I agree totally, specifically the orbital radial velocity is the most important from my perspective and submit that this is based on acceleration proportional to catalyst geometry. Your suggestion of using higher temperatures and lattice pores that only support monatomic hydrogen would Also put some theories to the test -You know I favor an oscillation between monatomic and diatomic hydrogen states which would be starved except at surfaces and defects using some of the tighter lattices you suggest.
I have a colleague who has also been proposing fractured ceramics for a catalyst (conductive doping). Best Regards Fran Alternate THEORY for Hydrino based on Relativity http://www.byzipp.com/hydrino/ -----Original Message----- From: Horace Heffner [mailto:hheff...@mtaonline.net] Sent: Monday, October 26, 2009 2:14 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Nickel has unique physical properties I think the loading percentage, concentration or pressure of hydrogen that can be achieved is not the most important thing. Bubble pressures of over 7 GPa (690,000 atmospheres) have been achieved by hydrogen implantation in aluminum (see reference material below). That was not enough by itself. High energy stimulation was further required. It is a *mix* of factors that must be achieved to perform reliable energy production. The most important factors are likely the orbital characteristics of the hydrogen circling electrons, and the tunneling rates for the hydrogen, I think. Also, high temperature lattices should clearly be used if for no other reason to permit energy conversion at high Carnot efficiencies. But there are other reasons. Lattices that can not possibly work at room temperature, which are essentially impermeable to hydrogen, can work at high temperature. There thus no limiting work primarily to Pd and Ni lattices. Much stronger lattices can be designed, alloys, possibly latices with special valence, spin, and nuclear characteristics. A wide range of engineering possibilities emerges at high temperatures, possibly including ceramics, especially proton conducting ceramics. The key to all this is to load at very high temperatures, and the reduce temperature to achieve an appropriate compressed state without cracking the lattice, and I would hope this compressed state would include a highly degenerate state of hydrogen. I think the most affordable way to investigate this kind of thing might be using hot wires, as various researchers have had positive results in this mode. Current through the wire can then be used to control not only the temperature, but also the tunneling rate. Large potentials can also be applied to the wire, as in the Claytor et al experiments. Loading of the wire can also readily occur through ion implantation or pressure or a combination. That's my two cents worth on this. Here are some summaries of Kamada experiments that achieved incredible hydrogen pressures and concentrations: - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1992 Article: Kamada states the H-H fusion reaction was observed based on beta disintegration of proton upon high energy electron capture, which does not need tunneling 1 event per 2x10^14 electrons 200 KeV and 400 keV beam energies were used. implantation fluence > 1x10^17 H+ or D+/cm^2 using Cockcroft Walton type acceleration (voltage not mentioned) 1.3 MeV alphas (80%) and >0.4 MeV protons (20%) emitted from *both* H2 and D2 implanted targets Beam density must be greater than 3x10^16 electrons/cm/s to get high energy particles emitted. From this I calculate the minimum flux to be 4.8 mA/cm^2. Beam used was 300 to 400 nA with beam size 4x10-5 cm^2. Flux actually used was 4-6x10^16 electrons/cm^2/s. Area through which beam was passed was 2x10^-3 cm^2. Time beam on target was 40 minutes. Tunnel like structures (between the bubble structures) *must be formed* to get the high energy particle emissions. They occupy roughly 60 percent of the sub-surface layer with about 50 nm depth. Molar volume of hydrogen = 10 cm^3/mol. Density of hydrogen molecues exposed to beam = 6x10^22/cm^2. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1996 Article: experiment repeated 30 times Positive results with D, negative results with H. No effort was made to count particles. 175 keV electron beam energy was used to avoid radiation damage to the Al 25 keV implantation at fluence of less than 5x10^17 H+/cm^2 was used. This is 12.5 keV per H atom implanted. The maximum retained hydrogen fluence (determined by ERD) after implantation was 1x10^17 atoms/cm^2, and density 2x10^17 H/cm^3. The density in the D2 collections was estimated at 1x10^22 D2/cm^3. Loading fluence 5x10^17 D+/cm^2 was chosen to *avoid forming bubble structures* and to form as many tunnel structures as possible. At a lower fluence only bubble structures are formed. When tunnel structures form between the bubbles, the bubbles empty out into the tunnel structures. At higher fluences, the bubble structures start to form again. Hydrogen bubble pressure estimated at 7 GPa. Average implantation depth about 60 nm., max depth about 90 nm. Estimated heat out to beam energy absorbed (per spot) was 6x10^5. Estimated heat out to beam energy absorbed (total surface) was 1x10^5. Degree of focusing was 50 nA on 1x10^-6 m diameter. Flux used was 4x10^19 electrons/cm^2/s. I calculate 6.41 A/cm^2. Flux must be over 1x10^19 electrons/cm^2/s to get the effect. I caculate the minimum flux to be 1.6 A/cm^2. Melting was observed in small transformed regions of about 1x10^-9 cm^2. Using a depth of 90 nm this gives 6.1x10-12 cal. per melted region, or 159 MeV per transformed region. The melting occurred in less than 10 seconds and the pools solidified in about one minute into the polycrystalline form. The thickness of the aluminum target was 8x10^-5 cm. The electron stopping power |dE/dt| of Al used is 0.07eV/Angstrom. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Best regards, Horace Heffner http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
