Rossi's 2009 TOF-SIMS analyses digitized (+ theory speculation)

I'm starting to become doubtful that hydrogen is even relevant to the operation of the E-Cat, myself, apart from its implications for thermal conductivity and so on. Obviously this impression might be mistaken. I like the potassium idea that I read about somewhere. Lithium is still interesting. In my mind, trace isotopes in nickel are another possibility. None of this is to say that nickel would necessarily be a hard-and-fast requirement. The data we have on the E-Cat are very ambiguous, unfortunately. (This is no doubt partly intentional.)

For some reason I had gotten the impression that the recent US patent from Rossi was a genuine effort, undertaken with competent legal counsel. If it was not a genuine effort, it will offer Rossi no protection, of course.

LENR is topological in nature. Shapes are important rather than material. Mills lists most of the periodic table as having catalytic activity. Piantelli says the same thing about substrates. LENR converts light into dipole motion. The catalysts produce nanoparticles dynamically. The gas must be a dielectric, oxygen or chlorine may work well and so will water. That's it.

Quote from Ecco

Eric Walker: no Nickel, that's quite possible given circumstantial evidence that Rossi may have not always used it, but no hydrogen? I would somewhat agree if you mean "not directly".

I know the idea that hydrogen might not be involved is a little unusual. I think there's been a bit of inertia in the interpretation of the older LENR experiments, which have long been predicated on the idea that deuterium was important. But the hydrogen isotope effect, in which deuterium is thought to work better than protium, has never been very pronounced or even, in my own mind, fully established. In addition, Rossi may have always believed, and still believe, that hydrogen is important; so the suggestion isn't to imply that Rossi has been misleading anyone in this regard.

My own reason for doubting hydrogen is that I wonder whether much of LENR can be explained by alpha and beta decay (induced, so that it is faster than normal). If so, then it's not clear how hydrogen or deuterium would be involved. That said, even if induced alpha and beta decay were a thing, it's always possible that there's yet another process out there that involves hydrogen. Because there are so many possibilities, it's an exciting time to be watching this field.

There are many ways to skin a cat and hydrogen rydberg matter is just one. Look at the Papp engine and the suncell. These systems do not contain hydrogen. Both the Leclair cavitation system, and the first Papp system used water. Papp also used chlorine.

The suncell uses water. The second Papp engine used noble gas and chlorine.

The key concept in dynamic and continuous nanoparticle production. Rydberg matter is just one way to do it. LeClair has micrographed water micro particles produced by cavitation bubbles.

Most replicators have produced blowouts in the tube during startup. Rossi could have found a way to get past that startup problem. This massive release of energy is similar to the gamma problem at startup. I think Rossi evened out the power spike at startup via the heat pipe idea expressed above.

Quote from Ecco

Eric Walker: are you suggesting something along the lines of what axil seems to be implying here?

Probably not. Although some of the systems Axil points to are interesting, and Papp did use chlorine in earlier iterations. (I'm quite doubtful about LeClaire's work.)

About the Zn, it could be active, a byproduct or an inert material. It would be interesting if it were one of the first two.

Quote from Ecco

@axil: disregarding Holmlid's interpretation of the end result (Rydberg Matter) would you agree with him saying that something unusual - not necessarily of nuclear nature - might occur when diatomic or covalent bonds are prevented from forming, and that this can happen with hydrogen, but also water and some diatomic gases? In other words, that the key for obtaining some sort of anomalous effect is attempting to continuously cause certain compounds to dissociate and recombine, and doing it as efficiently as possible?

Dissociation and recombination is the key to the nanoparticle formation process from plasma to a crystal state.

LENR is based on shape, the nanoparticle should be nanowire shaped. Water nano particles have the same shape as hydrogen rydberg matter(HRM). The smallest nano particle make the best shape. HRM is the sharpest shape. The nanoparticle must rest on a large microparticle or a solid substrate in order to receive all the large microparticle's dipole motion to produce enormously amplified EMF power.

In more detail, this power goes as the proportional size of the micro particle vs the size of the tip of the nanowire. This amplification factor can be up to 10^^20. For example for Rossi, 100 microns nickel microparticle vs .1 nanometers nanowire tip size produces the product (100)(1000)(10). That's a particle size amplification size factor of 1,000,000. That number is multiplied by the number of SPPs confined at the tip of the nanowire: let just say 10 trillion as the number of SPPs (bosons - no limit to packing) produced by the large microparticle that find their way to the tip of the nanowire. Now the spin of the SPP is 2. So when we multiply that out, we get a large spin that projects from the tip of the nanowire.
(10^6)(10^13)(2). All that spin is directed forward from the sharp tip of the nanowire in an anapole magnetic(monopole) beam up to 100 microns or more.

It does not matter what the materials of the reactor are, it only matters that the shapes meet the requirements of the LENR reaction. For example, carbon that make buckyballs won't work, but carbon that make nanowire might work.

These nanowires lead a hard life. They don't last long. Importantly, these nanowires need to be constantly rebuilt to replenish their numbers in a continuous production process.

We've fallen into Dodgson's rabbit hole with LENR and now in a Wonderland of conjectures.
Low amu hydrogen fusion is the stellar proton fusion process that results in helium and also photons to satisfy the "never created or destroyed" law. A nice example of KISS.

Quote from ogfusionist

We've fallen into Dodgson's rabbit hole with LENR and now in a Wonderland of conjectures.
Low amu hydrogen fusion is the stellar proton fusion process that results in helium and also photons to satisfy the "never created or destroyed" law. A nice example of KISS.

That picture that I show in the post above is a real monopole magnetic beam coming out of a real polariton soliton formed at the tip of a real nanoparticle. It is not pseudoscience, it is nanoplasmonics and it is real.

Does that polariton have a mass equivalent to that in your comment here Friday in "The Holmlid Effect" that
"The SPP hold a huge amount of energy in excess of 1,000,000 giga electron volts"

(Which, by the way is equivalent to a rest mass of about 1 million a.m.u., or nearly 2 billion electrons!--- "mass deficit" be damned, now the
problem would be "mass surfeit".)

Is there something amiss when such mass/energies are putatively so casually produced?

Quote from Longview

Does that polariton have a mass equivalent to that in your comment here Friday in "The Holmlid Effect" that
"The SPP hold a huge amount of energy in excess of 1,000,000 giga electron volts"

(Which, by the way is equivalent to a rest mass of about 1 million a.m.u., or nearly 2 billion electrons!--- "mass deficit" be damned, now the
problem would be "mass surfeit".)

Is there something amiss when such mass/energies are putatively so casually produced?

The polariton is mostly light and has a mass of 10^-6 of the electron. The SPP energy figure comes from the tachyon energy requirements derived from string theory. If the SPP soliton is a tachyon, then the mass of the tachyon is as stated in theory.

See:

http://restframe.com/rf/home.html

"for v > c, given values of m0 and E0 k . Using eq. (15) for Recami-Mignani tachyon monopoles gives |m0 | = 7.29 × 10^6GeV /c2 and β 0 = 1.83 × 10^7

By the way, to get mass from energy, we must divide by C^2

Which brings up the interesting point that C squared in a vacuum is presumably a constant and hence the exercise of its division is simply a constant of proportionality. But, C is not necessarily a constant (I will leave transluminal velocities for the clairvoyants to discuss) but lower velocities of light propagation are observable and meaningful. E = MC² in some propagating medium can make the E/C² yield an M that is much larger in the case of real world conductors, semiconductors and insulators that have propagation velocities several fold slower than C in vacuo. This may be another SIMPLE route to making up mass deficit or worded another way, a way of increasing effective mass... without resorting to arguments from the dark side, so to speak.

I invite all who wish to make progress in LENR, to be very cautious in adopting ideas that are completely incongruous with what has gone before.There is a very good chance that LENRs are not so unusual as to require total paradigm shifts for reasonably concise understanding and hence to theories of useful predictive power and engineering utility.

Research into the tools of quantum mechanics are being researched and defined and the tools are currently in use to produce such things as quantum computers and invisibility cloaks. These tools include entanglement, teleportation, black hole evaporation by entanglement and teleportation, closed time loops, negative matter, and backward flow of time. This is where science currently stands.

But I must confess that these theories are an abstraction in science were abstraction is safe and warm, and when there is a prospect that these things are real in the world, panic sets in for if the quantum world becomes real in our lives, the old familiar and warm world we live in is an illusion.

Quote from Longview

I invite all who wish to make progress in LENR, to be very cautious in adopting ideas that are completely incongruous with what has gone before.There is a very good chance that LENRs are not so unusual as to require total paradigm shifts for reasonably concise understanding and hence to theories of useful predictive power and engineering utility.

Agree 100 percent. Any overly complex explanation is likely to be wrong. (Especially if it's intentionally overly complex, as happens more often that you would think on the Internet.)

When Holmlid tells you all that he produces 10 billion K mesons in an instantaneous burst from a laser shot, you don't believe him. Your ability to accept complexity is limiting your ability to think open mindedly like Mary Yugo.