Great find Bob! I will study it closely
From: bobcook39...@hotmail.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2018 12:52 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: RE: [Vo]:EPRI study
Brian—
This linkhttps://aca.scitation.org/doi/full/10.1063/1.4936290
concerning spin crossover in certain Fe substances may help explain the cooling
associated with the Manelas SrFeO. It describes how coherent systems can swap
spin during a phase change or some other type of change of their energy state.
Note that both cooling and heating are addressed.
Bob
From: Brian Ahern
Sent: Saturday, March 17, 2018 12:55:06 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: [Vo]:EPRI study
I was excited about pulsing the nanopowders at a range of frequencies seeking
a resonance, but my supply burned out and the funding ended.
The appearance of the Manelas device showed a resonance around 130kiloHertz
with interacting pulses around a strontium ferrite billet.
The SrFeOx billet is a soft ferromagnetic material with very high resistivity
that limits eddy currents.
I noted a cooling of the billet that was continuous for 6 days in 2012. The
billet was 5 degrees C below ambient. These measurements were rock solid as was
the 60 watts excess power production.
From: bobcook39...@hotmail.com
Sent: Saturday, March 17, 2018 3:28 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: RE: [Vo]:LENR fission
Brian—
Did the EPRI 2012 experiments include resonant stimulation of any kind once a
low level heating was observed? I am thinking about dipole and or quadrupole
electric and /or magnetic field stimulation over a range of frequencies that
could resonate with the reactants present.
I particularly consider resonant magnetic field coupling of nuclear species
and Ni lattice electronic orbital spin energy states of the nano Ni particles
may be important. A Ni alloy may offer more varied energy states and enhance
the coupling and exchange of nuclear potential for increased lattice thermal
energy associated with the entire nano particle lattice. (This would be a
many-body reaction of a QM coherent system IMHO.)
The following link addresses ultra fast reactions in certain solid state
systems of many particles, including reactions within and among molecules.
https://aca.scitation.org/doi/full/10.1063/1.4936290
Bob Cook
From: Brian Ahern
Sent: Saturday, March 17, 2018 10:24:06 AM
To: Vortex
Subject: Re: [Vo]:LENR fission
In My 2012 EPRI on gas loading Nickel nanopowders I always saw continuing
heating, but at levels below 200 milliwatts. I did not find any accelerant
property. My attempts at dielectric discharges was terminated when I burned out
the power supply and was introduced to Arthur Manelas
From: Jed Rothwell
Sent: Saturday, March 17, 2018 11:12 AM
To: Vortex
Subject: Re: [Vo]:LENR fission
JonesBeene mailto:jone...@pacbell.net>> wrote:
FAIL
Apparently this is too an issue which is either not important or too technical
for you. I looked at the few of these references and none of them mention COP
wrt thermal feedback.
As I said, that is because the COP is meaningless in cold fusion. However, as I
also said, a thermal pulse often produces heat after death, with a COP of
infinity. You can't ask for more enhancement than that!
A lack of comprehension of the value of COP as an intuitive and accurate metric
in LENR and the silly attempt to change its meaning is apparently guiding an
uncharacteristic flood of disinformation…
I do not see what is intuitive or accurate about a parameter that does not even
exist in many experiments. Input power with electrolysis affects the formation
of material, but it has nothing to do with the performance of the reaction
itself. The reaction works with no input power during heat after death or with
gas loading, so how can the ratio of input to output (the COP) be a critical
parameter? I suggest you address that question rather than insulting top
experts in this field such as Fleischmann, Storms and Miles. (They are the ones
who say this, not me. Or not just me.)
- Jed
