Re: [Vo]:Wendt and Irion
I wrote: Consider, then, the following scenario: > > [- +] [- +] [- +] > [- G1 +] [- G2 +] [- G3 +] > [- +] [- +] [- +] > > > Here G1, G2 and G3 refer to grains of tungsten in the wire, and the > electrons flow from left to right. > (In labelling the diagram, I was absentmindedly thinking in terms of charge density, not electrical diagrams. In terms of an electrical diagram, the electrons would in fact flow from right to left.)
Re: [Vo]:Wendt and Irion
On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 6:40 PM, wrote: I think you need to look for a more direct route that doesn't rely on a > chain of > rare events. > Consider, then, the following scenario: [- +] [- +] [- +] [- G1 +] [- G2 +] [- G3 +] [- +] [- +] [- +] Here G1, G2 and G3 refer to grains of tungsten in the wire, and the electrons flow from left to right. Suppose there is a preferred direction for alpha emission (the positive side) and alpha capture (the negative side). Hence the distribution of emissions is not isotropic. Presumably there would be a pile-on effect, where alphas piled up on the left sides of the grains. Would this sufficiently change the odds in seeing mercury in the line spectra? Eric
Re: [Vo]:Wendt and Irion
The development of SPPs need metal nanoparticles to form from the vapor of metals produced by the exploding arc. Electrons along are not sufficient to produce the polariton solitons required for the formation of the LENR reaction. On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 1:08 PM, Eric Walker wrote: > A paper by Widom, Srivastava and Larsen [1] explores an old experiment > that was reported in 1922 by Wendt and Irion, in which the two exploded > tungsten wires by discharging a capacitor through them and afterwards saw > spectral lines for helium show up. In addition to helium, lines for > mercury and other unidentified elements were also seen. Wendt and Irion > thought that the tungsten wires had completely disintegrated into helium. > According to Widom et al., Rutherford did not think that the wires could > carry enough energy to result in nuclear reactions. Rutherford also > irradiated a tungsten target with a dilute beam of 100 keV electrons and > saw no evidence for nuclear reactions. > > A good description of the original experiment can be found here: > > http://www.levity.com/alchemy/nelson2_4.html > > I want to propose that what Wendt and Iron saw was the induced alpha decay > of the tungsten wires, rather than the complete disintegration to helium: > > e- + 180W => e- + 4He + 176Hf + 2515 keV > e- + 182W => e- + 4He + 178Hf + 1765 keV > e- + 183W => e- + 4He + 179Hf + 1673 keV > e- + 184W => e- + 4He + 180Hf + 1649 keV > e- + 186W => e- + 4He + 182Hf + 1116 keV > > The mercury might have built up through a series of reactions along the > following lines: > > 4He + 186W => 190Os - 1400 keV > 4He + 190Os => 194Pt - 1500 keV > 4He + 194Pt => 198Hg - 1400 keV > > Since these are all endothermic reactions, the only way for this to have > happened would be if the alphas had sufficient energy, which they would > have, according to the first set of reactions. > > Eric > > > [1] http://arxiv.org/pdf/0709.1222.pdf >
Re: [Vo]:Wendt and Irion
On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 6:40 PM, wrote: While theoretically possible, consider that, if you are lucky, 1 in 1 > alphas > would produce a nuclear reaction. 186W is only 28% of W. The amount of > 190Os > produced would be completely swamped by the existing W atoms. The same > story > goes for 194Pt, and even worse for 198Hg. In short I suspect you would be > lucky > to produce even a single Hg atom by this method. > Note that we also have a path to 196Hg starting at 184W, which has a 30.64 percent natural abundance, and to 194Hg (unstable) starting at 182W, which has an abundance of 26.5, the three isotopes together comprising ~ 85 percent of elemental tungsten. To get a better sense of the level of your pessimism, consider the improbable scenario where the alpha-capture cross section is temporarily 1e6 barns for the entire duration of the capacitor discharge, on the same order as the thermal neutron capture cross section for 135Xe. In this scenario, do you think the final amount of Hg would still be unmeasurable? In the link above, the mean weight of a tungsten wire in the experiment was 0.713 mg, giving: (7.13e-4 g / 183.84 g/mol) * 6.022e23 atoms/mol = 2.34e18 atoms of W, assuming pure tungsten. If you had to make a wild guess, what fraction of that amount would need to be converted to Hg, by whatever route, in order to appear in the line spectra they were looking at? Eric
Re: [Vo]:Wendt and Irion
In reply to Eric Walker's message of Fri, 18 Dec 2015 12:08:49 -0600: Hi, [snip] >The mercury might have built up through a series of reactions along the >following lines: > >4He + 186W => 190Os - 1400 keV >4He + 190Os => 194Pt - 1500 keV >4He + 194Pt => 198Hg - 1400 keV > >Since these are all endothermic reactions, the only way for this to have >happened would be if the alphas had sufficient energy, which they would have, >according to the first set of reactions. While theoretically possible, consider that, if you are lucky, 1 in 1 alphas would produce a nuclear reaction. 186W is only 28% of W. The amount of 190Os produced would be completely swamped by the existing W atoms. The same story goes for 194Pt, and even worse for 198Hg. In short I suspect you would be lucky to produce even a single Hg atom by this method. I think you need to look for a more direct route that doesn't rely on a chain of rare events. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
[Vo]:Fw: [jlnlabs] Preliminary pics from Video
Pioneering the Applications of Interphasal Resonances
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/teslafy/
On Friday, December 18, 2015 7:07 PM, "harv...@yahoo.com [jlnlabs]"
wrote:
80 volt interphasal
||
|||| 80 volt interphasal This shows a "time distortion"
test for the open loaded 666 machine, which produces an extra magnetic field
that rotates in time for a phasor effect. Some...||
| View on www.flickr.com |Preview by Yahoo|
||
https://www.flickr.com/photos/harvich/23206397184/in/dateposted-public/Open
load conditions of the 1.5 ohm 666 machine for reference of highest oscillation
value.Compressed time distortion
||
|||| Compressed time distortion Here we see the
reduction of primary currents from the 8 volt /2 Amp condition found in open
state to that of dual simultaneous secondary draws over p...||
| View on www.flickr.com |Preview by Yahoo|
||
__._,_.___ Posted by: harv...@yahoo.com
| Reply via web post | • | Reply to sender | • | Reply to group | • |
Start a New Topic | • | Messages in this topic (1) |
Messages archives at :
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/jlnlabs/
To unsubscribe, send a blank email to jlnlabs-unsubscr...@egroups.com
JLN Labs web site at: http://www.jlnlabs.org/ Visit Your Group
• Privacy • Unsubscribe • Terms of Use
.
__,_._,___#yiv2925779222 #yiv2925779222 -- #yiv2925779222ygrp-mkp {border:1px
solid #d8d8d8;font-family:Arial;margin:10px 0;padding:0 10px;}#yiv2925779222
#yiv2925779222ygrp-mkp hr {border:1px solid #d8d8d8;}#yiv2925779222
#yiv2925779222ygrp-mkp #yiv2925779222hd
{color:#628c2a;font-size:85%;font-weight:700;line-height:122%;margin:10px
0;}#yiv2925779222 #yiv2925779222ygrp-mkp #yiv2925779222ads
{margin-bottom:10px;}#yiv2925779222 #yiv2925779222ygrp-mkp .yiv2925779222ad
{padding:0 0;}#yiv2925779222 #yiv2925779222ygrp-mkp .yiv2925779222ad p
{margin:0;}#yiv2925779222 #yiv2925779222ygrp-mkp .yiv2925779222ad a
{color:#ff;text-decoration:none;}#yiv2925779222 #yiv2925779222ygrp-sponsor
#yiv2925779222ygrp-lc {font-family:Arial;}#yiv2925779222
#yiv2925779222ygrp-sponsor #yiv2925779222ygrp-lc #yiv2925779222hd {margin:10px
0px;font-weight:700;font-size:78%;line-height:122%;}#yiv2925779222
#yiv2925779222ygrp-sponsor #yiv2925779222ygrp-lc .yiv2925779222ad
{margin-bottom:10px;padding:0 0;}#yiv2925779222 #yiv2925779222actions
{font-family:Verdana;font-size:11px;padding:10px 0;}#yiv2925779222
#yiv2925779222activity
{background-color:#e0ecee;float:left;font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;padding:10px;}#yiv2925779222
#yiv2925779222activity span {font-weight:700;}#yiv2925779222
#yiv2925779222activity span:first-child
{text-transform:uppercase;}#yiv2925779222 #yiv2925779222activity span a
{color:#5085b6;text-decoration:none;}#yiv2925779222 #yiv2925779222activity span
span {color:#ff7900;}#yiv2925779222 #yiv2925779222activity span
.yiv2925779222underline {text-decoration:underline;}#yiv2925779222
.yiv2925779222attach
{clear:both;display:table;font-family:Arial;font-size:12px;padding:10px
0;width:400px;}#yiv2925779222 .yiv2925779222attach div a
{text-decoration:none;}#yiv2925779222 .yiv2925779222attach img
{border:none;padding-right:5px;}#yiv2925779222 .yiv2925779222attach label
{display:block;margin-bottom:5px;}#yiv2925779222 .yiv2925779222attach label a
{text-decoration:none;}#yiv2925779222 blockquote {margin:0 0 0
4px;}#yiv2925779222 .yiv2925779222bold
{font-family:Arial;font-size:13px;font-weight:700;}#yiv2925779222
.yiv2925779222bold a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv2925779222 dd.yiv2925779222last
p a {font-family:Verdana;font-weight:700;}#yiv2925779222 dd.yiv2925779222last p
span {margin-right:10px;font-family:Verdana;font-weight:700;}#yiv2925779222
dd.yiv2925779222last p span.yiv2925779222yshortcuts
{margin-right:0;}#yiv2925779222 div.yiv2925779222attach-table div div a
{text-decoration:none;}#yiv2925779222 div.yiv2925779222attach-table
{width:400px;}#yiv2925779222 div.yiv2925779222file-title a, #yiv2925779222
div.yiv2925779222file-title a:active, #yiv2925779222
div.yiv2925779222file-title a:hover, #yiv2925779222 div.yiv2925779222file-title
a:visited {text-decoration:none;}#yiv2925779222 div.yiv2925779222photo-title a,
#yiv2925779222 div.yiv2925779222photo-title a:active, #yiv2925779222
div.yiv2925779222photo-title a:hover, #yiv2925779222
div.yiv2925779222photo-title a:visited {text-decoration:none;}#yiv2925779222
div#yiv2925779222ygrp-mlmsg #yiv2925779222ygrp-msg p a
span.yiv2925779222yshortcuts
{font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;font-weight:normal;}#yiv2925779222
.yiv2925779222green {color:#628c2a;}#yiv2925779222 .yiv2925779222MsoNormal
{margin:0 0 0 0;}#yiv2925779222 o {font-size:0;}#yiv2925779222
#yiv2925779222photos div {float:left;width:72px;}#yiv2925779222
#yiv2925779222photos div div {border:1px solid
#66;height:62px;overflow:hidden;w
[Vo]:Fw: [teslafy] Re: Six Voltage Meter Triangulation Tests for Time Distortion
Pioneering the Applications of Interphasal Resonances
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/teslafy/
On Friday, December 18, 2015 6:50 PM, "harv...@yahoo.com [teslafy]"
wrote:
Pete said to Repeat/ I can't see the flicker URL's in the mailing;A
capture For reference from the video we first note several snapshots from the
video; here first showing the 8 volt input and q factors.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/harvich/23808367126/in/dateposted-public/ Now we
show the 6 voltage meter extrapolation during open loadings of the primary
system https://www.flickr.com/photos/harvich/23206397184/in/dateposted-public/
And to verify the 20% time compression with primary currents we have
https://www.flickr.com/photos/harvich/23752164941/in/dateposted-public/
showing time distortion under secondary loadings at 8:24
__._,_.___ Posted by: harv...@yahoo.com
| Reply via web post | • | Reply to sender | • | Reply to group | • |
Start a New Topic | • | Messages in this topic (2) |
Visit Your Group
- New Members 1
• Privacy • Unsubscribe • Terms of Use
.
__,_._,___#yiv0810469577 #yiv0810469577 -- #yiv0810469577ygrp-mkp {border:1px
solid #d8d8d8;font-family:Arial;margin:10px 0;padding:0 10px;}#yiv0810469577
#yiv0810469577ygrp-mkp hr {border:1px solid #d8d8d8;}#yiv0810469577
#yiv0810469577ygrp-mkp #yiv0810469577hd
{color:#628c2a;font-size:85%;font-weight:700;line-height:122%;margin:10px
0;}#yiv0810469577 #yiv0810469577ygrp-mkp #yiv0810469577ads
{margin-bottom:10px;}#yiv0810469577 #yiv0810469577ygrp-mkp .yiv0810469577ad
{padding:0 0;}#yiv0810469577 #yiv0810469577ygrp-mkp .yiv0810469577ad p
{margin:0;}#yiv0810469577 #yiv0810469577ygrp-mkp .yiv0810469577ad a
{color:#ff;text-decoration:none;}#yiv0810469577 #yiv0810469577ygrp-sponsor
#yiv0810469577ygrp-lc {font-family:Arial;}#yiv0810469577
#yiv0810469577ygrp-sponsor #yiv0810469577ygrp-lc #yiv0810469577hd {margin:10px
0px;font-weight:700;font-size:78%;line-height:122%;}#yiv0810469577
#yiv0810469577ygrp-sponsor #yiv0810469577ygrp-lc .yiv0810469577ad
{margin-bottom:10px;padding:0 0;}#yiv0810469577 #yiv0810469577actions
{font-family:Verdana;font-size:11px;padding:10px 0;}#yiv0810469577
#yiv0810469577activity
{background-color:#e0ecee;float:left;font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;padding:10px;}#yiv0810469577
#yiv0810469577activity span {font-weight:700;}#yiv0810469577
#yiv0810469577activity span:first-child
{text-transform:uppercase;}#yiv0810469577 #yiv0810469577activity span a
{color:#5085b6;text-decoration:none;}#yiv0810469577 #yiv0810469577activity span
span {color:#ff7900;}#yiv0810469577 #yiv0810469577activity span
.yiv0810469577underline {text-decoration:underline;}#yiv0810469577
.yiv0810469577attach
{clear:both;display:table;font-family:Arial;font-size:12px;padding:10px
0;width:400px;}#yiv0810469577 .yiv0810469577attach div a
{text-decoration:none;}#yiv0810469577 .yiv0810469577attach img
{border:none;padding-right:5px;}#yiv0810469577 .yiv0810469577attach label
{display:block;margin-bottom:5px;}#yiv0810469577 .yiv0810469577attach label a
{text-decoration:none;}#yiv0810469577 blockquote {margin:0 0 0
4px;}#yiv0810469577 .yiv0810469577bold
{font-family:Arial;font-size:13px;font-weight:700;}#yiv0810469577
.yiv0810469577bold a {text-decoration:none;}#yiv0810469577 dd.yiv0810469577last
p a {font-family:Verdana;font-weight:700;}#yiv0810469577 dd.yiv0810469577last p
span {margin-right:10px;font-family:Verdana;font-weight:700;}#yiv0810469577
dd.yiv0810469577last p span.yiv0810469577yshortcuts
{margin-right:0;}#yiv0810469577 div.yiv0810469577attach-table div div a
{text-decoration:none;}#yiv0810469577 div.yiv0810469577attach-table
{width:400px;}#yiv0810469577 div.yiv0810469577file-title a, #yiv0810469577
div.yiv0810469577file-title a:active, #yiv0810469577
div.yiv0810469577file-title a:hover, #yiv0810469577 div.yiv0810469577file-title
a:visited {text-decoration:none;}#yiv0810469577 div.yiv0810469577photo-title a,
#yiv0810469577 div.yiv0810469577photo-title a:active, #yiv0810469577
div.yiv0810469577photo-title a:hover, #yiv0810469577
div.yiv0810469577photo-title a:visited {text-decoration:none;}#yiv0810469577
div#yiv0810469577ygrp-mlmsg #yiv0810469577ygrp-msg p a
span.yiv0810469577yshortcuts
{font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;font-weight:normal;}#yiv0810469577
.yiv0810469577green {color:#628c2a;}#yiv0810469577 .yiv0810469577MsoNormal
{margin:0 0 0 0;}#yiv0810469577 o {font-size:0;}#yiv0810469577
#yiv0810469577photos div {float:left;width:72px;}#yiv0810469577
#yiv0810469577photos div div {border:1px solid
#66;height:62px;overflow:hidden;width:62px;}#yiv0810469577
#yiv0810469577photos div label
{color:#66;font-size:10px;overflow:hidden;text-align:center;white-space:nowrap;width:64px;}#yiv0810469577
#yiv0810469577reco-category {font-size:77%;}#yiv0810469577
#yiv0810469577reco-desc {font-size:77%;}#yiv0810469577 .yiv0810469577replbq
{margin:4px;}#yiv081
Re: [Vo]:new images RAR Energia gravity motor
I thought this machine was oriented in a specific direction so as to subtract energy from the rotation of the Earth. On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 3:07 PM, Jones Beene wrote: > *From:* John Berry > > If it works.. > > And that's a big IF, I do suspect it is possible to get energy out of > asymmetric inertial transformation. > > --- > > Yes, the one explanation which has a chance… “IF” the RAR works, is asymmetric > inertia – most likely using the so-called “Casimatter,” configured as the > weights. If it works, RAR will not let anyone get near those weights- > which are disguised as solid metal blocks to hide what is inside. > > The Principle of Equivalence - inertial mass is always equal to the > gravitational mass– would presumably not apply to Casimatter. The 800 > pound block used as the main weight for the gravitational down-stroke would > effectively have something like 795 pounds of inertial resistance on the > upstroke, for instance. This why you have to super-size it. Everything > else, including the numerous design changes they have gone through, would > be smoke-and-mirrors designed to confuse copycats. > > About 5 years ago, Nick Reiter experimented with zeolites contain various > metal ions – looking for the elusive Casimatter. AFAIK, he never was sure > that he had found it unless it was with the aluminum chloride zeolite. But > he was not telling everything… Come to think of it, there were some > Brazilians on that forum who showed a keen interest in the experiments J > >
RE: [Vo]:new images RAR Energia gravity motor
From: John Berry If it works.. And that's a big IF, I do suspect it is possible to get energy out of asymmetric inertial transformation. --- Yes, the one explanation which has a chance… “IF” the RAR works, is asymmetric inertia – most likely using the so-called “Casimatter,” configured as the weights. If it works, RAR will not let anyone get near those weights- which are disguised as solid metal blocks to hide what is inside. The Principle of Equivalence - inertial mass is always equal to the gravitational mass– would presumably not apply to Casimatter. The 800 pound block used as the main weight for the gravitational down-stroke would effectively have something like 795 pounds of inertial resistance on the upstroke, for instance. This why you have to super-size it. Everything else, including the numerous design changes they have gone through, would be smoke-and-mirrors designed to confuse copycats. About 5 years ago, Nick Reiter experimented with zeolites contain various metal ions – looking for the elusive Casimatter. AFAIK, he never was sure that he had found it unless it was with the aluminum chloride zeolite. But he was not telling everything… Come to think of it, there were some Brazilians on that forum who showed a keen interest in the experiments :-)
Re: [Vo]:Residential energy costs that could be offset with cold fusion
Maybe microgrid is something exaggerated . Most device today are quite intelligent and a processor to manage my vision of microgrid cost <1$ A home microgrid for me is just : - a CHP which produce AC at a voltage which get lower when nearly overloaded (some do that naturally being dumb) - devices with a low cost processor which manage a dimmer (my fridge use a dimmer to control cooling power, my hoover too), and which detect when the generator is in panic mode, deciding to move to moderated consumption (there is something to do to avoid that oscillating, but that is not hard)... it will be easy for kettle, oven, iron, car charger, to react that way... in a way the smart grid I imagine use component not smarter than a NiMH charger, and no real communication except voltage (that is a smartgrid technology with a name , I've forgotten). Your argument that people will not bother to be smart is good... but maybe not because it is expensive anyway, even if only the turbine and the cooling elements... It think that like for hard disk people will pull the line as far as possible, and some smartness will be like using zipped disk... required when you exaggerated and are lazy to update... anyway maybe you are right that probably some company will sell LENr as a service at home, like cloud disk, but without the grid.. just like "rent-a new-car" service. Whether people will be smart or will waste a little is an interesting debate. I think like an EU engineer who "survived" 1974 crisis (there was huge anti waste campaign) , and this is not standard. 2015-12-18 16:21 GMT+01:00 Jed Rothwell : > Alain Sepeda wrote: > > >> home energy is not so hard to manage with the following configuration : >> >> - an LENR CHP/trigen that warm/cool the house, >> - a configuration that allows to waste heat if electricity is required >> - a nano/microgrid with simple smartgrid control (why not voltage >> controlled) cooperating with devices >> - smart consumer devices who communicate with the smartgrid to save >> energy, slow heating, stop/slow washing program, when peak power is reached >> > > That would be a reasonable approach with solar panels but it is too > complicated and too expensive for cold fusion. > > > >> today you pay mostly energy, but with LENr you will pay peak power >> capacity... This will change product engineering. >> > > Yes, but the increased cost for higher peak capacity is trivial compared > to the cost of implementing things like a nano/microgrid. I say this based > on incremental increase cost for additional standby power generation. Look > at the retail incremental costs for one manufacturer, Generac, with natural > gas (NG): > > 6 kW, $1700 > 16 kW, $3,400 > 22 kW, $4,300 > > > http://www.lowes.com/Electrical/Generators/Home-Standby-Generators/_/N-1z0x2n8/pl# > ! > > The high end is 3.7 times more powerful for only 1.6 times more money. The > actual cost difference is only $1,600. The equipment is not much larger: > > 6 kW, 36" x 27", 360 lb > 22 kW, 48" x 25", 476 lb > > There is no way you can justify the cost of implementing a nano/microgrid > or smart consumer devices when you can solve the problem completely by > spending an extra $1,600 on a generator that takes up 12 inches more space. > > Whatever a cold fusion generator ends up costing, the incremental cost in > percentage terms should be similar to the incremental costs for standby > generators, because the electric generator and the interface to the house > wiring is the same. For the 6 kW unit you need a cold fusion cell that > produces 24 kW raw heat, and for the 22 kW unit you need a cell that > produces 88 kW. That should not be much bigger or more expensive. Assuming > the device is an Ni-H reactor the additional material cost will be trivial, > and the actual incremental cost will be similar to today's standby > generators. > > Suppose you normally need 9 kW at most. You could buy a 16 kW unit and > have plenty of capacity to spare. But suppose you are thinking of taking up > welding steel garden statues as hobby. You might need an extra 9.6 kW, 19 > kW total. (Welding takes more electricity than any other home hobby I can > think of!) It would make sense to just buy 22 kW unit. Spend an extra $900, > and you never need to think about it again. > > Remember, you are saving $162 to $396 per month. Why worry about an extra > $900? Most people will end up buy much more capacity than they need. This > is similar to the way we buy computer equipment these days. Everyone buys a > 1 TB disc even if you only going to use 0.3 TB. I have a large APC battery > backup system that will last for 39 minutes in the event of a power > failure, even though the power seldom fails for more than a few minutes. It > costs $138. I could have gotten a smaller model for $100 to $129, but they > would only last ~10 minutes. Why bother? > > > (The APC unit tells you on the control panel how long it will last in a > power failure. Mine says "39 minutes" as of rig
Re: [Vo]:new images RAR Energia gravity motor
If it works.. And that's a big IF, I do suspect it is possible to get energy out of asymmetric inertial transformation. There is quite a bit of strong evidence that motion rectifiers do work (dean drive etc), and this is the other side of the same coil, that the acceleration profile with which something is accelerated can lead to a decoupling of inertia so to speak. So maybe if something is lifted slowly, but falls quickly. The EM drive might be just a photonic version of a dean drive, but the RAR engine might be playing with the asymmetry in a slightly different way. Asymmetry is how you mess with matter's coupling to the aether, how you stop the mathematical predicted results that conserve energy and momentum. John On Sat, Dec 19, 2015 at 5:01 AM, MJ wrote: > > Last year RAR stated they have a working small model before designing > the big ones. > > Mark Jordan > > > > On 18-Dec-15 13:24, a.ashfield wrote: > >> Jones, >> "Hmmm... anyone got a clue about what the small gadget is - which is >> mounted to the bottom rail, just to the right of the main weight - and is >> moved slightly one every revolution by an elbow of one of the cranks?" >> >> I'm guessing that it is intended to capture the momentum somehow. Just >> how is not clear. >> >> What is intriguing is that someone bright enough to have accumulated >> enough money to make these two gigantic machines, would not have the sense >> to try it on a small model first and then build just one machine not two, >> without being very confident that it worked. >> >> RAREnergia wrote that it did work. >> "Final pieces and weights of our motor moved by the power of gravity can >> be assembled in many positions, forming different but similar forms. We >> tested the final part, in several assembling models. The motor worked >> perfectly in all models, varying between bigger and minor power or torch >> (torque?). We choose (chose?) one of the models to conclude the assembling >> of the equipment and we posted more pictures." >> >> But if it works, why have we not seen a video of it and why not a press >> conference to show the world that what we learned at school was wrong? RAR >> must know if it works. I was expecting no further news indefinitely so >> that they are back is a surprise. >> >> >> >
[Vo]:Renzo Mondaini electrolysis video
Renzo Mondaini has put together an interesting video that shows some of the things that can happen during electrolysis (courtesy of Peter's blog [1]): http://www.eurvi.com/cold-fusion-reactions-by-renzo-mondaini_a25eaf7dc.html Things do not get interesting until around minute 3:00. Mondaini presumes that a lot of what is happening in the video is connected to cold fusion somehow; one can be very skeptical of the experimental basis of his conclusions and still benefit from the concrete picture the video gives of the kinds of things that go on in electrolysis. At higher voltages, it is a very active, fulminating process. Eric [1] http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2015/12/dec-18-2015-just-lenr-info.html
Re: [Vo]:Parkhomov replication by Jeff Morriss
There was evidence of small excess heat in Alan Goldwater's GS5 experiment and the excess heat had just began an upward ramp at the time the experiment was shut off. One of the problems that Alan has is not being able to run the experiment unattended/automated. It needs a longer run time. Another problem being addressed is that Alan's seals are much better than Parkhomov's (AP's last were epoxy). As I mentioned previously, Parkhomov's reactors leaked. In the last one that he reported that produced XH, analysis of his data showed that his reactor began to leak at low temperature and limited the pressure to 5 bar at peak and then it continued to leak until it was near 0 bar absolute at 800C. AP has even mentioned that he times his heating until the pressure has gone down to prevent it from bursting. Primarily this means that he gives it time to leak out a lot. In the active region of AP's experiment, the pressure actually went to below atmospheric (probably due to absorbtion by the LiH). In Alan's GS5, he burped out the pressure a couple of times (needle valve) to limit the pressure to about 100 PSIG, and while the pressure did go up and down some with heating, in the high temperature range Alan still had over 5 bar of H2. So, in these better-than-Parkhomov replications, I think we are repeatedly missing key important elements. But we will get there. I am designing an automate-able USB controlled leak that will be used to replicate AP's pressure profile going forward. I will interface it with the rest of my automation code in Labview. MFMP has a good relationship with Parkhomov and we actually have some of AP's own nickel powder and some of his LiAlH4. He answers questions to Bob Greenyer frequently. Regarding the dense hydrogen and the use of an F-T catalyst ... I suspect this is of primary importance in the low temperature eCat. Clearly it was not part of AP's fuel and should not be necessary to replicate his work. The Fe rich particles in the Lugano hotCat were certainly not fine particles like Alan used (crushed). On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 10:17 AM, Jones Beene wrote: > It is clear that there is no scientific, reproducible evidence that either > Rossi or Parkhomov demonstrated substantial excess heat, and that Morriss’s > work is higher quality than either and his null result is troubling. > Together with null or inconclusive results from Jack Cole, Brian Ahern, > MFMP, Alan Goldwater, Ed Storms (?) and several others – the entire > “glow-tube” subfield is going sideways and needs a boost… or better yet - > redirection away from Rossi. > > > > Despite the pessimism implied in the above assessment – there are still > valid reasons to think that someone will discover the right combination of > factors which works at the hundred watt level “on demand”. The most obvious > issue with Morriss’s null result is that he used hydrogen gas admitted from > outside the systems instead of LAH4. The mechanics of hydrogen transfer > from LAH4 is complicated, and may involve “hydrogen densification” as a > side effect, which takes place on at least of a small portion of the > hydrogen, when done properly. > > > > I have been holding out hope that evidence would be forthcoming to show > that “dense hydrogen cluster” formation was the key to success. Alan > Goldwater’s lack of success with the iron oxide catalyst of Holmlid seems > to cast doubt on that explanation. However, AG used only a tenth-gram and > did not allow a long aging period for build-up of a population of dense > clusters… so it cannot be said that that he negated the underlying premise. > > > > As always, there is little agreement on which details are important, and > which are not. Apparently the “dense hydrogen” approach is not appreciated > by all. > > > > *From:* Jed Rothwell > > > > See the slides here: > > > > > http://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/index.php/Attachment/470-E-cat-cell-to-post-pdf/?s=f386c23c9028da91b72c24b95d920d4381f273fc > > > > These are nice slides describing what looks like solid, well-made > equipment. > > > > Conclusion, p. 15: > > > > "Lack of excess energy, despite close adherence to Parkhomov protocol > indicates that key information is missing > > > > * Assume that both Rossi, and Parkhomov did generate COP >>1 . . . > > > > That seems like an unfounded assumption. I would say an equally likely > conclusion is that Parkhomov did not get excess heat and the results are a > mistake. I do not think the Lugano experiment produced any excess heat. It > is difficult to judge from the report. > > > > - Jed > > >
[Vo]:Wendt and Irion
A paper by Widom, Srivastava and Larsen [1] explores an old experiment that was reported in 1922 by Wendt and Irion, in which the two exploded tungsten wires by discharging a capacitor through them and afterwards saw spectral lines for helium show up. In addition to helium, lines for mercury and other unidentified elements were also seen. Wendt and Irion thought that the tungsten wires had completely disintegrated into helium. According to Widom et al., Rutherford did not think that the wires could carry enough energy to result in nuclear reactions. Rutherford also irradiated a tungsten target with a dilute beam of 100 keV electrons and saw no evidence for nuclear reactions. A good description of the original experiment can be found here: http://www.levity.com/alchemy/nelson2_4.html I want to propose that what Wendt and Iron saw was the induced alpha decay of the tungsten wires, rather than the complete disintegration to helium: e- + 180W => e- + 4He + 176Hf + 2515 keV e- + 182W => e- + 4He + 178Hf + 1765 keV e- + 183W => e- + 4He + 179Hf + 1673 keV e- + 184W => e- + 4He + 180Hf + 1649 keV e- + 186W => e- + 4He + 182Hf + 1116 keV The mercury might have built up through a series of reactions along the following lines: 4He + 186W => 190Os - 1400 keV 4He + 190Os => 194Pt - 1500 keV 4He + 194Pt => 198Hg - 1400 keV Since these are all endothermic reactions, the only way for this to have happened would be if the alphas had sufficient energy, which they would have, according to the first set of reactions. Eric [1] http://arxiv.org/pdf/0709.1222.pdf
RE: [Vo]:Parkhomov replication by Jeff Morriss
It is clear that there is no scientific, reproducible evidence that either Rossi or Parkhomov demonstrated substantial excess heat, and that Morriss’s work is higher quality than either and his null result is troubling. Together with null or inconclusive results from Jack Cole, Brian Ahern, MFMP, Alan Goldwater, Ed Storms (?) and several others – the entire “glow-tube” subfield is going sideways and needs a boost… or better yet - redirection away from Rossi. Despite the pessimism implied in the above assessment – there are still valid reasons to think that someone will discover the right combination of factors which works at the hundred watt level “on demand”. The most obvious issue with Morriss’s null result is that he used hydrogen gas admitted from outside the systems instead of LAH4. The mechanics of hydrogen transfer from LAH4 is complicated, and may involve “hydrogen densification” as a side effect, which takes place on at least of a small portion of the hydrogen, when done properly. I have been holding out hope that evidence would be forthcoming to show that “dense hydrogen cluster” formation was the key to success. Alan Goldwater’s lack of success with the iron oxide catalyst of Holmlid seems to cast doubt on that explanation. However, AG used only a tenth-gram and did not allow a long aging period for build-up of a population of dense clusters… so it cannot be said that that he negated the underlying premise. As always, there is little agreement on which details are important, and which are not. Apparently the “dense hydrogen” approach is not appreciated by all. From: Jed Rothwell See the slides here: http://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/index.php/Attachment/470-E-cat-cell-to-post-pdf/?s=f386c23c9028da91b72c24b95d920d4381f273fc These are nice slides describing what looks like solid, well-made equipment. Conclusion, p. 15: "Lack of excess energy, despite close adherence to Parkhomov protocol indicates that key information is missing * Assume that both Rossi, and Parkhomov did generate COP >>1 . . . That seems like an unfounded assumption. I would say an equally likely conclusion is that Parkhomov did not get excess heat and the results are a mistake. I do not think the Lugano experiment produced any excess heat. It is difficult to judge from the report. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Parkhomov replication by Jeff Morriss
On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 10:10 AM, Bob Higgins wrote: It appears that Parkhomov's seals began leaking at the peak pressure of > about 5 bar and continued to leak from there on. > Ingredients in the sealing compound itself might be important. There are many unknowns. It would be nice to see Parkhomov collaborate with MFMP, Michael McKubre or David Kidwell to replicate his own results. A minimum of changes should be made to the setup to lest something be done that gets rid of an important but unknown variable. Eric
Re: [Vo]:Parkhomov replication by Jeff Morriss
I have read Jeff Morriss' presentation about his experiment. It is very nicely constructed, but there are several important misses in replication of Parkhomov. One is the lack of using LiAlH4 which dissociates eventually into a liquid LiH film on the surface of the Ni which was long since stripped of its oxide by heating in high temperature H2. LiH is an ionic hydride with the hydrogen being in the form of hydrogen anions (which Piantelli implicates in his Ni-H reaction). Another difference we (MFMP) observed is that Parkhomov's reactors leaked. By the time these were at excess heat producing temperatures (>900C), the hydrogen pressure was a partial vacuum in the 0.25-0.5 bar absolute range. It appears that Parkhomov's seals began leaking at the peak pressure of about 5 bar and continued to leak from there on. Above 800C, the LiH began re-absorbing some of the H2, drawing it into a partial vacuum. MFMP's seals have been much better and hence did not strictly replicate Parkhomov's actual protocol. Jeff may also be having trouble due to supplying H2 using a nafion based H2 generator. Nafion is also an H2O conductor and it has a dessicant dryer on the output. There will always be some H2O being supplied with the H2 in his system. I don't mean this as a criticism at all! Jeff ran a good experiment. I am just trying to point out potential issues that could be complicit in failure to replicate. I wrote a long email to Jeff about it. Bob Higgins On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 7:36 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > See the slides here: > > > http://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/index.php/Attachment/470-E-cat-cell-to-post-pdf/?s=f386c23c9028da91b72c24b95d920d4381f273fc > > These are nice slides describing what looks like solid, well-made > equipment. > > Conclusion, p. 15: > > "Lack of excess energy, despite close adherence to Parkhomov protocol > indicates that key information is missing > > * Assume that both Rossi, and Parkhomov did generate COP >>1 . . . > > > That seems like an unfounded assumption. I would say an equally likely > conclusion is that Parkhomov did not get excess heat and the results are a > mistake. I do not think the Lugano experiment produced any excess heat. It > is difficult to judge from the report. > > - Jed > >
Re: [Vo]:new images RAR Energia gravity motor
Last year RAR stated they have a working small model before designing the big ones. Mark Jordan On 18-Dec-15 13:24, a.ashfield wrote: Jones, "Hmmm... anyone got a clue about what the small gadget is - which is mounted to the bottom rail, just to the right of the main weight - and is moved slightly one every revolution by an elbow of one of the cranks?" I'm guessing that it is intended to capture the momentum somehow. Just how is not clear. What is intriguing is that someone bright enough to have accumulated enough money to make these two gigantic machines, would not have the sense to try it on a small model first and then build just one machine not two, without being very confident that it worked. RAREnergia wrote that it did work. "Final pieces and weights of our motor moved by the power of gravity can be assembled in many positions, forming different but similar forms. We tested the final part, in several assembling models. The motor worked perfectly in all models, varying between bigger and minor power or torch (torque?). We choose (chose?) one of the models to conclude the assembling of the equipment and we posted more pictures." But if it works, why have we not seen a video of it and why not a press conference to show the world that what we learned at school was wrong? RAR must know if it works. I was expecting no further news indefinitely so that they are back is a surprise.
RE: [Vo]:new images RAR Energia gravity motor
Jones, "Hmmm... anyone got a clue about what the small gadget is - which is mounted to the bottom rail, just to the right of the main weight - and is moved slightly one every revolution by an elbow of one of the cranks?" I'm guessing that it is intended to capture the momentum somehow. Just how is not clear. What is intriguing is that someone bright enough to have accumulated enough money to make these two gigantic machines, would not have the sense to try it on a small model first and then build just one machine not two, without being very confident that it worked. RAREnergia wrote that it did work. "Final pieces and weights of our motor moved by the power of gravity can be assembled in many positions, forming different but similar forms. We tested the final part, in several assembling models. The motor worked perfectly in all models, varying between bigger and minor power or torch (torque?). We choose (chose?) one of the models to conclude the assembling of the equipment and we posted more pictures." But if it works, why have we not seen a video of it and why not a press conference to show the world that what we learned at school was wrong? RAR must know if it works. I was expecting no further news indefinitely so that they are back is a surprise.
Re: [Vo]:Residential energy costs that could be offset with cold fusion
Alain Sepeda wrote: > home energy is not so hard to manage with the following configuration : > > - an LENR CHP/trigen that warm/cool the house, > - a configuration that allows to waste heat if electricity is required > - a nano/microgrid with simple smartgrid control (why not voltage > controlled) cooperating with devices > - smart consumer devices who communicate with the smartgrid to save > energy, slow heating, stop/slow washing program, when peak power is reached > That would be a reasonable approach with solar panels but it is too complicated and too expensive for cold fusion. > today you pay mostly energy, but with LENr you will pay peak power > capacity... This will change product engineering. > Yes, but the increased cost for higher peak capacity is trivial compared to the cost of implementing things like a nano/microgrid. I say this based on incremental increase cost for additional standby power generation. Look at the retail incremental costs for one manufacturer, Generac, with natural gas (NG): 6 kW, $1700 16 kW, $3,400 22 kW, $4,300 http://www.lowes.com/Electrical/Generators/Home-Standby-Generators/_/N-1z0x2n8/pl# ! The high end is 3.7 times more powerful for only 1.6 times more money. The actual cost difference is only $1,600. The equipment is not much larger: 6 kW, 36" x 27", 360 lb 22 kW, 48" x 25", 476 lb There is no way you can justify the cost of implementing a nano/microgrid or smart consumer devices when you can solve the problem completely by spending an extra $1,600 on a generator that takes up 12 inches more space. Whatever a cold fusion generator ends up costing, the incremental cost in percentage terms should be similar to the incremental costs for standby generators, because the electric generator and the interface to the house wiring is the same. For the 6 kW unit you need a cold fusion cell that produces 24 kW raw heat, and for the 22 kW unit you need a cell that produces 88 kW. That should not be much bigger or more expensive. Assuming the device is an Ni-H reactor the additional material cost will be trivial, and the actual incremental cost will be similar to today's standby generators. Suppose you normally need 9 kW at most. You could buy a 16 kW unit and have plenty of capacity to spare. But suppose you are thinking of taking up welding steel garden statues as hobby. You might need an extra 9.6 kW, 19 kW total. (Welding takes more electricity than any other home hobby I can think of!) It would make sense to just buy 22 kW unit. Spend an extra $900, and you never need to think about it again. Remember, you are saving $162 to $396 per month. Why worry about an extra $900? Most people will end up buy much more capacity than they need. This is similar to the way we buy computer equipment these days. Everyone buys a 1 TB disc even if you only going to use 0.3 TB. I have a large APC battery backup system that will last for 39 minutes in the event of a power failure, even though the power seldom fails for more than a few minutes. It costs $138. I could have gotten a smaller model for $100 to $129, but they would only last ~10 minutes. Why bother? (The APC unit tells you on the control panel how long it will last in a power failure. Mine says "39 minutes" as of right now.) - Jed
[Vo]:Dec 18, daily LENR info, sketch of a LENR prayer
http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2015/12/dec-18-2015-just-lenr-info.html -earlier edition; if something important comes in the next 5-6 hours I will let you know- now going to listen beautiful music and ugly news. peter - Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Let's LENR contribute to the Energy revolution, defining LENR inteligence, info
thanks my friend! peter On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 4:39 PM, Terry Blanton wrote: > Reads fine, Peter. > > Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE Smartphone > > - Reply message - > From: "Peter Gluck" > To: > Subject: [Vo]:Let's LENR contribute to the Energy revolution, defining > LENR inteligence, info > Date: Thu, Dec 17, 2015 12:42 PM > > Thinking about energy revolution > > http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2015/12/dec-17-2015-trying-to-define-lenr.html > > PS I made some change in Gmail, can you read this as usual? > > Peter > -- > Dr. Peter Gluck > Cluj, Romania > http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com > -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
[Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Let's LENR contribute to the Energy revolution, defining LENR inteligence, info
Reads fine, Peter. Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE Smartphone - Reply message - From: "Peter Gluck" To: Subject: [Vo]:Let's LENR contribute to the Energy revolution, defining LENR inteligence, info Date: Thu, Dec 17, 2015 12:42 PM Thinking about energy revolutionhttp://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2015/12/dec-17-2015-trying-to-define-lenr.html PS I made some change in Gmail, can you read this as usual? Peter -- Dr. Peter GluckCluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
[Vo]:Parkhomov replication by Jeff Morriss
See the slides here: http://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/index.php/Attachment/470-E-cat-cell-to-post-pdf/?s=f386c23c9028da91b72c24b95d920d4381f273fc These are nice slides describing what looks like solid, well-made equipment. Conclusion, p. 15: "Lack of excess energy, despite close adherence to Parkhomov protocol indicates that key information is missing * Assume that both Rossi, and Parkhomov did generate COP >>1 . . . That seems like an unfounded assumption. I would say an equally likely conclusion is that Parkhomov did not get excess heat and the results are a mistake. I do not think the Lugano experiment produced any excess heat. It is difficult to judge from the report. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Residential energy costs that could be offset with cold fusion
the power of a gas boiler/heater for a 100m2 house is not more than 25kWth in france, which allow a CHP of 2-6kWe if you accept to waste heat as generator. 6kWe is the entry power in france, much enough for people who don't heat with electricity. biggest peak consumption in house today, beside heating, is oven(s), stove, iron . average consumption today are computers,set top box,fridge (note that modern fridge use proportional controllers, not bang bang) Devices like iron, kettle, are peak 2kW but modern proportional control may reduce it below kW except at starting - and why not if local microgrid broadcast data, can they decide to warm slower. Oven consume much,from 2-3kW up to 5-7kW, but good control may reduce the peak power (today bang-bang thermostatic controllers are cheaper, but if you put the price of doubling peak power of your CHP in the balance, a proportional controller is valuable). good insulation and good design may improve the results. There is trivial system of microgrid control where the voltage is used to tell the consumers they have to reduce the power (modern devices today have a tendency unlike old resistor based devices, to compensate lower voltage by pulling more current instead of adapting by reducing current). home energy is not so hard to manage with the following configuration : - an LENR CHP/trigen that warm/cool the house, - a configuration that allows to waste heat if electricity is required - a nano/microgrid with simple smartgrid control (why not voltage controlled) cooperating with devices - smart consumer devices who communicate with the smartgrid to save energy, slow heating, stop/slow washing program, when peak power is reached - why not LENR heating elements in oven, in iron, in kettle to avoid wasting electricity to heat - cars (or powerwall) that swallow capacity that remains for charging today you pay mostly energy, but with LENr you will pay peak power capacity... This will change product engineering. 2015-12-17 22:38 GMT+01:00 Jed Rothwell : > How much money could a residential customer save with a cold fusion > generator? Assume it is a cogenerator (CHP) that also provides all space > heating. Here are the average annual costs US customers pay for electricity > and space heating: > > Electricity > > $1,369 > > http://www.eia.gov/electricity/sales_revenue_price/pdf/table5_a.pdf > > Space heating > > $578 to $1,437 > > "Average household expenditures for homes heating primarily with natural > gas will total $578 this winter, a $64 decline from last winter's average. > Homes primarily using propane are expected to spend $1,437 . . ." > > http://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.cfm?id=23232 > > Suppose the customer also uses mainly an electric car which is recharged > with the cold fusion generator. Add to that: > > Gasoline, replaced by using an electric car > > $1,962 > > http://www.eia.gov/electricity/sales_revenue_price/pdf/table5_a.pdf > > The total ranges from $1,947 to $4,768 per year, or $162 to $396 per month. > > Assume that a generator lasts for 15 years, and that maintenance costs > would be negligible. Over the 15-year life of the generator, savings range > from $29,205 to $71,295. This gives you a sense of how much a cold fusion > generator would have to cost before it begins to pay for itself. > > Of course first-generation cold fusion generators are likely to cost much > more than $71,000. They will be used for critical applications in the > military, and by the sort of wealthy people who buy Tesla automobiles > today. It will cost billions of dollars to develop these things and begin > manufacturing them, so it will take a while for the prices to fall to > commodity levels reasonably close to the cost of materials and > manufacturing. (That is, a price roughly similar to today's standby > generator.) > > As I wrote before -- > > After the technology matures, I expect cold fusion generators will cost > roughly as much as today's standby generator. In other words, a cold fusion > cell and steam turbine will cost about as much as the gas powered motor in > a standby generator. . . . You can see the range of power and the costs of > today's standby generators here: > > > http://www.lowes.com/Electrical/Generators/Home-Standby-Generators/_/N-1z0x2n8/pl# > ! > > The prices range from $2,000 up to $5,500 for a 20 kW unit. > > As I described in my book, you do not need as much electric power capacity > as we use today, because many applications will use cold fusion heat > directly. I think the average house will not need more than 20 kW. > > However, the generators shown at Lowe's are standby generators, not > standalone continuous duty ones. I have not been able to find a source of > standalone generators for remote locations. I expect they are much more > expensive than standby generators, mainly because there is not much of a > market for them, but also because they have to be more robust. I am going > to guess that a standalone units will cost
