[Vo]:FusionCatalyst.org
Hi group, I'm excited to announce our newly formed non-profit organization to the advancement of cold fusion. We are planning an open catalyst project geared towards finding the secret catalyst needed to achieve nuclear fusion in the solid state. The plan is to use the power of the crowd to search and try the many different possibilities in a highly paralleled and fast way. By installing many many reactor-calorimeters in labs of participating scientist all over the world and by sharing all data in a structured way we envision an enormous advantage compared to the individual approach. For this purpose I designed a special reactor-calorimeter called the *Peer Pressure*, it is a simple reactor with extended data logging and autonomous Internet connectivity. Individual scientists can purchase a reactor, hook it up directly to the Internet through its TCP/IP connection, start testing materials and share results. The reactor is designed with a minimum of presumptions about the detailed working of cold fusion reactions and providing maximum versatility for the experimentalist. Please have a look at the Peer Pressure and let me know what you think of it, can you use it? Suggestions for improvement? http://www.fusioncatalyst.org/open-catalyst/peer-pressure/ Cheers, Bastiaan.
Re: [Vo]:FusionCatalyst.org
Very interesting! I suggest to add an option for a simple neutron counter. Specially good for cluster of reactors, but also for home users: you do not want them to be irradiated. mic 2011/12/20 Bastiaan Bergman bastiaan.berg...@gmail.com: Hi group, I'm excited to announce our newly formed non-profit organization to the advancement of cold fusion. We are planning an open catalyst project geared towards finding the secret catalyst needed to achieve nuclear fusion in the solid state. The plan is to use the power of the crowd to search and try the many different possibilities in a highly paralleled and fast way. By installing many many reactor-calorimeters in labs of participating scientist all over the world and by sharing all data in a structured way we envision an enormous advantage compared to the individual approach. For this purpose I designed a special reactor-calorimeter called the *Peer Pressure*, it is a simple reactor with extended data logging and autonomous Internet connectivity. Individual scientists can purchase a reactor, hook it up directly to the Internet through its TCP/IP connection, start testing materials and share results. The reactor is designed with a minimum of presumptions about the detailed working of cold fusion reactions and providing maximum versatility for the experimentalist. Please have a look at the Peer Pressure and let me know what you think of it, can you use it? Suggestions for improvement? http://www.fusioncatalyst.org/open-catalyst/peer-pressure/ Cheers, Bastiaan.
Re: [Vo]:FusionCatalyst.org
very interesting On 12/20/11, Bastiaan Bergman bastiaan.berg...@gmail.com wrote: Hi group, I'm excited to announce our newly formed non-profit organization to the advancement of cold fusion. We are planning an open catalyst project geared towards finding the secret catalyst needed to achieve nuclear fusion in the solid state. The plan is to use the power of the crowd to search and try the many different possibilities in a highly paralleled and fast way. By installing many many reactor-calorimeters in labs of participating scientist all over the world and by sharing all data in a structured way we envision an enormous advantage compared to the individual approach. For this purpose I designed a special reactor-calorimeter called the *Peer Pressure*, it is a simple reactor with extended data logging and autonomous Internet connectivity. Individual scientists can purchase a reactor, hook it up directly to the Internet through its TCP/IP connection, start testing materials and share results. The reactor is designed with a minimum of presumptions about the detailed working of cold fusion reactions and providing maximum versatility for the experimentalist. Please have a look at the Peer Pressure and let me know what you think of it, can you use it? Suggestions for improvement? http://www.fusioncatalyst.org/open-catalyst/peer-pressure/ Cheers, Bastiaan.
Re: [Vo]:FusionCatalyst.org
Potentially a good idea for a non-profit, especially if donations can drive the price down well below cost. That said, where is the calorimeter? Also, the device looks too small. This looks more like a Rossi replicator idea than a general purpose LENR investigation device. That seems a bit premature, given the publicly released evidence provided by Rossi thus far is so lacking scientifically. If Rossi has a successful venture this research might be moot, given the way multi-year billion dollar budgets that likely will quickly develop. If Rossi is not successful, this approach might be barking up the wrong tree. On Dec 19, 2011, at 11:02 PM, Bastiaan Bergman wrote: Hi group, I'm excited to announce our newly formed non-profit organization to the advancement of cold fusion. We are planning an open catalyst project geared towards finding the secret catalyst needed to achieve nuclear fusion in the solid state. The plan is to use the power of the crowd to search and try the many different possibilities in a highly paralleled and fast way. By installing many many reactor-calorimeters in labs of participating scientist all over the world and by sharing all data in a structured way we envision an enormous advantage compared to the individual approach. For this purpose I designed a special reactor-calorimeter called the *Peer Pressure*, it is a simple reactor with extended data logging and autonomous Internet connectivity. Individual scientists can purchase a reactor, hook it up directly to the Internet through its TCP/IP connection, start testing materials and share results. The reactor is designed with a minimum of presumptions about the detailed working of cold fusion reactions and providing maximum versatility for the experimentalist. Please have a look at the Peer Pressure and let me know what you think of it, can you use it? Suggestions for improvement? http://www.fusioncatalyst.org/open-catalyst/peer-pressure/ Cheers, Bastiaan. Best regards, Horace Heffner http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
Re: [Vo]:FusionCatalyst.org
Horace Heffner hheff...@mtaonline.net wrote: This looks more like a Rossi replicator idea than a general purpose LENR investigation device. That seems a bit premature, given the publicly released evidence provided by Rossi thus far is so lacking scientifically. More to the point, we do not know what Rossi's catalyst contains. I see no point to trying to replicate without the formula, or with material from somewhere else, such as Ames N. L. Materials and material preparation are the key to cold fusion. The hardest part by far. You cannot use just any Ni material. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:FusionCatalyst.org
Here is a response to this proposal by Ed Storms. he feels this project is dangerous. I share his concerns. I was going to say this, but he says it with more authority than I could. Rossi himself has often cautioned his readers that this research is dangerous. I am glad he says that. - Jed - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dear Bastiaan, We are witnessing the start of of a process that, I predict, will end in disaster. The Rossi effect is not suited to investigation by amateurs. High pressure H2 in heated containers is dangerous, finely divided nickel is poisonous, and calorimetry under such conditions is very difficult. This is not like the electrolytic method that could be studied safely by high school students. We need only one careless accident resulting in death to bring the regulators down on further research outside of an established laboratory. In addition, the number of variations in conditions and materials is so large, no hope of success is possible without considerable knowledge of materials. Even people presently doing such studies show very little knowledge about the subject. As a result, repeated failure will once again embolden the skeptics. In short, this suggestion is not the way to do science in this field and will subject many ignorant kids to considerable danger. Please withdraw this suggestion and post my comment. Ed
Re: [Vo]:FusionCatalyst.org
Cooling is optional? Gak! Storms is right with one exception -- in a geometry such as Rossi has, calorimetry is fairly easy. But not by Rossi's measurement methods.
Re: [Vo]:FusionCatalyst.org
Horace, Calorimetry is done through temperature monitorring, simple on the equipment a bit more demanding on the experimentalist and analysis. In due time we will post more details on the analysis as a help. Device looks kinda small Yes and I put a lot effort in making it even smaller. The smaller the reactor is the less material (nickel powder, catalyst, hydrogen, etc) you will use, keeping the cost for operation down. Besides it will keep temperature control easier (this is a problem in Rossi's original E-Cat, thats why he moved to the flat-cat). It further will keep the power needs low so we can get a low power, hence cheaper, power supply. Finally, it adds to the safety, as a little bit of hydrogen is less dangerous than a lot of it. Why would you want a big one? Cheers, Bastiaan On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 2:18 AM, Horace Heffner hheff...@mtaonline.net wrote: Potentially a good idea for a non-profit, especially if donations can drive the price down well below cost. That said, where is the calorimeter? Also, the device looks too small. This looks more like a Rossi replicator idea than a general purpose LENR investigation device. That seems a bit premature, given the publicly released evidence provided by Rossi thus far is so lacking scientifically. If Rossi has a successful venture this research might be moot, given the way multi-year billion dollar budgets that likely will quickly develop. If Rossi is not successful, this approach might be barking up the wrong tree. On Dec 19, 2011, at 11:02 PM, Bastiaan Bergman wrote: Hi group, I'm excited to announce our newly formed non-profit organization to the advancement of cold fusion. We are planning an open catalyst project geared towards finding the secret catalyst needed to achieve nuclear fusion in the solid state. The plan is to use the power of the crowd to search and try the many different possibilities in a highly paralleled and fast way. By installing many many reactor-calorimeters in labs of participating scientist all over the world and by sharing all data in a structured way we envision an enormous advantage compared to the individual approach. For this purpose I designed a special reactor-calorimeter called the *Peer Pressure*, it is a simple reactor with extended data logging and autonomous Internet connectivity. Individual scientists can purchase a reactor, hook it up directly to the Internet through its TCP/IP connection, start testing materials and share results. The reactor is designed with a minimum of presumptions about the detailed working of cold fusion reactions and providing maximum versatility for the experimentalist. Please have a look at the Peer Pressure and let me know what you think of it, can you use it? Suggestions for improvement? http://www.fusioncatalyst.org/open-catalyst/peer-pressure/ Cheers, Bastiaan. Best regards, Horace Heffner http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
Re: [Vo]:FusionCatalyst.org
Hey Bastiaan, How to you remove the heat? Why don't you use a liquid coolant in a jacket surrounding the cell -- like Rossi seems to do? That would accomplish reasonably accurate calorimetry for you automatically with nothing more than a flow meter, two thermometers, a known electrical power source.for calibration, and a computer/data logger. All of those are cheap and easy these days. If you don't want to complicate the system, you don't need the coolant jacket -- you can run the device in a well insulated water bath. Calibration will compensate for any losses from the bath.
Re: [Vo]:FusionCatalyst.org
Materials and material preparation are the key to cold fusion. The hardest part by far. You cannot use just any Ni material. Exactly! That is why we want to engage the crowd! Because finding exactly the right stuff may be a daunting task. Moreover, even if you think you have found the right stuff you may in fact be wrong. e.g. the Patterson case, it worked then it didn't. Now we are building a database, if something works on and off we'll keep track of it. Maybe some day, some bright scientist sees the connection while slicing and dicing the database. More to the point, we do not know what Rossi's catalyst contains. I see no point to trying to replicate without the formula, True, Rossi has the secret, he found it and Rossi is our hero (mine at least). But he is not god, what he can find, we can! And I wouldn't be surprised if there were a zillion other materials that work just as well (or better). or with material from somewhere else, such as Ames N. L. Now you're getting there! You're following on this track, someone else follows-up on another. Maybe there is a theory that seems appealing, maybe you found a dusty paper explaining something? Maybe you're inspired by processes already happening in nature, maybe you stumbeld upon a somthing you now think might be explained with,.. C ..F... And everybody tries his own thing. Some don't work, some were stupid to begin with and some are going to work. We know that. Happy mailing! Bastiaan. On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 6:06 AM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: Horace Heffner hheff...@mtaonline.net wrote: This looks more like a Rossi replicator idea than a general purpose LENR investigation device. That seems a bit premature, given the publicly released evidence provided by Rossi thus far is so lacking scientifically. More to the point, we do not know what Rossi's catalyst contains. I see no point to trying to replicate without the formula, or with material from somewhere else, such as Ames N. L. Materials and material preparation are the key to cold fusion. The hardest part by far. You cannot use just any Ni material. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:FusionCatalyst.org
Mary, I'm looking into cooling, it won't be finished for the first version though. You can't just stick the reactor in a bath as the top and bottem of the reactor have things (eg electrical wires) sticking out from them. My plan is to use a 'springy' kind of copper tube coil, that sids around the middle of the reactor. Haven't looked into 'springy' copper tube though,.. suggestions are welcome. Specific suggestions for a pump, flowmeter and water temperature sensors are welcome too. As long as we don't attain tremendous fusion power I think cooling at the air will be sufficient. Cheers, Bastiaan. On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 12:33 PM, Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote: Hey Bastiaan, How to you remove the heat? Why don't you use a liquid coolant in a jacket surrounding the cell -- like Rossi seems to do? That would accomplish reasonably accurate calorimetry for you automatically with nothing more than a flow meter, two thermometers, a known electrical power source.for calibration, and a computer/data logger. All of those are cheap and easy these days. If you don't want to complicate the system, you don't need the coolant jacket -- you can run the device in a well insulated water bath. Calibration will compensate for any losses from the bath.
Re: [Vo]:FusionCatalyst.org
On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 1:40 PM, Bastiaan Bergman bastiaan.berg...@gmail.com wrote: Mary, I'm looking into cooling, it won't be finished for the first version though. You can't just stick the reactor in a bath as the top and bottem of the reactor have things (eg electrical wires) sticking out from them. My plan is to use a 'springy' kind of copper tube coil, that sids around the middle of the reactor. Haven't looked into 'springy' copper tube though,.. suggestions are welcome. Specific suggestions for a pump, flowmeter and water temperature sensors are welcome too. As long as we don't attain tremendous fusion power I think cooling at the air will be sufficient. Cheers, Bastiaan. If you're going to air cool, you may wish to supplement your temperature measurements for calorimetry with heat flux measurements. Heat flux transducers, already calibrated, are commercially available (Google is your friend). Some are not terribly expensive. In a pinch, you can reverse a Peltier (thermoelectric junction) cooling plate in the sense that if you have a heat flux through it, it will give an output millivolt signal which is roughly linear with the heat flux. However, those are rather insensitive. But they are cheap. You can also make a Seebeck effect envelope calorimeter using the method Storms used. It's tedious but cheap. If you plan on doing that, either Jed or I can find you the instructions on line. You have to seal your top and bottom anyway and all sorts of cheap underwater electrical connectors are available commercially so the idea of the water bath is still something you may wish to consider. Bottom line: I think if you have continuous calorimetry sensor output recording of some type, you will have a better idea more easily and faster if you find something that works well. Otherwise, it's easy to fool yourself with temperature measurements on or in an uninsulated device in a changing environment. Also: if you get real fusion, use caution. Lots of it. Heating fluids and gas in a closed vessel can result in what amounts to a pipe bomb with shrapnel. Fusion, in theory, can make lots of power very fast in a very small volume from which heat can not escape well. People have been killed with in pipe experiments of various types, many times in the past. Don't make an ash out of yourself.
