On Nov 2, 2009, at 9:20 AM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
At 11:22 AM 11/2/2009, Horace Heffner wrote:
there are more non-nuclear possibilities, obviously, at higher
voltages.
There are non-nuclear possibilities at lower voltages too, and that
is in part my point. The SPAWAR spots are visible in infra-red.
It should be noted that the SPAWAR video is showing the back side
of the cathode, not the side facing the anode.
See Figure 1 of:
http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/SzpakSpolarizedd.pdf
It shows the camera on the outside, next the Mylar film, next the
*unsealed* surface of the cathode. It appears to me there is
electrolyte between the Mylar and the surface. My experience with
anode spots is they form well on both sides.
The video is showing the heating of the foil, through the foil,
I don't think this is true.
in local areas. I'm not at all sure of the size of those heat
areas, but the heat obviously dissipates very rapidly, as one would
expect. They didn't look from the anode side because of the obvious
obstructions.
I'll be looking at the cathode palladium deposit edge-on, for the
most part, so I would only expect to see some of the flashes. If
I'm lucky, though, I might see flashes against the CR-39. Hmmmm...
what if I used a scintillator crystal? Don't know if it would be
stable in the electrolyte. But it might be, and, up close and very
personal, it might flash....
It's been done. I also suggested a type of plastic for that earlier.
The
electrospark spots are visible. Both anode spots and cathode spots
could be the result of, initiated by, cavitation. Both increase in
intensity as things heat up. Both have similar sounds. Both tend to
occur in the center of the cathode, where it is hottest. I expect
steam+hydrogen cavitation is involved. Cavitation can produce plasma
which is conductive. A high current density will feed the plasma
heat, and further provide a hot gas for the re-compression cycle.
It's also more dangerous! I doubt that my power supply will be
chugging out more than 20 volts at the maximum current for the
protocol and two cells running in series.
I would expect that to be more than enough to cause steam cavitation
if the electrolyte conductivity is high enough.
The current will be limited to, at the maximum point in the
protocol, 100 mA.
I'll repeat here a measurement from one of my earliest AC
electrospark experiments:
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
The voltage waveform was a nice and clean sign wave, but the spikes
did show up on it when the sparking started. It looked kind of like
a rounded version of the following:
----
/ \
/ \
------ \
/ \
/..................\..........................
\ /
\ /
------- /
\ /
\ /
----
At the end of the experiment the scope measured .581 V rms, and 1.34
V pp on the current probe, giving 58.1 mA rms and 134 mA p-p or 67 mA
peak current. The DMM showed 53.9 mA at the time. The spikes were
very small. I measured the small spikes at only 15 mV, or
0.015V*100mA/V = 1.5 mA each, peak. I did not use a bypass capacitor.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
That means, even in the powerful electrospark domain, the little
plasmas are only getting 1.5 mA for microseconds. One AC phase is 8.3
milliseconds and there were dozens of spikes on the above current
wave form. It seems to me that, in a boiling cavitation regime, it
should be feasible to get IR flashes with much much less. If you
don't supply enough current density to get there then (1) you
probably haven't reproduced the SPAWAR experiment conditions, and (2)
probably will not observe the flashes.
The setup is constant-current, the current is then stepped up in
stages. It starts out very low, 100 uA, upped once a day to 200 and
then 500 uA, where it remains until the Pd plates out, "10-14
days," then current is increased each day to 1, 5, 10, 25, 50, 100
mA, and it sits at the highest current for two days total, then
it's shut down and the cell dismantled and the CR-39 is etched.
I know this. This has nothing to do with the fact pulses, either
voltage or current, can be imposed on the current when conductivity
suddenly changes across the interface.
I also intend to lay the cathode and anode carefully on LR-115, to
get a radioautograph.
When I wrote 20 volts, this would be for two cells in series, I
think. I have a current regulated supply, but it isn't designed to
be accurately adjustable for the lower currents, I'll use current
regulators, which need some head-room. If I have to, it's a dual
supply and I can run each cell from one side, for the higher
currents. I haven't been able to find cell voltage data from
Galileo cells, but that data was collected, presumably. I find it
frustrating that experimenters tend to only report what they think
significant. We end up wasting a lot of time because of this....
Hypertext was a great invention. Earthtech actually does use it,
they have an overall report, then detailed reports on each cell,
but the detailed reports are missing ... detail.
SPAWAR states in:
http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/SzpakSpolarizedd.pdf
"The random time/space distribution of hot spots as well as their
varying intensity with time, Figs. 4a 4d, exclude the existence of
fixed location of the nuclear active sites. The random distribution
and the varying intensity arises from the coupling of the various
processes occurring on both sides of the contact surface in response
to fluctuations."
"Both, the frequency and intensity are a strong function of
temperature. In particular, both increase with an increase in
temperature, exhibiting the so called positive feedback, cf Figs. 3
and 5. This is, perhaps, the most direct indication of the influence
of the chemical environment."
So ... heating the cell should amplify the effects. Eventually,
I'll chart those waters.
If the cell doesn't heat then you haven't replicated.
Or what would happen? Something to look for, I suppose. If it does
go into solution as a salt, it would re-deposit. Quantities would
be small.
In the case of SPAWAR, when they use the PdCl electrolyte, the Pd,
produced in such minor quantities, can go back into solution and then
immediately become re-codeposited.
Is that a fact?
Actually no. I think SPAWAR runs the initial co-deposition until the
Pd is plated out. That means the Cl is gone too - evolved as a gas.
I think Pd will dissolve in boiling HCl. PdOH, PdO, Pd2O, and Pd2O
should form in the plasma/arc, which are insoluable, but might end up
in large part as colloids. However, my experience with electrospark
regimes is they are violent enough to throw out comparatively large
(visible) chunks of material. The bottom of the Zr cell runs was
covered with black material. Aluminum usually produced white or gray
material I think, and even chunks of foil. This of course assumes the
SPAWAR spots are due to cavitation.
I'd expect that expelled Pd vapor would immediately condense to
form a nanonparticle, which would be insoluble near the cathode at
least. Maybe. My kingdom for a tiny knowledge of electrochemistry!
I have thought of putting an extended anode at the bottom of the
cell, a piece of foil that covers the whole bottom, so that any
palladium that drops would be dissolved back into the solution and
redeposited. But the Galileo protocol claims that some PdOH
accumulates on the bottom. Would this redissolve at the anode, or
would it be lost until exposed to different chemistry?
Say, I'm no expert on chemistry. BTW, how is it that no matter what
I post on CF here now it somehow becomes relevant to your effort and
I end up having to do work answering your questions? 8^)
PdOH is insoluble. I doubt it would make electrical contact with the
anode. It would be a change of protocol, but if you added a some
HCl to the electrolyte the Pd should dissolve if the electrolyte is
hot enough. This could have major effects on just about everything
though, could totally change the results. It could totally change
the codeposition process, especially at the terminal part. It may be
of interest that CF experiments have been done in acidic electrolytes
before though.
Say, HCl buffered with PdCl might be used for a semi-continuous co-
deposition process. Just reversing the polarity periodically might
be sufficient to re-establish a fresh layer of co-deposited material,
and eliminate He and any other deleterious structural or chemical
problems.
(I intend to scavenge palladium, after the cathode and the
"droppings" are documented as well as I can. If someone offers me
analytical services, I'd go there, providing samples of the raw
materials and then what was left in the cell at the end. Later on,
I might even be able to pay for that -- and then those services
would be offered to my customers, either through me or directly,
depends.)
You could just try dissolving what is left in aqua regia or boiling
HCl to make PdCl. Save it up for a giant CF device to heat your
house. 8^)
Best regards,
Horace Heffner
http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
