Glowstick 5.2 Test series

  • Yesterday I had contact with Alan Goldwater ( magicsound ) about the Glowstick 5.2 tests.
    In this thread, we can discuss the experiment. Alan Goldwater will be available for discussion/feedback.


    URL for the live stream will come here as soon as the test begins.


  • The first GS5.2 test is now under way. The cell is loaded with pre-baked Hunter AH50 Ni powder but no LAH. The system was evacuated to 40 um and Hydrogen added to 15.2 psia. After some settling time, I'll heat the cell to ~180 C and let it sit for an extended period. Hydrogen loading into Nickel is a slow process, so not much will be happening except (hopefully) a gradual drop in the Hydrogen pressure.


    The live data and video stream (with chat sidebar) is available at:
    http://magicsound.us/MFMP/video


    Here's a picture of the cell components before assembly:

  • I wish you success Alan! Do you plan to use any source of stimulation?
    A proper stimulation is what we are missing in our experiments and reason why all replicators are not seeing positive results.


    There are many possible stimulations including phononic resonance achieved by very precise temperature control management. Unfortunately implementation and decent stimulation amplitude is problem.

  • In my penultimate run the experiment turned out the reaction at a temperature of 1150, the usual cooling! Due to lack of power supply has to be insulated. 2 seconds lifted termo insulation - the temperature began to rise sharply. Power consumption has fallen (it with the period of averaging 120 seconds, did not immediately evident on the charts).


    In another experiment, after power and cooling - noted in the chart is the same surge - a sharp rise in t. And then I cleaned the insulation at this time! Unfortunately, I noticed only after the reactor has cooled down.


    I understand perfectly that my equipment is not perfect, and errors can occur. However, there is no need to exaggerate.

  • @me356 For this series (GS5.2), no stimulus is planned other than thermal transients. I can power the heater with an arbitrary waveform up to 30 kHz and 1200 watts, but the B field will be much less than the 1 Tesla described by Piantelli. I have a plan for direct electric stimulus of the fuel capsule, but that will have to wait for GS6.

  • me356 For this series (GS5.2), no stimulus is planned other than thermal transients. I can power the heater with an arbitrary waveform up to 30 kHz and 1200 watts, but the B field will be much less than the 1 Tesla described by Piantelli. I have a plan for direct electric stimulus of the fuel capsule, but that will have to wait for GS6.


    Can the heating wire accept a much greater load than 1200W for a very brief amount of time? (for example with a capacitor bank discharge)

  • @Ecco "Can the heating wire accept a much greater load than 1200W for a very brief amount of time? (for example with a capacitor bank discharge)"


    Yes, certainly. But the wire has to supply heat as well as stimulus in this scenario. The power source I'm testing is a Behringer iNuke 6000 Class D amplifier (I couldn't resist it with that name!). If configured for bridging (differential) output, It can theoretically supply 6 kW of short-duration pulsed power. This could be (for example) 10 usec full-scale pulses at 10 kHz repetition rate. That would represent a 10% duty cycle, or 600 watts average power, enough to heat the cell core to ~1000 C.

  • magicsound : from Piantelli's 1995 patent it sounds as if a single abrupt impulse can be sufficient to start up the reaction, which is then maintained using only heat. His experiments were performed at much lower temperatures than in Parkhomov/Lugano replications, though.


    https://patentscope.wipo.int/search/en/detail.jsf?docId=WO1995020816&recNum=1&maxRec=&office=&prevFilter=&sortOption=&queryString=&tab=PCTDescription


    Quote

    The startup occurred with the thermoelectric method (by a thermic impulse produced by a current impulse passing through winding 9), with the core inserted at all times in the above-mentioned magnetic field and immersed in natural hydrogen at a pressure of 500 millibar. More precisely, the startup was obtained with an impulse intensity of 1000A and a rise time of 30 nanoseconds.


    Quote

    The startup was accomplished with the magnetostrictive method, or, in other words, by applying an electromagnetic impulse to the core through winding 9. More precisely, the startup was obtained with an impulse of 0.8 Tesla and rise time of 0.1 seconds.


    (among other details described in previous sections)

  • @padam73
    My estimate for the volume is 6 ml, so loading was ~.012
    The question is HOW to get higher loading, and that's what this experiment is aimed at. Higher temperature didn't seem to work. Maybe some heat/cool cycles would help.
    Several sources have stated that the pressure should be no more than 1 atm for proper loading. That can be tested up to 10 atm with the current setup. It all takes time...

  • My honest opinion is that it is too early to start another experimental run. You should wait for the end of the test phase of the 1 MW E-Cat.
    There is quite a chance for more valuable data in the next months, which could give you a better starting point.

  • When the end of the test, 1 MW, and the skeptic will quickly prove mathematically that the test can not be trusted ..
    More experiments any different - the way to the accumulation of statistical data. And then, and finished devices. What pleases - the effect does not require anything expensive.

  • The experiment is just getting started. After renewing the thermocouple attachments, we're now doing a formal calibration of the cell, still with dummy fuel (Al2O3) and Hydrogen starting at 13 psia. This series of fixed power steps will establish the base line comparison of the active vs null parts of the cell. Initial steps at low powers can take an hour or more to settle, and this also cures the cement attaching the thermocouples, before higher temperature is applied.


    We'll also be looking for any further evidence of extra gas coming out of the cell components. The full calibration sequence will take 4-5 hours.

  • To summarize the results of previous testing, we collected good data for loading of H2 into pre-baked Nickel powder, with a final loading ratio of 0.012 by mass. In the next test I replaced the Nickel fuel capsule with one containing only Alumina. We found that a considerable amount of gas came out of the cell contents when heated, with a final cell pressure of around 3 atm.. Some of this may have been from de-loading of H2 trapped in the inner surface of the Mullite cell tube. Most of it was probably water vapor trapped in the Alumina powder, which is hydroscopic.


    Following this finding, I did a lengthy bake-out of the cell at up to 800 C. This was done with vacuum, reaching ~80 microns at the end. After the cell cooled (under vacuum) it was sealed and left over night. The pressure rose to ~3 psia in 12 hours, suggesting either a small leak or additional trapped gas. the cell was pumped out again prior to adding H2 to 13 psia for today's test.

  • Great job Alan! You walk while we peanuts talk :-)


    Another guy that walked the walk is Freethinker, he got radiation after prebaking as you just did. I noticed that in your list of equipment there is only one geiger meter, you might need two to identify the direction of the source of radiation to rule out other sources of radiation IF you will have such a signal. See Freethinker's replication attempts


    I recommend read the whole thread, but page #12 is the shit.

  • Mats, I have a NaI Gamma Spectrometer (thanks to a generous donor) with 200 kg of lead around the detector. It runs during all fueled experiments. The aperture for the detector is visible in the live camera of the video stream.


    So far we have seen only background.

  • @Mats
    My GM counter is a basic instrument that detects beta particles (fast electrons) and gamma (high energy photons) in the range 0.1..3.0 MeV. It's pretty sensitive and has data output which is nice. The Sodium Iodide Spectrometer detects the same range of energies and particle types. It also measures the energy of each event using a photomultiplier tube and digital software. This feature helps characterize the possible source of emissions.


    Neither of these instruments can detect massive slow particles like alphas or neutrons. The alphas are not likely to pass through the cell wall. The neutrons are the real issue and detecting them is tricky. Then there's muons - we've talked about how Holmlid (and Sveinn) detect them, and the possibility of building a replica.That would be a separate experiment and venue though.

  • @magicsound


    There are many different kinds of traps alongside those that catch rabbits or reputations. I recommend that MFMP avoids getting caught in Leif Holmlid’s ultradense deuterium trap. Just like the hydrinos this is not something that exists or can be coaxed into existence by black magic or any color magic.


    At least wait for a couple of D(-1) replications before spending resources on it. Before this has happened I suspect that the average donor will find it a less worthy cause.

  • @Mats
    My GM counter is a basic instrument that detects beta particles (fast electrons) and gamma (high energy photons) in the range 0.1..3.0 MeV. It's pretty sensitive and has data output which is nice. The Sodium Iodide Spectrometer detects the same range of energies and particle types. It also measures the energy of each event using a photomultiplier tube and digital software. This feature helps characterize the possible source of emissions.


    Neither of these instruments can detect massive slow particles like alphas or neutrons. The alphas are not likely to pass through the cell wall. The neutrons are the real issue and detecting them is tricky. Then there's muons - we've talked about how Holmlid (and Sveinn) detect them, and the possibility of building a replica.That would be a separate experiment and venue though.


    Building a muon detector is a great idea. Its not junk, its been certified. The Holmlid muon detector was peer reviewed by the Review of Scientific Instruments.


    http://scitation.aip.org/conte…si/86/8/10.1063/1.4928109


    I can mail you the full article is you are interested. I have all of Holmlid stuff.

  • H-G Branzell
    There are many different kinds of traps alongside those that catch rabbits or reputations. I recommend that MFMP avoids getting caught in Leif Holmlid’s ultradense deuterium trap. Just like the hydrinos this is not something that exists or can be coaxed into existence by black magic or any color magic. At least wait for a couple of D(-1) replications before spending resources on it. Before this has happened I suspect that the average donor will find it a less worthy cause.


    I can make one practical comment on this statement H-G Branzell.


    Leif Holmlid´s work does not urgently need a replication the reason is that anyone that has visited him has been able to perform similar measurements using his setup. A replication from different lab would be fine but that lab would face the same problem of interpreting similiar experimental results. That lab could hardly come up with much different interpretation. Anyone that reads Leif papers can look for alternative interpretation of his data.


    The muon and other results however urgently need confirmation with different experimental methods i.e. not a replication experiment.


    Greetings


    Sveinn

  • What about a DIY cloud chamber? Wouldn't it be capable of visually detecting muons emitted from the reactor, especially if in great number compared to the cosmic ray background?


    It seems like Piantelli is the only researcher who has used a cloud chamber in his research. For the life of me, I cannot understand why. A cloud chamber is not only a low cost, easy to build, highly probative, and informative scientific instrument but also a unparalleled visual aid in providing both the researcher and general audience with a full flavor of what LENR really means.


    The particle detectors at CERN are solid state devices based on the same particle detection principles as those afforded in a cloud chamber.


    When cupped with a magnetic field, a cloud chamber can show the polarity and energy level of charged particles like the muon and even particle decay chains. Being so simple, rudimentary, and fundamental, a YouTube video of an experimental run featuring a series of experimental LENR based visual depictions of the experiment would provide visual evidence for nuclear activity that even the most brain dead of naysayers would have trouble denying. Even those LENR critics who persist in denying this simple to understand visual evidence would look like fools and propagandists that they are. After all who does one believe, this blabbering naysaying fool or the evidence of your own eyes?

  • @axil
    Yes please, build a cloud chamber and show us LENR, that would be nice of you!


    @Svein
    Quoting fromhttp://nextbigfuture.com/2015/09/patent-details-for-nuclear-fusion-using.html

    Quote

    The hydrogen transfer catalyst may further be configured to cause a transition of the hydrogen into the ultradense state if the hydrogen atoms are prevented from re-forming covalent bonds. The mechanisms behind the catalytic transition from the gaseous state to the ultra-dense state are quite well understood, ...


    Can you help spread light on “understood”?


    Is this the answer to my question perhaps hidden here: http://link.springer.com/artic…s10894-010-9280-4#/page-1

    Quote

    An attempt is made to explain the recently reported occurrence of ultradense deuterium as an isothermal transition of Rydberg matter into a high density phase by quantum mechanical exchange forces. It is conjectured that the transition is made possible by the formation of vortices in a Cooper pair electron fluid, separating the electrons from the deuterons, with the deuterons undergoing Bose–Einstein condensation in the core of the vortices.

  • What gammas will your meter NOT detect? I see that if it detects something at all that would be Something but is it sensitive enough to detect a non-chemical signal?


    Both GM detectors and NaI scintillators are going to be limited in important ways for observing any activity that may be generated within a core. Neither beta electrons nor charged particles are likely to pass through the walls. The photon stopping power of different materials is largely dependent upon material density. If the photons must traverse anything nontrivial, they are likely to be stopped altogether below a threshold energy. As a practical matter, I'm guessing that in the case of gas loading NiH experiments that use stainless steel containers, one is unlikely to pick up anything other than hard x-rays and MeV gammas, and these may not be produced in any quantity.


    (Neutrons have never been seen in quantities commensurate with excess heat that I know of, so they can probably be set aside as something to worry about until a lot more is known.)


    My GM counter is a basic instrument that detects beta particles (fast electrons) and gamma (high energy photons) in the range 0.1..3.0 MeV.


    Translating the lower bound energy for photons into keV -- that's a range of 100 keV to 3000 keV, i.e., hard x-rays and MeV gamma photons. Fast electrons are unlikely to escape from any container used in the NiH gas loading experiments. It would be nice to have detectors with lower energy ranges and to run them against the contents of the core before and after an experiment, along the lines of Axil's cloud chamber idea.

  • @Svein
    Quoting fromhttp://nextbigfuture.com/2015/09/patent-details-for-nuclear-fusion-using.html
    The hydrogen transfer catalyst may further be configured to cause a transition of the hydrogen into the ultradense state if the hydrogen atoms are prevented from re-forming covalent bonds. The mechanisms behind the catalytic transition from the gaseous state to the ultra-dense state are quite well understood, ...


    Can you help spread light on “understood”?


    This is a patent text if you do A then B then C with something then you have "an understood mechanism " i.e. the process that you are trying to patent?


    Is this the answer to my question perhaps hidden here: link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10894-010-9280-4#/page-1
    An attempt is made to explain the recently reported occurrence of ultradense deuterium as an isothermal transition of Rydberg matter into a high density phase by quantum mechanical exchange forces. It is conjectured that the transition is made possible by the formation of vortices in a Cooper pair electron fluid, separating the electrons from the deuterons, with the deuterons undergoing Bose–Einstein condensation in the core of the vortices.


    I have tried to read this paper a few times, I always loose the thread/logic jumps on the way.....so do you maybe ?