David - the short answer is yes, it is definitely NOT
coincidental that the well-documented trigger temperature in many NiH
systems is around the Curie point of nickel (358 C). The problem is that
there could be several known processes interacting at the same time,
including a dynamical Casimir effect, to provide what is essentially 'new
physics' but also non-nuclear gain.
This is at the heart of an emerging theory of nanomagnetism,
being promoted by Ahern and others. It is incomplete and evolving. It does
not deny that a small level of nuclear reaction can occur as a side effect,
but proposes that the main thermal gain is non-nuclear, in the sense of too
little radiation and too little transmutation to account for the heat.
Almost all physicists, even the ones who are open to some
kind of novel energetic reaction "want", even demand that any gain must be
nuclear in direct proportion to the thermal gain (as opposed to chemical or
zero point). Unfortunately, it is not.
The "unfortunate" part about this predicament is that it
adds another level of skepticism to the arduous process of re-educating the
mainstream of physics. In effect, we are saying that not only is the
preponderance of gain non-nuclear, but yet LENR does indeed occur at tiny QM
levels, so there seems to be "two miracles" involved. That would be - as
opposed to only the LENR miracle (but actually it is two parts of the same
miracle, yet I will leave that fine point for another time). The only way
this re-education will proceed, of course, is first to demonstrate the high
level of gain in ways that nanomagnetism emerges as the only possible way to
explain it. This could take decades to fully accomplish, but it will happen
IMO.
The final "dot to connect" and the reason Mills name comes
up often, in developing a workable model involves the magnetic properties of
f/H (fractional hydrogen) vis-à-vis the nickel host. Molecular hydrogen is
essentially nonmagnetic. Atomic hydrogen, in contrast, has high magnetic
susceptibility, high magnetic moment and high NMR sensitivity and high mass
mobility. f/H is exponentially higher in all of these features, as this is
generally a function of inverse square or higher power law, so every
shrinkage step adds up to a tipping point. In terms of effective magnetic
field strength, we are talking about thousand of Tesla.
Curiously, and unlike Mills' CQM, the nanomagnetism theory
(at least my version) requires the dense Rydberg hydrogen state (redundant
ground states), but finds the putative gain from that shrinkage process
either un-necessary or orders of magnitude less than the realized thermal
gain which is seen.
When you have kilo-Tesla equivalent magnetic attraction
being cycled against Coulomb repulsion, and this is acting on an extremely
medium (mobile target atom) somewhat as a yo-yo, then essentially this
dynamic system operates as a 'pump' for an underlying field (ZPE, Higgs,
EPO, etc). Thus, the population of f/H will be used and reused millions of
times in its role as 'medium for the ZPE pump', and its original formation
is only mildly related to net gain - just as net gain is only mildly related
to LENR, which is essentially evidence of the final collapse of the yo-yo
medium.
From: David Roberson
Jones, I want to inject my question about
the effect of magnetic fields into the considerations. You have pointed out
that power is always required for heat generation and I recall that power is
supplied by means of an electric current in most cases. I think it is
prudent for us to make an attempt to determine how a magnetic field might
influence the operation.
The fact that a certain temperature makes a
difference tends to suggest the rearrangement of grains of the material
which is a characteristic of magnetic behavior. Nickel is particularly
responsive to magnetic fields.
Do you see any way to include such an effect
within your analysis?
Dave
-----Original Message-----
From: Jones Beene
From: Roarty, Francis
* Is it possible that 1) Ni-H releases H, 2)
the released H is forced
into Pd fissure, 3) its electron cloud goes
through redistribution, and 4)
energy is released. [snip]
Doesn't that scenario presuppose that there
is an adequate distribution of
pure palladium in the magma, and in
particles which are large enough to
fissure? That situation seems unlikely in a
statistical sense - given the
rarity of Pd in the earth's crust, and the
fact it is almost always found as
an alloy, and is very ductile and would heal
fissures when under pressure.
However, something similar with Ni-Pd alloy
could happen, according to
Ahern's Arata replication.
But first, isn't "electron cloud
redistribution" a dynamical Casimir effect,
not necessarily involving fusion? That is my
take on it. If so, you do not
need fissures anyway (as opposed to maximum
loading). However, this brings
up two overlooked points.
There is a most interesting but limited
paper showing thermal gain in
hydrogen filters - which is seen around 350
C. The effect is the small
'bump' in the graph that happens after power
is cutoff. This same trigger
temperature was found by Ahern, and by
several others - and it has been
found in both Pd and Ni (and in alloys of
the two) - always in a range
around 350 C. That information is all in the
public domain, and in the paper
from Fralick of NASA -
lenr-canr.org/acrobat/FralickGClenratgrcp.pdf or
http://tinyurl.com/cydppod.
It is not a big effect in itself, but the
'bump' or gain - is persistent.
Perhaps all that is needed, for getting
excess heat continuously from even
the hydrogen filter shown in the paper - is
to cycle around this point
continuously, using good controls. In a
commercial context, that should
read: "using good controls such as NI and
Siemens have developed for this
niche". Does this not explain why one must
add heat to an exothermic process
in order to get the excess heat? And why the
Austin meeting could provide
confirmation of some of what has been mostly
anecdotal.
That little detail - concerning a novel
process always requiring some level
of power input to get excess output - is
perplexing to all the experts in
thermodynamics who want to model this as a
nuclear process... one where heat
addition is not required. It is not
primarily that kind of process! But let
me add the caveat that, yes - a small number
of real nuclear reactions can
and do occur - but as a side effect. The
nuclear reactions seen are 4 orders
of magnitude too low to provide the excess
energy, but they do manage to
confuse everyone into thinking that this is
nuclear (instead of primarily
non-nuclear with a small nuclear
side-effect).
I am almost certain that this will be the
one big message, if not the only
useful message, which comes out of the NI
conference in Austin: "cycle your
input carefully around the trigger point".
Of course, this means Rossi is
either full of BS with his 600 degree
nonsense, or else that he has found a
completely new reaction regime over the most
common one (and the one which
he started with). The smart money is on
"completely full of BS" and/or his
silly attempts to always add misdirection
and disinformation, into the mix.
So back to the original suggestion of an
alternative for magma heating.
Nickel is not rare. In earth's crust, there
is 99 ppm of Ni compared to .015
for Pd - several thousand times more. Plus,
deuterium is not needed for NiH
thermal success. Plus, Ahern and others
discovered that an alloy of nickel
with only 5% Pd provides 400% increase
hydrogen loading compared to pure Pd
(4:1 vs 1:1). If we are looking for energy
gain through some kind of
electron cloud redistribution, or whatever
happens in tight loading, then
you would want maximum the loading and the
porosity of the matrix, no? That
eliminates Pd in favor of alloys which seem
to be mostly (95%) nickel, and
in some kind of a natural porous 'foam' with
Casimir internal cavities which
form and disappear as the magma squishes
around, and there are probably many
undiscovered hosts for this process.
Jones
<<attachment: winmail.dat>>
