At 08:11 AM 2/11/2010, you wrote:
Nice post Abd. Just a terminology detail, I don't think "Q factor" is
adequate for the heat released by a reaction. "Q factor" is a
dimensionless factor used in resonance phenomena. I think you really
mean "Q value".
Sure. I've been using "factor" as a synonym for "value," and, yes, I
was also aware of the other usage of Q. I'll be more careful, if
"value" is clearer, I'll use it.
Krivit is correct that a Q value of 23.8 or 24 has not been proven
for LENR. It appears that he originally misunderstood the evidence
and, in correcting his own misunderstanding, he then blamed it on
everyone else. Here is Krivit's report of his personal history with
this, from NET #29,
http://newenergytimes.com/v2/news/2008/NET29-8dd54geg.shtml#FROMED
When I wrote my first paper on this subject, "The 2004 Cold Fusion
Report," I asked Mallove to review and critique it.
He vehemently disagreed with this sentence: "It is now known that
that the amounts of excess heat in cold fusion are consistent with
the change in energy that results when heavy hydrogen is converted
into helium-4."
In other words, I was saying that it was fact that excess heat was
now measured at 23.8 MeV per helium-4 atom produced. As I now know,
I was inadvertently reinforcing the myth based on what I was told by
some CMNS researchers.
Mallove did not mince words with me.
"You're on VERY thin ice is stating that," he wrote. "There is only
ONE experiment in which such a fact has been even approximately
proved, and that is the SRI International reproduction of the Case
catalytic fusion work. Instead of saying consistent say correlated
to some degree with." [Emphasis original]
Mallove wasn't actually correct. The results are, indeed, consistent
with 23.8 MeV for the predominant reaction, but "consistent with"
does require allowing for various factors such as failure to detect
all the helium (which will produce a higher number) or all the energy
(which will produce a lower number). What would be incorrect would be
a claim that 23.8 MeV had been proven to be the actual Q value.
For example, see what Krivit then gets from Storms.
I see in my notes that I "rejected" Mallove's critique after asking
a prominent CMNS researcher, Edmund Storms, formerly of Los Alamos
National Laboratory for comment. Mallove was wrong, according to
Storms; he said that researchers at the U.S. Navy China Lake
laboratory and an Italian government laboratory all quantitatively
measured helium-4 that proved a 23.8 MeV reaction, because they all
"quantitatively measure helium-4 within a factor of two."
I'm not arguing that Mallove was exactly "wrong," for the core of
Mallove's assertion was that only one experiment more closely nailed
down the Q value, and that is the one that Mallove referred to. Other
experiments have much higher error bars, and Storms refers to this
with his "within a factor of two." In other words, Storms is saying
that the Q factor is within a factor of two of that expected from d-d fusion.
Did Storms actually say that the reports from China Lake, etc.,
"proved a 23.8 MeV reaction"? Krivit does not supply an exact quote,
and we already know from other examples recently that he's not
reliable as to interpretation of what people are saying. However, if
Storms wrote that, it was an error. Storms definitely knows better.
Here is what's in The Science of Low Energy Nuclear Reactions (2007):
"Helium has been found in amounts consistent with energy production." (p. 86)
"The measured helium values are expected to have a negative bias
because some unknown amount will be retained by the palladium. The
values obtained by Miles et al. indicate 46% was retained in their
study, a very reasonable amount if half of the emitted alphas went in
the direction of the bulk material and were captured, while the other
half went into solution and were detected. In addition, some extra
energy might result from other reactions, such as transmutation
without helium being produced. The values reported by Bush and
Lagowski are consistent with 42% of the helium being retained by the
metal -- a reasonable agreement with the Miles value." (pp. 87-88)
His final comment on this is quite clear and correct:
"If the gross values are combined, an upper limit of <43 +/- 12
MeV/He is obtained. If 50% of the helium is assumed to be retained,
this is reduced to 21 +/- 12 MeV. The value of 24.8 +/- 2.5 MeV,
obtained after an effort was made to extract all the helium, is in
excellent agreement with the corrected value. by combining all the
measurements, a value of 25 +/- 5 MeV/4He is proposed to be the
amount of heat produced by formation of each helium atom using the
cold fusion process, whatever that process might be. Although this
value is consistent with d-d fusion being the source of energy and
helium, other reactions may also be consistent, as discussed in chapter 8."
Nowhere does Storms claim that 23.8 MeV has been proven. If he said
something like that in a private conversation with Krivit, this shows
a hazard of reports of private conversations. Someone may say
something unguarded that has implications that were not intended.
Hence if there is a gap between what's been published by an author
and what the author says privately, as there would be here if
Krivit's report is accurate, it would be important to carefully check
and verify that is what the author actually intended.
Storms does apparently consider the 25 +/- 5 Q value to be solidly
established, he uses it to evaluate theories. But he also clearly
does not believe that this "proves" that the reaction is d-d fusion,
23.8 MeV, especially because he gives an example (4D -> Be-8 -> 2
He-4 + 47.6 MeV) that is not d-d fusion (not literally, anyway) that
would also predict 23.8 MeV.
I considered Storms more of a first-hand source than Mallove, and
Storm's viewpoint had consensus among other CMNS researchers, so I
went along with his suggestion to disregard Mallove's critique.
This, again, was an error on Krivit's part. Had Storms actually said
what Krivit interpreted him as saying, it would not be a "first-hand
source," it would have been an opinion. First-hand should refer to
testimony, not to opinion, unless what is being reported is the
opinion! Further, there is no such consensus, and almost all
statements I've seen from CMNS researchers is couched with the
caveats. The assumption has, indeed, become strong that helium and
excess heat are correlated at 23.8 MeV, but always with an
understanding that other reactions may be occurring, and without
considering the figure as being "proven." Eventually, there will be
some experiments that combine rigorous and accurate calorimetry with
rigorous recovery of all the helium, and then we will know much
better. That's difficult work, I don't expect it to appear tomorrow.
As an opinion, it would have been an informed one, with some
authority, for sure, but this whole field is not one where informed
opinion can be considered to be authoritative. Experts are divided.
Storms discusses proposed models in his Chapter 8. First, he notes
that d-d fusion is unlikely, for the well-known reasons, and then he
asks what other reactions would produce helium? He rejects reactions
involving lithium and boron because of an expected Q value that is
too low. He notes Takahashi's Be-8 proposal as "consistent with the
measurements provided Be-8 formation can be justified." He also
covers Mill's hydrino theory, which might explain helium as a form of
d-d fusion.
Personally, I consider it established with high probability that the
*primary reaction* in most "cold fusion" experiments is one in which
the fuel is deuterium and the ash is helium. That does not at all
rule out other reactions and I consider it likely that other
reactions are occurring, either independently or as secondary
reactions caused by the energy released by the primary reaction. In
my consideration, that the Q value is consistent with what we would
expect from a black box that takes in deuterium and spits out helium,
is the primary evidence. "Consistent with" covers lots of possible
variation. It does not prove the Q value is some exact number, and,
even if measurements came up with, say, 24 MeV +/- 1 MeV, it would
not "prove" d-d fusion, per se. But *something* is producing helium,
correlated with heat, and what ingredients are there in the cell that
might possibly do that? There aren't a lot of possibilities!
