Let us generalize the discussion about the two catalysts involved in the Rossi reaction in terms of there function requirements to see if a reaction control mechanism can be derived.
Let us get into the details on this point as follows: Under the assumption that the nuclear active area in the Rossi process is within large numbers of nanoscopic crystal defects in catalyst N (for nuclear) and catalyst C (for control) is somehow the controlling mechanism, what can that mechanism be? The nuclear heat comes from catalyst N. To transfer that nuclear heat to the stainless steel reaction vessel, the catalyst N must be in surface contact with the wall of this stainless steel vessel. Adjusting the preheating input adjusts the power output of the reactor. How can this be. The catalyst C must be in surface contact with the preheating input. The catalyst C must not be in surface contact with the catalyst N since the nuclear heat produced by catalyst N does not affect the catalyst C. There must be a space between the catalyst N and catalyst C and that space is filled with hydrogen an insolating material. Catalyst C is a Mott insulator that produces electrostatic charge. This charge increases as the temperature of catalyst C increases since the atomic all distances in catalyst C increase with temperature. Catalyst C must also be mounted on a material that can conduct input heat to catalyst C. When preheating input is applied to the catalyst C, its production of electrostatic force increases. This force travels across the insolating gap to the Catalyst N and increases the nuclear reaction. A decrease in the preheating input reduces the electrostatic force impinging on the nuclear active areas in the catalyst N. This reduces the nuclear reaction. Preheating input changes electrostatic force from 0 to 100%. This is the adjusting mechanism. If the catalyst C and catalyst N were physically mixed the reaction would be self sustaining. Reducing the pressure of the hydrogen increases the insulation value between the catalyst N and the catalyst C thereby reducing nuclear activity, since some small part of the nuclear heat travels across the insulation gap from the catalyst N to the catalyst C thereby supplementing the preheating input. What chemical compounds can catalyst C and catalyst N be. What catalyst is associated with nickel and what element is associated with catalyst N (a Mott insulator). Catalyst N must be highly porous with many nuclear defects in its crystal structure and beside nickel only two other elements are involved. One must be oxygen to form a Mott insulator. Catalyst N must be a element that can form a oxide with high levels of defects in it crystal structure. All compounds must survive for years in a hot hydrogen environment. I assumed that Iron was involved as a catalyst because of the reference to US patent 20010024789 = Methods for generating catalytic proteins. On its face, this is a strange subject of interest for a nuclear reactor. But this is a standard method of producing Iron oxide catalysts of the form Fe2O3. http://appft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PG01&p=1&u=/netahtml/PTO/srchnum.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=20010024789.PGNR.&OS=DN/20010024789&RS=DN/20010024789 On Sat, Apr 16, 2011 at 5:17 PM, Jones Beene <jone...@pacbell.net> wrote: > Axil, > > > > Ø > > Ø Loading hydrogen into Rust does not produce nuclear derived heat. > > > > Correct – it produce iron and water. I do not see Fe2O3 specifically as > being involved at all in Rossi. > > > > FeO – however, when fully supported (shared oxygen) does make sense - but > not Fe2O3. After all, the Swedes said iron in some form was there at a fair > percentage, and they did sophisticated testing. > > > > Hydrogen reduction is one way that low carbon iron is processed from iron > ore by the way. Iron ore is essentially rust. How to you propose to > attenuate the reduction of rust inside the Rossi cell ? It could not last an > hour. > > > > Having said that – your speculation about nickel oxide and copper oxide as > Mott insulators does have merit, BUT ONLY when they are positioned to share > their oxygen atom with the zirconia support. Otherwise they would be rapidly > reduced also. In the same way, FeO is possible to be used as a catalyst - if > and when supported on a dielectric, plus FeO is probably a Mott insulator. I > don’t think rust qualifies at all, since it is fairly conductive. > > > > BTW – iron oxides of various levels have been used in tonnage as a bulk > catalysts with hydrogen for a long time – that much is true. When used in > the Haber process, the oxides are partially reduced ahead of time, and there > is a competing oxidant present (nitrogen) which lowers the rate of full > reduction to iron, but even so - catalyst must be replaced periodically and > often, which is inconsistent with running a Rossi reactor continuously. Rust > or magnetite was ideal in the original Haber process since it is more > valuable when reduced, than as a refined ore. > > > > If there was to be any heat anomaly involving rust - we would have known > about it long ago, as the ammonia industry is old, competitive and was a > national priority 100 years ago. Every detail of Haber and its offshoots has > been thoroughly analyzed. > > > > Jones > > > > >
