Bob Higgins and Axil-- In nano Ni systems we have discussed many ideas about the nature of H(D) in such systems. This has included the potential existence of Cooper pairs of H, BEC's of these pairs, ionized hydrogen plasmas, H monatomic gas, H diatomic gas, and various forms of molecular and crystalline H in combination with other elements. The system's parameters, such as temperature, pressure, H and B magnetic fields, magnetic moments, sonic vibrations, EM resonant fields, allowable spin energy transitions, etc., all may influence the population of ionic H and its lifetime in the nano system.
If the lifetimes of the ionic H or its production from other forms of H is somehow influenced by these system parameters such that time constants for transitions of H from state to state are NOT instantaneous, then the system can be regarded as storing energy, and its release should be evaluated and accounted for with time IMHO. Jed seems to miss this point that the production of H ions may be delayed with some effective time constant in Piantelli's Ni system. Time constants such as I have suggested make the dynamics and control of the system difficult to understand, but necessary to understand, if the mechanism for the LENR is to see the light of day. For example, in common fission reactors, energy production and energy balances, including decay heat calculations, include the production of protons, their kinetic energies, and the generation of 13.6 MEV associated with the radiation they give off as they collect electrons and become a neutral H atom. This is a delayed H reaction with a time constant for the macroscopic system, considered relative to the total energy balance, and used to size decay heat cooling systems. The contribution of this mechanism to produce decay heat may be small compared to other sources, but it is still considered. Bob Cook ----- Original Message ----- From: Axil Axil To: vortex-l Sent: Monday, January 26, 2015 12:21 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:A strange and screwy claim by Piantelli This question does not involve a chemical reaction. True, no chemical reaction can ionize hydrogen. When hydrogen in the ground state is ionized to the plasma state, it requires 13 electron volts. per atom. On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 2:47 PM, Jed Rothwell <[email protected]> wrote: Bob Higgins <[email protected]> wrote: I don't know why you think it is impossible. I think so because every textbook and every expert says it is impossible, and because I am familiar with the upper limits of chemical fuel energy density. I have read a lot about both conventional and exotic chemical fuel. Energy storage in ions may be impractical for any significant energy storage, but the ionization energy is exactly as he describes. Even though it was described as energy/mole, it is no different than saying 13.6 eV/atom. I say it is impossible because there is no chemical fuel that even gets close to 13.6 eV, and certainly nothing with hydrogen. By weight, H2 + O2 is the best chemical fuel there is, or ever will be, and it produces only ~2 eV per atom. Fuels made from carbon do better per atom but are not as good per gram. Hydrocarbons make the best liquid fuel for practical purposes, when you take into account volume, weight, room temperature versus cryogenic storage and so on. Cryogenic liquid hydrogen is difficult to contain and difficult to deal with, even for NASA. An ionized atom immediately discharges and loses the energy, as does an atom heated to a high temperature. It does not store the energy. No macroscopic calorimetry could measure this effect. It would see the energy go in and come out instantaneously. There would be a balance, with no net gain. No one ever said a mole would or could be ionized in such a small apparatus. However, it is just another item in the energy balance. If it cannot be ionized in this apparatus then it is NOT just another item in the energy balance! It cannot be part of the balance, in that case. Furthermore, as I said, even if you can ionize the hydrogen, the energy balance would be zero as measured Piantell's calorimeter. Energy in = energy out. It is simply not possible to measure the effects Piantelli describes, with the instrument he shows in his papers, or the instruments other cold fusion researchers use. If he thinks such things as ionization might register with his calorimeter, and that such effects have to be ruled out before we can be sure this is not a chemical effect, then he does not know what he is doing. Perhaps there are instruments that can measure nanosecond storage of energy in a single molecule, and they could detect 13.6 eV per atom ionization. I would not know about that. That is nothing like the ordinary mascroscopic calorimeters that Piantelli uses. Trying to detect such effects with his instruments would be like trying to see the atoms on the surface of a metal with a magnifying glass instead of an STM. - Jed
