At the W&M ILENRS-12 symposium, I was told that what is used by DGT and is shown in their pictures were not spark plugs, but actually were glow plugs. I was also told that DGT was having reliability problems with these devices.
If true, how does this change the thinking about what DGT is using to stimulate/quench their reaction to form it into controlled pulses? Bob On Sun, Jul 15, 2012 at 2:43 AM, Jojo Jaro <jth...@hotmail.com> wrote: > ** > Hey Gang, > > A while back, I was harping on the use of sparks for LENR reactors. I > remember quite a vigorous exchange of ideas as to why sparks may be or may > not be a critical component. There was discussion as to whether RF or > sparks was the important thing. I was speculating that the temp. spike we > find in DGT charts were the result of sparks firing and rapidly increasing > the temp of the H2 and then rapidly dropping it again. I speculated that > sparks was the mechanism for modulating the reaction rates in DGT's > reactors. > > Well, after the publication of DGT's pictures of their reactors, we find > not 1 but 2 spark plugs. But even with the evidence, we still had a few > people here questioning the sparks. There was speculation that the spark > plugs were being used to plug a hole only, and serve as a high > pressure/high temp plug only; which to me was ludicruous as we find a host > of other thermocouple connections that could serve the same purpose. > > Anyways, it turned out I was right about sparks being a critical > ingredient. > > Then I harped on Rossi's rationale for shifting to a fat-Cat design. I > speculated that this was Rossi's attempt to try to achieve more efficient > and consistent spark delivery. I then continued on and speculated that > this design was probably a CVD reactor in disguise. I speculated that the > goal was to grow Carbon Nanostructures on a nickel substrate. > > Well, evidence seems to be accumulating on that front as well. > > We find out that nickel use was reduced to a few grams (consistent with > nickel being used as growth catalyst for Carbon nanostructures. not as a > metal lattice for hosting a NAE.) > > Then we found out his gen 2 reactors did not have hydrogen canisters > anymore. (Consistent with using a hydrocarbon gas to grow Carbon > Nanostructures and wth concurrent release of free hydrogen ions. as used > in CVD reactors.) > > Then we find out high temp (>600c) operation, which was consistent with a > NAE that is thermally stable. This is also the temp where CVD reactors > work at. More importantly, this gen 2 Rossi eCats did not experience > thermal runways. This is consitent with a reaction mechanism which was > totally different from his earlier thermionic catalyst based reactor. > > So, evidence is mounting everyday regarding the use of Carbon > Nanostructures. > > > > The point of this post is simply this. We here in the collective should > try to focus on understanding this new mechanism, e.g. Carbon > Nanostructure-based LENR - LENR2. Let's not waste our time discussing the > theory, evidences, possibilities of older LENR paradigms such as FP, and > others. LENR mechanisms are old, let's get on with LENR2. If we can get > just half of the brain power in this collective to study LENR2, that would > go a long ways in advancing the state of LENR research. > > > Jojo > > > > -- Regards, Bob Higgins
