minutes ago 
The pressure sensor was not connected. this can be seen visually. The core 
was shown in pictures earlier in the evening on Facebook.


On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 1:58 PM, MarkI-ZeroPoint  
wrote:

  Do you believe the sensor, or your eyes?

  -mi



  From: James Bowery [mailto:jabow...@gmail.com] 
  Sent: Friday, February 06, 2015 10:42 AM
  To: vortex-l
  Subject: Re: [Vo]:Dog Bone Project



  The pressure release hypothesis is inconsistent with the "PSI" read out 
in the video, which never reaches 1.0.



  On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 12:39 PM, MarkI-ZeroPoint  
wrote:

  At 2:29/2:30 into the short segment posted by Craig, it looks like the 
right-side end-plug, or whatever is sticking out that end, blows out.  And I 
use that term specifically since one also sees some hint of a pressure release. 
 Whether that release is at an appropriate level is apparently debatable...
  -mark iverson


  -Original Message-
  From: Orionworks - Steven Vincent Johnson [mailto:orionwo...@charter.net]
  Sent: Friday, February 06, 2015 9:25 AM
  To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
  Subject: RE: [Vo]:Dog Bone Project

  Good show,

  Thanks, Craig.

  Regards,
  Steven Vincent Johnson
  svjart.orionworks.com
  zazzle.com/orionworks

  > Short segment showing the explosion.

  > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dDfRaDY2R_A&feature=youtu.be

  > Craig

Re: [Vo]:Re: Dog Bone Project

[Bob Higgins]

Well, this is only sort-of possible.  The capillary nature of the plumbing
will make it difficult to get much of a vacuum on the portion of the
reactor that has the bulk of the volume, but it could be possible to reduce
the atmosphere by an order of magnitude.

Then you have to deal with the fact that this is yet another departure from
replication.  We don't really know that the oxygen, nitrogen, and argon are
not involved in the reaction.  Removing these gasses will certainly alter
the chemistry of the reaction. Neither Parkhomov nor Rossi removed the
atmosphere.  It might turn out to be something that improves the reaction,
but it is another departure from replication.

On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 3:48 PM, Mark Jurich  wrote:

>   FYI:
>
> MFMP might also want to use this plumbing setup to pump out the headspace
> at the start of the run, pulling 30” of vacuum on it, to remove any
> nitrogen/oxygen/etc.
>
> Mark Jurich
>
>
>  *From:* Bob Higgins 
>  *Sent:* Friday, February 06, 2015 1:57 PM
> *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com
> *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:Dog Bone Project
>
>  I wouldn't call that bizarre, I would call that a sense of
> self-preservation kicking in.
>
> Remember that these fellows have come together for only a limited time to
> run these experiments.  It could be that the appropriate plumbing was not
> readily available to hook up the pressure sensor in a way that did not open
> up a large gas volume.  The volume inside the Parkhomov alumina tube is
> really small.  Maintaining that small volume is important to generate the
> high pressures as the LiAlH4 decomposes.  To use the long tube (so as to
> get the compression fitting away from the heat), almost all of the volume
> must be filled with alumina rod and then what is connected on the end to
> the compression fitting must also be minimum volume.  Otherwise, the
> pressure measured would not be representative of what it was inside
> Parkhomov's reactor.  I am working on plumbing to make such measurements
> using 1/16" stainless tubing having a 0.006" bore with appropriately small
> other fittings to minimize the dead gas volume in the plumbing.
>
> What I particularly don't like about just using a cap on the end is that
> the really high pressure is likely to remain even after the reactor cools
> to room temperature.  How do you bleed out the gas to open the tube safely?
>
> My objective is to measure the pressure over the course of the reaction,
> have a way to capture the product gas in a sample cylinder for analysis,
> and have a way to bleed off any remaining pressure when cool.
>
> Bob Higgins
>
> On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 2:41 PM, James Bowery  wrote:
>
>> Bizarre that they would think to hide behind an explosion shield -- which
>> is rational given prior pressure excursions -- but would not think to hook
>> up the pressure sensor.
>>
>> On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 1:13 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:
>>
>>>  Bob Greenyer  Obvious
>>> 
>>> • 40 minutes ago
>>> 
>>>
>>> The pressure sensor was not connected. this can be seen visually. The
>>> core was shown in pictures earlier in the evening on Facebook.
>>>
>>> On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 1:58 PM, MarkI-ZeroPoint 
>>> wrote:
>>>
  Do you believe the sensor, or your eyes?

 -mi



 *From:* James Bowery [mailto:jabow...@gmail.com]
 *Sent:* Friday, February 06, 2015 10:42 AM
 *To:* vortex-l
 *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:Dog Bone Project



 The pressure release hypothesis is inconsistent with the "PSI" read out
 in the video, which never reaches 1.0.



 On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 12:39 PM, MarkI-ZeroPoint 
 wrote:

 At 2:29/2:30 into the short segment posted by Craig, it looks like the
 right-side end-plug, or whatever is sticking out that end, blows out.  And
 I use that term specifically since one also sees some hint of a pressure
 release.  Whether that release is at an appropriate level is apparently
 debatable...
 -mark iverson


 -Original Message-
 From: Orionworks - Steven Vincent Johnson [mailto:
 orionwo...@charter.net]
 Sent: Friday, February 06, 2015 9:25 AM
 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
 Subject: RE: [Vo]:Dog Bone Project

 Good show,

 Thanks, Craig.

 Regards,
 Steven Vincent Johnson
 svjart.orionworks.com
 zazzle.com/orionworks

 > Short segment showing the explosion.

 > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dDfRaDY2R_A&feature=youtu.be

 > Craig



>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Dog Bone Project

[a.ashfield]

I saw a comment that stated the ticking sound was not from the Geiger 
counter but from an H2 leak detector.  Can anyone verify this?
ALso, is i possible to verify there was not an audio delay of about a 
second in the video that might explain the delay in the ticking picking 
up speed?

[Vo]:Re: Dog Bone Project

[Mark Jurich]

This is all true.  The only reason I mentioned this, is that MFMP has gone to 
the trouble of adding this beautifully working extension (which is 
non-Parkhomov), they might as well use it to research other deviations once 
some type of replication is done, especially if the design hasn’t been 
solidified yet...

... Perhaps bringing in H2 Gas or D2 Gas (if you’re rich!) would also be 
possible. 

From: Bob Higgins 
Sent: Friday, February 06, 2015 2:55 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com 
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Re: Dog Bone Project

Well, this is only sort-of possible.  The capillary nature of the plumbing will 
make it difficult to get much of a vacuum on the portion of the reactor that 
has the bulk of the volume, but it could be possible to reduce the atmosphere 
by an order of magnitude. 

Then you have to deal with the fact that this is yet another departure from 
replication.  We don't really know that the oxygen, nitrogen, and argon are not 
involved in the reaction.  Removing these gasses will certainly alter the 
chemistry of the reaction. Neither Parkhomov nor Rossi removed the atmosphere.  
It might turn out to be something that improves the reaction, but it is another 
departure from replication.


On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 3:48 PM, Mark Jurich  wrote:

  FYI:

  MFMP might also want to use this plumbing setup to pump out the headspace at 
the start of the run, pulling 30” of vacuum on it, to remove any 
nitrogen/oxygen/etc.

  Mark Jurich


  From: Bob Higgins 
  Sent: Friday, February 06, 2015 1:57 PM
  To: vortex-l@eskimo.com 
  Subject: Re: [Vo]:Dog Bone Project

  I wouldn't call that bizarre, I would call that a sense of self-preservation 
kicking in.   

  Remember that these fellows have come together for only a limited time to run 
these experiments.  It could be that the appropriate plumbing was not readily 
available to hook up the pressure sensor in a way that did not open up a large 
gas volume.  The volume inside the Parkhomov alumina tube is really small.  
Maintaining that small volume is important to generate the high pressures as 
the LiAlH4 decomposes.  To use the long tube (so as to get the compression 
fitting away from the heat), almost all of the volume must be filled with 
alumina rod and then what is connected on the end to the compression fitting 
must also be minimum volume.  Otherwise, the pressure measured would not be 
representative of what it was inside Parkhomov's reactor.  I am working on 
plumbing to make such measurements using 1/16" stainless tubing having a 0.006" 
bore with appropriately small other fittings to minimize the dead gas volume in 
the plumbing.

  What I particularly don't like about just using a cap on the end is that the 
really high pressure is likely to remain even after the reactor cools to room 
temperature.  How do you bleed out the gas to open the tube safely?

  My objective is to measure the pressure over the course of the reaction, have 
a way to capture the product gas in a sample cylinder for analysis, and have a 
way to bleed off any remaining pressure when cool.

  Bob Higgins


  On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 2:41 PM, James Bowery  wrote:

Bizarre that they would think to hide behind an explosion shield -- which 
is rational given prior pressure excursions -- but would not think to hook up 
the pressure sensor.

On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 1:13 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:

  Bob Greenyer Obvious • 40 minutes ago 
  The pressure sensor was not connected. this can be seen visually. The 
core was shown in pictures earlier in the evening on Facebook.


  On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 1:58 PM, MarkI-ZeroPoint  
wrote:

Do you believe the sensor, or your eyes?

-mi



From: James Bowery [mailto:jabow...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Friday, February 06, 2015 10:42 AM
To: vortex-l
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Dog Bone Project



The pressure release hypothesis is inconsistent with the "PSI" read out 
in the video, which never reaches 1.0.



On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 12:39 PM, MarkI-ZeroPoint 
 wrote:

At 2:29/2:30 into the short segment posted by Craig, it looks like the 
right-side end-plug, or whatever is sticking out that end, blows out.  And I 
use that term specifically since one also sees some hint of a pressure release. 
 Whether that release is at an appropriate level is apparently debatable...
-mark iverson


-Original Message-
From: Orionworks - Steven Vincent Johnson 
[mailto:orionwo...@charter.net]
Sent: Friday, February 06, 2015 9:25 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Dog Bone Project

Good show,

Thanks, Craig.

Regards,
Steven Vincent Johnson
svjart.orionworks.com
zazzle.com/orionworks

> Short segment showing the explosion.

> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dDfRaDY2R_A&feature=youtu.be

> Craig

[Vo]:Will Gravitational Waves Ever Be Found?

[H Veeder]

Will Gravitational Waves Ever Be Found?

http://news.discovery.com/space/astronomy/bicep2-vs-planck-will-gravitational-waves-be-found-150206.htm

quotes

<>


Harry

[Vo]:Re: the entirety of the quantum condition exists within a subset of Newtonian mechanics... The Quantum Condition and an Elastic Limit, free full text, 2014 Frank Znidarsic PE: Rich Murray 2015.

[Rich Murray]

Since QM applies to all physical systems, the question arises: does your
simple approach apply to systems that do not have an atomic nucleus, such
as positronium, an electron and a positron in orbit around their common
center of mass?

with appreciation, Rich Murray

On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 1:25 PM, Frank Znidarsic  wrote:

> Thanks Rich.
>
>  I have read of Jones Bennie's comment where he speculates that
> transformer action lies at the heart of the cold fusion phenomena.  This is
> very close to my logic, however, I have come up with a velocity associated
> with the transformer action.  The product of the nm dimension and the
> terahertz stimulation is 1 million meters per second.  This is Jones'
> transformer described in more detail.   So what is the 1 million meters per
> second?  Its the velocity of sound in the nucleus.  Once we know this we
> can derive the entirety of the quantum condition without and cold fusion.
> My paper has no cold fusion in it.
>
>  Jones has also commented about a strong paramagnetic effect.  This idea
> is on track but too limited.  We must understand that magnetic fields are
> not a conserved property of the universe.  They come and go as needed.
> It's the magnetic component of the strong nuclear force (the spin orbit
> force) that's at work in cold fusion.  I believe that Jones has the right
> idea but the wrong force.
>
>  We have also discussed interpretations of quantum physics.  These are
> the Copenhagen and the pilot wave.  A new one emerges as a result of the
> transform action.  Transformers match the impedance of a system.  The
> interpretation to arrive out of Jones' transformer the impedance matching
> interpenetration of quantum physics.  One one photon emerges from a quantum
> transition.  That implies that the quantum transition occurs in a single
> step without bounce.  How do you match impedance of a line?  With a
> transformer, of course.
>
>
>
>  Frank Znidarsic
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Rich Murray 
> To: vortex-L ; Frank Znidarsic ;
> Rich Murray 
> Sent: Thu, Feb 5, 2015 10:51 pm
> Subject: the entirety of the quantum condition exists within a subset of
> Newtonian mechanics... The Quantum Condition and an Elastic Limit, free
> full text, 2014 Frank Znidarsic PE: Rich Murray 2015.02.05
>
>  the entirety of the quantum condition exists within a subset of
> Newtonian mechanics... The Quantum Condition and an Elastic Limit, free
> full text, 2014 Frank Znidarsic PE: Rich Murray 2015.02.05
> http://rmforall.blogspot.com/2015/02/the-entirety-of-quantum-condition.html
>
>
>  "This author suggests that this extension analysis may demonstrate that
> the entirety of the quantum condition exists within a subset of Newtonian
> mechanics."
>
>  http://benthamopen.com/CHEM/VOLUME/1/
>
>  http://benthamopen.com/FULLTEXT/CHEM-1-21
>
>  Open Chemistry Journal
> ISSN: 1874-8422 ― Volume 1, 2014
>
>  The Quantum Condition and an Elastic Limit
>
>  Frank Znidarsic P.E.
> Registered Professional Engineer, State of Pennsylvania
>
>  Abstract
>
>  Charles-Augustin de Coulomb introduced his equations over two centuries
> ago.
>
>  These equations quantified the force and the energy of interacting
> electrical charges.
>
>  The electrical permittivity of free space was factored into Coulomb’s
> equations.
>
>  A century later James Clear Maxwell showed that the velocity of light
> emerged as a consequence this permittivity.
>
>  These constructs were a crowning achievement of classical physics.
>
>  In spite of these accomplishments, the philosophy of classical Newtonian
> physics offered no causative explanation for the quantum condition.
>
>  Planck’s empirical constant was interjected, ad-hoc, into a description
> of atomic scale phenomena.
>
>  Coulomb’s equation was re-factored into the terms of an elastic constant
> and a wave number.
>
>  Like Coulomb’s formulation, the new formulation quantified the force and
> the energy produced by the interaction of electrical charges.
>
>  The Compton frequency of the electron, the energy levels of the atoms,
> the energy of the photon, the speed of the atomic electrons, and Planck’s
> constant, spontaneously emerged from the reformulation.
>
>  The emergence of these quantities, from a classical analysis, extended
> the realm of classical physics into a domain that was considered to be
> exclusively that of the quantum.
>
>  Keywords: Atomic radii, photoelectric effect, Planck’s constant, the
> quantum condition.
>
>  Article Information
> Identifiers and Pagination:
>
>  Year: 2014
> Volume: 1
> First Page: 21
> Last Page: 26
> Publisher Id: CHEM-1-21
> DOI: 10.2174/1874842201401010021
> Article History:
>
>  Received Date: 26/06/2014
> Revision Received Date: 28/07/2014
> Acceptance Date: 02/09/2014
> Electronic publication date: 28/11/2014
> Collection year: 2014
>
>  © Frank Znidarsic P.E.; Licensee Bentham Open.
>
>  Open-Access License: This is an open access article licensed under the
> terms of the Crea

[Vo]:Maximum Possible Pressures: The Ideal Gas Law, Parkhomov & MFMP

[Mark Jurich]

Hello All:

   Please let me know if I've made any mistakes in the analysis which follows.  
Thank you...



Considering all the problems related to the Parkhomov Charge Amount and MFMP 
Replication, I have decided to formulate an Engineered Version of the 

Ideal Gas Law to calculate maximum theoretical pressures that may be obtained 
in an experiment.  This should be painstakingly simple but will 

serve as a reference...

Recall the Ideal Gas Law:

  PV = nRT, where P = Pressure, V = Volume, n = Number of Gas Species, R = 
Gas Constant & T = Temperature.

Typically, T is given in Kelvin, n in moles (of gas) & V in Liters.  Thus, if 
one would like the Pressure in Pascals, R (the Gas Constant) would 

be:

 R = 8.314462 [L][kPa] / ([K][mole])

This would result in the pressure being in kilo-Pascals.

Please note that the Ideal Gas Law assumes an Ideal Gas as opposed to a Real 
Gas, and is thus an approximation, valid in certain regimes...


Now let us take a look at the Relevant Parkhomov Experiment Values (or the 
values used to make a pressure estimation):

900 mg Ni  x  (1 g Ni / (1000 mg Ni   )) x  (1 mole Ni  
  / (58.69 g Ni   ))  =  0.01533   moles Ni
100 mg LiAlH4   x  (1 g LiAlH4  / (1000 mg LiAlH4)) x  (1 mole LiAlH4 / 
(37.95 g LiAlH4))  =  0.002635 moles LiAlH4
V = 2 ml  (please note that the calculated volume for the Parkhomov Cell is 
actually 2.3562 ml; cylinder diameter 5 mm & length 120 mm)
T = 1300 C = 1573.15 K (maximum Parkhomov temperature obtained, but away 
from the center and closer to the heater coils)
Starting Pressure: 1 Standard Atmosphere


If we assume the worst case scenario in which all of the Hydrogen evolves to H2 
Gas, and that gas does not permeate the Ni or the Vessel Housing 

(both unrealistic), then we will have twice as many moles of H2 Gas, as to 
moles of LiAlH4:

n = 0.005270 moles H2 Gas

We also note that we will obtain 4 times the atomic Hydrogen, if all the 
Hydrogen decomposes to H:

0.01054 moles H

If we compare this to the number of moles of Ni we see that we have less H 
atoms than Ni atoms; recall that the maximum loading ratio for Ni:H is 

1:1 .  This is important to note, scientifically.

Now let us crunch through the ideal gas law equation, and determine the 
Pressure.  I will leave this as an exercise to you.  Recall that:

   1 Pascal = 0.000145037738 pounds per square inch

If I’ve done the calculation correctly, you will obtain close to 4999 psi of 
pressure at T = 1300 C (1573.15 K).  If one uses the method described 

in the translation of Parkhomov's first set of slides (applying Boyle's Law, 
then hand waving through Amonton's Law), one will obtain a value of 

about 4548 psi.

   In order to make this calculation easier for the experimenter, I have 
reformulated the Ideal Gas Law into more manageable values:

   Pressure [psi]  =  delta[psi] + (0.063553 x (w[mg LiAlH4] x (273.15 + T[C])) 
 /  V[ml]

   where delta = starting pressure of 1 atmosphere = 14.6959488 pounds per 
square inch
, w = measured weight of LiAlH4 charge in milligrams
, V = Headspace Volume in milliliters
, T = Temperature in degrees C
  & P = Vessel Pressure in psi

Here I've added an additional term (delta), reflecting a starting pressure and 
which introduces a small correction.

More succinctly,
 
   P = delta + ((0.063553 x w x (273.15 + T))  /  V)

delta = 14.6959488 psi
w = 100 mg
T = 1300 C
V = 2.3562 ml (Volume of a cylinder whose diameter is 5 mm (radius (r) = .25 
cm) and length (L) is 120 mm (L = 12.0 cm), V = L*pi*r**2)


Using this formula, the calculated pressure for the above Parkhomov parameters 
becomes 4258 psi.  This is calculated using the actual volume of 

2.3562 ml and assuming the solid charge takes up zero volume.

This form should be useful for quickly calculating maximum theoretical 
pressures in Parkhomov-type Experiments.

Mark Jurich

[Vo]:How vortexes become massive.

[Axil Axil]

http://arxiv.org/pdf/1404.5685v2.pdf

*Quantum Mass Acquisition in Spinor Bose-Einstein Condensate(BEC)*

*It seems that excited spin 2 spinor quasi-particles (dark mode polaritons)
become massive do to quantum fluctuations in their energy state when these
vortexes are in an excited state within a BEC. This peculiar type of
particles are called quasi-Nambu-Goldstone (qNG) bosons, which are gapless
exciations that do not originate from spontaneous symmetry breaking. The
qNG bosons have been a vital ingredient in high-energy physics. They behave
like Goldstone bosons at the zerothorder but acquire energy gaps due to
higher-order cor- rections. We can see these particles now inside a LENR
reactor.*

*If you can digest math that can kill an elephant, the above reference lays
it all out root and branch. A Noble prize is to be had here that explains
how LENR produced by polaritons in a interstellar dusty plasma BEC gas can
produce the huge masses seen in dark matter that can hold galaxies
together. Good luck and good theorizing. *