At 11:48 AM 10/30/2009, you wrote:
On Oct 29, 2009, at 3:02 PM, Michel Jullian wrote:
2009/10/29 Abd ul-Rahman Lomax <a...@lomax design.com>:
What I meant by my comment was that
measuring elevated temperature of a cathode is an *indicator* of
excess
heat. But the possibility would remain that some condition in the
electrolyte close to the cathode raises the resistance there, so
the Joule
heat would be dissipated there, thus making the cathode appear
hotter. But I
think it unlikely. Shanahan might disagree. But, remember, my goal
is not to
prove that cold fusion is real, but to demonstrate it and detect its
signatures. A hot cathode is one.
No it isn't. A hot cathode means the global reaction at the cathode is
exothermic, nothing else. Palladium hydride formation is exothermic
(it releases around 11 kJ/mol heat for a loading factor of 0.8), so a
hot cathode is to be expected, correct me someone if I am wrong.
Michel
I was under the impression the palladium was mostly plated out before
SPAWAR jacked up the voltage and current to get the live results.
I have reason to think some contradictory things, but, yes, the
protocol does go into higher currents in order to take the cell out
of equilibrium. On the other hand, it is claimed as well that codep
cells begin to show results *immediately.* The Galileo protocol
doesn't show when the cells start generating radiation, so they don't
test this. I will.
In
any case much of the i*W power is dissipated as heat at the cathode
and anode surfaces, in the two molecule interface layer, at least
i*0.6 V worth on both the cathode and anode where these potential
drops occur. It is also notable that under some conditions photons
are produced in these layers, both at the anode, and to a lesser
degree at the anode, and in both phases in AC electrolysis. These
glows have been observed in some electrolytic cells even at the low
voltages typical for electrolysis, e.g. 3 V. The interface layer
reactions at the cathode are initiated by electron tunneling across
the interface layer to cations. It should be no surprise that light
can be produce there, in that even at a 0.6 V interface drop, the
interface layer is only about 24 angstroms thick, so the field
strength is 2.4x10^8 V/m.
Cool! Or Hot, as the case may be.
It is further notable that in some
electrochemical cells the anode produces more heat than the cathode
and vice versa. Not much effort has been spent analyzing here the
heat is evolved in many CF experiments because it is assumed to be
the cathode. I think in various kinds of high voltage electrolysis
experiments the anode vicinity can be the excess heat producer, but
that is outside the scope of the SPAWAR protocols.
A side note - an excess heat signal at the cathode would be larger if
it were known to be from the cathode. In other words if heat evolved
from both the anode Ea and cathode Ec are measured, then the excess
Ee shows up as a larger COP ratio Ee/Ec than that for the whole cell
Ee/(Ec + Ea).
In spite of Jed's recommendations, I'm not depending on seeing a
clear heat signal, I'm merely going to look. If I were using a foil
cathode, I'd use a non-contact IR thermometer, I'd expect, but I'm
just using two single pieces of wire, only 250 microns in diameter. I
just bought 25 feet each of gold and platinum wire, and 25 grams of
palladium chloride. This is getting serious, that really whacked my
American Express card, they actually shut it down for a while to
check that it hadn't been stolen. I'm going to have to start selling that wire.
Suddenly I'm in the jewelry business, too. All I was trying to do was
edit Wikipedia. What did I get myself into?
