Thanks Axil,
What do you think of my recipe below:
I plan to heat Ni powder to say 300-400C (below curie point) in open air to
allow creation of Nickel Oxides. Also heat some copper powder and some iron
powder in open air for the same purpose. Mix about 7% copper and 3% iron
powder with Ni powder so prepared. Place the mixture into the reactor and
perform the Piantilli style heating to 400c and vacuuming and then loading H2,
and repeating several times to totally boil off the oxides. All the 3 powders
should have lots and lots of micro-cavities. This should improve the copper's
and iron's ability to split H2 to H+. At least that's the theory.
Then cool the reactor to room temp and then do a final load of H2 at 300-360
psi. Then start the reaction.
Any flaws in my thinking?
Jojo
----- Original Message -----
From: Axil Axil
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Thursday, February 02, 2012 2:52 AM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:To Sinter or Not to Sinter
The one big disadvantage of using the reactor walls is in replacing the
embedded powder. When the powder is spent, the whole core must be
discarded...not competitive.
On the other hand, nano-powder may be too tiny to allow surface phonons to
propagate correctly (however that might work). Nano powder might not work.
The compromise in micro powder in the 5 micror size range. This powder is
replaceable, yet big enough to carry effective phonon vibrations.
The challenge is to properly form the surface of the micro-powder to provide
micro-cavities that allow protons to become synchronized (coherent).
Like Jones has posted, protons repel each other but when you put them in a
small quantum well, they bounce off each other and also off the cavity walls
for a very long time until they just so happen in a one in a million encounter
to approach in just the right way to syncronize their quantom properties. That
is the only job of the micro-powder, to get protons to sync up into coherent
pairs.
IMHO, Nano powder is too small to perform this function and the reactor walls
are too inconvenient, but micro powder is just the right size and weight…and
the surface needs to have the most effective micro cavities formed on each
particle too.
On Wed, Feb 1, 2012 at 1:17 PM, Jojo Jaro <jth...@hotmail.com> wrote:
With all the floating theories on how Rossi Cold Fusion works, do we have a
consensus on whether the Ni powder needs to be attached to the reactor walls?
or free floating inside the reactor?
There are very good reasons for either strategy. I have read all the
comments on this collective on this. On the one hand, sintering the Ni powder
may improve thermal conduction, thereby improving reaction stability by
allowing for more efficient removal of heat; on the other hand, free floating
Ni nanopowder may make a larger surface area available for reaction. Does
anybody have info on whether DGT sinters their powder? I haven't read anything
on that.
I'd like to hear the best educated guesses of the smartest people in our
collective. I will adjust my reactor design based on what the collective
thinks is the best initial guess.
Jojo
