MFMP: New Dog-Bone run tomorrow!

AlainCo,

How does one prevent an attack of vertigo when reviewing these posts related to P + P fusion? In reality it's a simple process being replicated an infinite number of times.

p + P fusion.

Matter of luck when years ago I used nickelous oxide in a reactor that duplicated the proton proximity for hydrogen fusion. The heat produced melted the reactor. This transformer with its voltage supply could not have produced the heat to melt the Inconel reactor. The atomic array in the oxide duplicated the effect of extreme pressure found in stars and stimulated the formation of helium.

This hypothesis must be simple if occurring an infinite number of times in the universe.

I had the melted reactor sitting at my work desk as a center piece for years and certainly was a [lexicon]conversation[/lexicon] stimulator.

The results of this experiment are sitting in a storage cabinet as I'm now retired. This was a reactor loaded with NiO on fiber frax with hydrogen gas flowing through. At 830 C measured with a type k thermocouple the input to the furnace suddenly became non linear when the melt down occurred. A simple hypothesis is that the hydrogen interacting with the NiO atomic array allowed proton proximity for fusion. Considering that the reactor is in existence as a unit must indicate that not much helium was produced. As a 90 year great grandfather there must not have been much ionizing radiation either.

I'm sure that I could construct a reactor for home use utilizing this effect but why put up with the hassle of hydrogen recirculation and turbine electrical generation when my PG&E bill is so reasonable.

Also not interested in replication, I worked as an analyst for many years and was not sloppy.

"but what is happening cannot be hot fusion... not the same branching, teh same radiations..."

The reaction is happening and it's hot, so "hot fusion" or maybe "hot transmutation" if preferred. A hypotheses should be on the horizon.

Electron clustering studies were funded by the Jupiter Project a few years back. Kenneth R. Shoulders was a pioneer associated with this entity he called the EV related to fusion. Surprisingly this is not mentioned.

Use of nickel with its variety of surface conditions will lead to the variety of reported results related to fusion. Much more reproducible results are obtained if nickelous oxide is used in the reactor. This presents an atomic array that's easily reproducible. When the reactor temperature is correct for a proton clustering reaction then fusion will result. Probably fortunate for the experimenter that this is very low yield.
Warnings are being posted about the danger associated with these experiments and should be heeded. I was lucky with this one that only a melted reactor resulted. It could have been much worse. I've a left arm with embedded glass fragments from an experiment with calcium carbide that taught me a valuable lesson.

I'd like to toss the dog this bone to chew on.

Try this if you believe seeing is believing.
Take a 24 inch long ceramic tube with about 1/2 inch bore thin wall. Wrap nichrome wire to resistance heat the central 12 inch section. Wrap on outside of tube. Use ceramic wool to hold the reactor material spaced in the 12 inch long central portion of the tube. The 12 inch central section should be a wool plug holding a 6 inch reactor charge and then wool plugging the other 6 inches. The assembly is an externally wound heater on a ceramic tube holding an asymmetrically located charge. High temp silastic tubing is used to deliver hydrogen gas through the reactor. When in operation the ceramic should glow uniformly in the central section until fusion initiates and then the region with the internal reactor will be much brighter.

Instead of fooling with nickel that's hit or miss depending on the surface oxidation and impurity level why not try something that will work reproducibly to demonstrate p + p fusion?

Simply fill a ceramic tube with nickelous oxide and pass hydrogen gas through the tube. Monitor the temperature and witness fusion at 830 C.

This is protocol for a RAGOEL reactor. A nichrome wound alumina cylinder with high temp furnace liner wool plugs holding NiO saturated fiberfrax strips in the central region of the cylinder.

I agree, it's time we move on from these hit and miss e-cat replications because of the random surface conditions of the nickel oxidation state. The reactor should be loaded with a controlled nickel oxide configuration. This will allow the p + p fusion to occur in a highly replicable experiment.

It's unfortunate that this e-cat protocol caught such a strangle hold on the p + p community.

Let's move on by this e-cat fiasco and use a reactor charge that produces 100% reproducibility. The material for the reactor requires special equipment for producing submicron particles and long processing time. The process to produce the RAGOEL reactor material I've documented and will publish if anyone is interested in replicating the fusion reaction. No high pressure is developed in this process and consequently no explosion hazard. There is a problem with runaway reaction and meltdown unless carefully monitored though.