Re: [Vo]:Seeing the Light
The LockTherm testing is certainly interesting, but it is not clear to me that it has any advantage over Parkhomov. I have seen no additional videos, nor have I heard that they achieved excess heat. An interesting phase of this whole Parkhomov/Rossi fuel is what is happening in the 700-1100ºC range. By 700ºC, both aluminum and LiH are melted. LiH is an ionic hydride with the hydrogen as an H- anion. At temps of 900-1000ºC, the LiH is reported to dissociate. However, high ambient H2 pressure may keep the LiH from dissociating until higher temperatures. I think the high temperature molten LiH + Al in contact with the Ni is a very interesting place to find LENR. However, in the LockTherm case with only 5 bar of H2, the lower pressure may allow the dissociation of the LiH in the 900ºC range, and the opportunity for LENR may not exist until the temp reaches 700ºC where the LiH and AL have melted. This would perhaps leave a lesser, narrower temp range where LENR could occur with their use of only 5 bar of H2 pressure. On Mon, Mar 9, 2015 at 8:30 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: Interesting note from Quantum Heat/Hunt/MFMP/. Quote: LockTherm LLC representatives did not say if they had seen excess heat in these tests… they demonstrated a video where, with 5 atmospheres of pressure put into a used tube, they could see light… Does anyone have a citation for that video or is it this one which turned up on YT? *https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6e1dhVnWupY* https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6e1dhVnWupY There seems to be a direct link between light emission (incandescence) and thermal gain. This seems to indicated that SPP are the operative mechanism. BTW – it looks now like “LockTherm LLC” is a major player in the race to understand this phenomenon. Jones
Re: [Vo]:Seeing the Light
Well, this could be true, but we have no evidence that it was an advantage since there has been no report of XH from LockTherm. Better to compare experiments that show XH, and that is a really small group. It would be interesting to have an SEM of their heated pill. Since they appear to be a company, they may have no interest in sharing. Of course, MFMP can always replicate that - it is simple to do. On Mon, Mar 9, 2015 at 10:59 AM, Roarty, Francis X francis.x.roa...@lmco.com wrote: Bob, One advantage not mentioned was on geometry, nature opposes construction of Casimir geometry in bulk powders and skeletal cats… this method is far easier than leaching aluminum out of a nickel alloy or counting on stiction forces to maintain the powder in bulk form .. It should increase the catalytic properties of the powders by packing the individual grains closer together and making the geometry between grains smaller. IMHO a more robust dynamic tapestry of smaller geometries is better than loosely packed larger geometries. Regards Fran *From:* Bob Higgins [mailto:rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com] *Sent:* Monday, March 09, 2015 12:34 PM *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com *Subject:* EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Seeing the Light The LockTherm testing is certainly interesting, but it is not clear to me that it has any advantage over Parkhomov. I have seen no additional videos, nor have I heard that they achieved excess heat. An interesting phase of this whole Parkhomov/Rossi fuel is what is happening in the 700-1100ºC range. By 700ºC, both aluminum and LiH are melted. LiH is an ionic hydride with the hydrogen as an H- anion. At temps of 900-1000ºC, the LiH is reported to dissociate. However, high ambient H2 pressure may keep the LiH from dissociating until higher temperatures. I think the high temperature molten LiH + Al in contact with the Ni is a very interesting place to find LENR. However, in the LockTherm case with only 5 bar of H2, the lower pressure may allow the dissociation of the LiH in the 900ºC range, and the opportunity for LENR may not exist until the temp reaches 700ºC where the LiH and AL have melted. This would perhaps leave a lesser, narrower temp range where LENR could occur with their use of only 5 bar of H2 pressure.
Re: [Vo]:Seeing the Light
Bob, One advantage not mentioned was on geometry, nature opposes construction of Casimir geometry in bulk powders and skeletal cats… this method is far easier than leaching aluminum out of a nickel alloy or counting on stiction forces to maintain the powder in bulk form .. It should increase the catalytic properties of the powders by packing the individual grains closer together and making the geometry between grains smaller. IMHO a more robust dynamic tapestry of smaller geometries is better than loosely packed larger geometries. Regards Fran From: Bob Higgins [mailto:rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, March 09, 2015 12:34 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Seeing the Light The LockTherm testing is certainly interesting, but it is not clear to me that it has any advantage over Parkhomov. I have seen no additional videos, nor have I heard that they achieved excess heat. An interesting phase of this whole Parkhomov/Rossi fuel is what is happening in the 700-1100ºC range. By 700ºC, both aluminum and LiH are melted. LiH is an ionic hydride with the hydrogen as an H- anion. At temps of 900-1000ºC, the LiH is reported to dissociate. However, high ambient H2 pressure may keep the LiH from dissociating until higher temperatures. I think the high temperature molten LiH + Al in contact with the Ni is a very interesting place to find LENR. However, in the LockTherm case with only 5 bar of H2, the lower pressure may allow the dissociation of the LiH in the 900ºC range, and the opportunity for LENR may not exist until the temp reaches 700ºC where the LiH and AL have melted. This would perhaps leave a lesser, narrower temp range where LENR could occur with their use of only 5 bar of H2 pressure. On Mon, Mar 9, 2015 at 8:30 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.netmailto:jone...@pacbell.net wrote: Interesting note from Quantum Heat/Hunt/MFMP/. Quote: LockTherm LLC representatives did not say if they had seen excess heat in these tests… they demonstrated a video where, with 5 atmospheres of pressure put into a used tube, they could see light… Does anyone have a citation for that video or is it this one which turned up on YT? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6e1dhVnWupY There seems to be a direct link between light emission (incandescence) and thermal gain. This seems to indicated that SPP are the operative mechanism. BTW – it looks now like “LockTherm LLC” is a major player in the race to understand this phenomenon. Jones
RE: [Vo]:Seeing the Light
From: Bob Higgins * * The LockTherm testing is certainly interesting, but it is not clear to me that it has any advantage over Parkhomov. Well, the one HUGE advantage is that they are able to seal the ceramic with a compression fitting and are therefore able to both relieve excess pressure or add hydrogen from a tank. This practical advance should reduce the “bone yard” of broken cells… Every broken cell in that pile represents 30-40 man-hours of lost time – not to mention the out-of-pocket expense. Jones
Re: [Vo]:Seeing the Light
Yes, this is an advantage, and it is one that MFMP has already demonstrated. I guess I should have said that it has no clear advantage over MFMP. My experiments going forward should allow the pressure to be measured in the small Parkhomov-size volume, do the experiment in a non-boiling calorimeter, capture radiations during the experiment, capture the gas after the experiment, and be able to analyze the solid ash after the experiment. All of this will be done at Parkhomov-like pressures (up to 5000 PSI) and temperatures to over 1100C. Most of Parkhomov's reactor fabrication hours are spent sealing the tubes. LockTherm is only using fused quartz tubes. This won't allow them to work at the Parkhomov pressures. And, we have no reports of excess heat from them. On Mon, Mar 9, 2015 at 11:14 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: *From:* Bob Higgins Ø Ø The LockTherm testing is certainly interesting, but it is not clear to me that it has any advantage over Parkhomov. Well, the one HUGE advantage is that they are able to seal the ceramic with a compression fitting and are therefore able to both relieve excess pressure or add hydrogen from a tank. This practical advance should reduce the “bone yard” of broken cells… Every broken cell in that pile represents 30-40 man-hours of lost time – not to mention the out-of-pocket expense. Jones
Re: [Vo]:Seeing the Light
Way don't you use a tungsten pipe. It holds hydrogen about a thousand time better than stainless steel and it would explode if it is thick enough. On Mon, Mar 9, 2015 at 2:03 PM, Bob Higgins rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com wrote: Yes, this is an advantage, and it is one that MFMP has already demonstrated. I guess I should have said that it has no clear advantage over MFMP. My experiments going forward should allow the pressure to be measured in the small Parkhomov-size volume, do the experiment in a non-boiling calorimeter, capture radiations during the experiment, capture the gas after the experiment, and be able to analyze the solid ash after the experiment. All of this will be done at Parkhomov-like pressures (up to 5000 PSI) and temperatures to over 1100C. Most of Parkhomov's reactor fabrication hours are spent sealing the tubes. LockTherm is only using fused quartz tubes. This won't allow them to work at the Parkhomov pressures. And, we have no reports of excess heat from them. On Mon, Mar 9, 2015 at 11:14 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: *From:* Bob Higgins Ø Ø The LockTherm testing is certainly interesting, but it is not clear to me that it has any advantage over Parkhomov. Well, the one HUGE advantage is that they are able to seal the ceramic with a compression fitting and are therefore able to both relieve excess pressure or add hydrogen from a tank. This practical advance should reduce the “bone yard” of broken cells… Every broken cell in that pile represents 30-40 man-hours of lost time – not to mention the out-of-pocket expense. Jones
Re: [Vo]:Seeing the Light
On Mon, Mar 9, 2015 at 9:33 AM, Bob Higgins rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com wrote: At temps of 900-1000ºC, the LiH is reported to dissociate. However, high ambient H2 pressure may keep the LiH from dissociating until higher temperatures. I think the high temperature molten LiH + Al in contact with the Ni is a very interesting place to find LENR. One question I'm interested in knowing more about is whether there is an accumulation of charge via static electricity in the case where the fuel becomes molten or part of it vaporizes. Eric
