Axil— I agree with much of your assessment of the Rossi effect, what you call the Rossi reactor. I agree that there is a history of high temperature reactions, but many of these have been associated with the Pd-D system, which I consider entails a different physical mechanism for the conversion of potential energy to kinetic energy.
Rossi has developed a reactor (an engineered system which includes a control system for the important physical parameters—dynamic magnetic and electric field intensity, and temperature of the nickel nano- structures—and heat transfer devices/agents) that works to limit the production of energetic particles associated with normal fission or hot fusion reactors and the unstable isotopes such reactions are notorious for. One of the keys to the success of the Rossi reactor R&D IMHO has been the development of a Ni based nano-particle—a quantum mechanical coherent system—which is cooled by Li vapor—to avoid a run-away reaction which you, Axil, correctly associate with temperatures around 3000 C. The small size of the nano-particles provides a limit to the effects of a run-away release of potential energy and destruction of the reactor or more than one nano-particle. (And no muons or other sub atomic particles are produced by the relatively low kinetic energy associated with 3000 C. ) There are many commercial devices that create temperatures above 3000C, for example electric arc welders which I have used many times. They do not produce the energetic particles or photons you, Axil. are concerned about with respect to the “Rossi reactor” IHMO. Bob Cookhere are many common commercial reactions that occu From: Axil Axil<mailto:janap...@gmail.com> Sent: Friday, July 7, 2017 8:06 AM To: vortex-l<mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com> Subject: Re: [Vo]:Picking up the pieces There are multiple third party validations. Rossi's methods and approach have been verified in part by his many replicators. This is not to say that Rossi's reactor or any LENR reactor for that matter can be commercialized due to heavy subatomic particle emissions. This includes R. Mills and the SunCell. On Fri, Jul 7, 2017 at 5:11 AM, Alain Sepeda <alain.sep...@gmail.com<mailto:alain.sep...@gmail.com>> wrote: from recent data, taking any conclusion on Rossi's claims is at best risky, and to be honest, baseless. 2017-07-07 3:01 GMT+02:00 Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com<mailto:janap...@gmail.com>>: What the Rossi experiments has shown over many years is that LENR in a lattice is not workable because the reaction cannot be controlled. This lack of control makes the E-Cat technology untenable. Rossi has realized this and Rossi is will to let this knowhow fadeaway. The LENR reaction wants to operate at the boiling point of the metal lattice (nickel) which is 3000K. LENR is based on activation of nanoparticles in a dusty plasma. Rossi has struggled to control the LENR reaction at low temperatures but he always fails because LENR would invariably get to 3000K and meltdown his reactor. So Rossi finally decided to use reactor structural material that doesn't melt at 3000K. This material must be an insulator that does not melt at 3000K. Mills has stumbled on the same reaction and his SunCell runs at the vapor point of silver at only 2200C. Mills has solved the meltdown problem is another way, he justs runs everything as a liquid without any containment. Holmlid is on to the same LENR mechanism. There is nothing unusual with metalized hydrogen. In the LENR reaction, metalized hydrogen acts like any other metallic nanoparticle. Using a lattice for LENR is a losing proposition. The dusty plasma approach to the LENR reaction is the only way to go. I beleive that Rossi has settled on a high temperature tube material that works: boron nitride, a transparent isolator whose melting point is 3000C. Alan Smith wrote:<https://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/thread/4645-rossi-blog-comment-discussion/?postID=62235#post62235> I do remember. BTW, eye witness accounts claim that the tube itself is transparent, and the electrodes bright silver colour. nothing is visible in the gap. I have no idea about sealing or anything else - except that the plasma can apparently be made 'any colour you like'. The example shown was glowing yellow when energised for short periods. That's all the info I have. Unlike most other observers of Rossi, I know that the QuarkX works because its reported behavior fits in with my understanding of how LENR works. For example: New research into polariton condensates has revealed a side emission channel that produces light whose frequency is proportional to the density of the polariton aggregation...for example, the dense polariton condinsate produces a higher frequency light (blue) and a less dense condinsate will produce red light. Rossi must have a way to control the density of the polariton population. See https://phys.org/news/2016-06-…einstein-condensates.html<https://phys.org/news/2016-06-superconductors-lasers-bose-einstein-condensates.html> They tackled this problem by highly exciting exciton-polaritons, which are particle-like excitations in a semiconductor systems and formed by strong coupling between electron-hole pairs and photons. They observed high-energy side-peak emission that cannot be explained by two mechanisms known to date: Bose-Einstein condensation of exciton-polaritons, nor conventional semiconductor lasing driven by the optical gain from unbound electron hole plasma. The details on this side channel are here https://www.nature.com/articles/srep25655 High-energy side-peak emission of exciton-polariton condensates in high density regime In summary, eyewitness reports of QuarkX operating characteristics fit my technical expectations perfectly in very many ways. On Thu, Jul 6, 2017 at 2:19 PM, Jones Beene <jone...@pacbell.net<mailto:jone...@pacbell.net>> wrote: According to Abd... "All claims dropped on both sides. It is as if the suit was never filed. All parties bear their own costs. The action of the Agreement was the consent of counsel to settlement without any court order other than dismissal, which is final." No agreements were included... so unless they present something otherwise in a joint statement, IH retains the original E-Cat License. No money changes hands. As for the future of the litigants, it looks like IH paid about $11 million ++ for a License which according to them is worthless insofar as it was never shown to produce excess heat. Add to that the attorney fees and we see why many observers consider IH to be the big loser in this. That assumes the IP is really worthless, but it may have value in a surprising way, even if Rossi could never make it work. Here is the granted patent, and there are a number of applications not granted. https://www.google.com/patents/US9115913 Darden raised much more than his losses on the Rossi fiasco and there is a small chance that he could make lemonade out of the Rossi lemons, using some of it. An interesting development in all of this will be the course that IH takes from here on with the remaining money. They are known to have been funding others in LENR all along. Of course IH could abandon the field altogether, but maybe they have a vision which transcends Rossigate. Possibly the best thing that could happen is for Randell Mills to demonstrate strong gain in that SunCell device. If it turns out that Mills device is arguably nuclear - it will not be covered by the hydrino IP. There have already been "inside" rumors that recent delays in the "Mills' Roadshow" are due to radioactivity showing up. This is expected in LENR but not in hydrino-tech and it could change the IP landscape. Footnote. Rossi's IP covers "Group 10 catalysts" which are nickel, palladium and platinum. It does not cover silver, which is being used by Mills and is Group 11. Silver is easily activated and perhaps it is activated by dense hydrogen. Mills' IP would not cover nuclear reactions. This puts him in a bind. If silver is required, but becomes activated, then there is an IP storm brewing. If I were advising Darden, it would be to look at quickly expanding the IP to fill the gap which exists when Mills can no longer hide the radioactivity of the SunCell.
