The LENR reaction always happens in a plasma that has been produced by electrical discharge, but when water is present, the plasma is quenched and it cools quickly. This removes the SPP solition before it can properly develop to the proper strength.
On Mon, Aug 4, 2014 at 10:30 AM, Jones Beene <jone...@pacbell.net> wrote: > Final note: Mizuno saw 108 MJ of gain over > 30 days at COP of 1.9 - his net output was about 8 MJ per day, on average. > For Roulette et al, the next best result in the history of deuterium LENR, > there was 294 MJ is net output over 152 days at COP of 1.5, or about 2 MJ > per day but with less actual net gain than Mizuno (less than 108 MJ of gain > due to the lower COP). > > Therefore, the Mizuno experiment is about 4 > times more robust in net energy than the best prior result in LENR for > which > adequate data exists but over 600% more robust, based on net gain. > > The next step for this ground-breaking experiment is the analysis, and then > the implications – which will be controversial. That is why there has been > scarcely a peep from many “experts” on this paradigm shift in LENR. They do > not like the implications and especially not Storms, who essentially > ignored > this in his recent book. > > In fact, the results overturn several pillars of entrenched thinking which > are lingering from the “cold fusion era”; but some of the conclusions may > hinge on the final radiation results, which were not presented at MIT but > were summarized by Yoshino to others there. > > Here are some main talking points. > 1) It took 24 years of trying to greatly improve Pd-D results, yet the > main reasons for the vast improvement are simple and two-fold. Switch from > palladium to nickel wire as the cathode and run the experiment as a plasma. > 2) The SEM image after activation shows no evidence of Storms’ active > “cracks”. The Ni surface is suggestive of micron-sized spheres, possibly > formed by adsorption of hydrogen, which result is highly suggestive of > Rossi’s description of his nickel surface. i.e. “sphericules”. > 3) This experiment is devastating to Storm’s theory in several ways. > There is no helium in the ash. > 4) This experiment is problematic for Mills recent demo, since Mizuno > tried heavy water vapor and found it did not work in the presence of a > Mills > catalyst (nickel) > 5) The nickel is said to be in the form of a “mesh” but in fact, > consists of 200 meters of .2 mm nickel wire which is arranged in a > mesh-like > blob, reminiscent of a ladies hairdo from the sixties. > 6) While H2 shows irregular gain, D2 is more active and D2O in not > active. > 7) The experiment was monitored for radiation, yet the information was > omitted. This information is critical to understanding. Yoshino told Ahern > that no gamma radiation was seen. Since Yoshino did include slides showing > the neutron cross-section of Ni58, the implication is that neutrons have > been seen. > 8) Given the long history between Jed Rothwell and Mizuno, it is hoped > that Jed and vortex will be the first to see this very important > information > which may indicate the presence of neutrons. > 9) If there are significant neutrons, this indicates that the > Oppenheim > Phillips effect could be part of the gain, yet since H2 was also gainful, > neutrons probably indicate that two different gainful effects have been > seen > possibly more than two. > 10) Neutrons have been the desired goal (to find) since 1989. In short, > this could be the final fulfillment of everything which PF wanted to > demonstrate but never could – reliable excess heat and neutrons. > 11) Too bad PF did not think of the simple expedient of going to nickel > wire in a plasma. > > Jones > > > > > >
