Yes but they were assuming only electrochemically driven recombination with dissolved oxygen was possible.
No. Any kind of recombination, from any source, would always result in more water left in the cell than the expected amount. The amount of water in a cell and the amount added as make-up water is measured with precision. After a day or two it would be obvious there is recombination.
Another fatal error in the Ascoli analysis:
Of the input electrical energy he assumes 10 watt lost as heat, which is approximately correct, BUT then he assumes the remaining is available for vaporization.
However, this is not correct, a large portion (60% + increasing with temperature) goes into splitting of the water molecules to H2 and O2, and therefore less available to heat.
Are you saying that the most talented electrochemists of the last century did such a silly mistake in their calculation at page 16 of their ICCF3 paper (1)?
They were sloppy, but not so much. In their calculation, the input power available for vaporization was 26.5 W, that is 171 W (enthalpy of vaporization) minus 144.5 W (presumed excess heat). It also coincides to 37.5 (enthalpy input) minus 11 W (enthalpy losses to ambient), ie all the input power beyond the losses to the ambient was considered by F&P as available for vaporization.
The portion which goes into the splitting of water molecules to H2 and O2 was already accounted by the 1.54 V term shown in the first equation, which F&P called Ethermoneutral in equation [1] at page 3. Therefore, it is a minor portion of the input power since the beginning of the test and its percentage decreases as the Vcell increases.
In consequence, your "Calculations of Excess Heat - Part 1 and 2" (2,3) are completely wrong.
(1) http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/Fleischmancalorimetra.pdf
la plus extravagante et la plus chère de la Côte d'Azur.
The beer and sun on the Riviera is irrelevant to this issue,
Attributing Lipid Transfer Protein 1 to Fleischmann and Pons is Ascoli Frothology
https://www.craftbeer.com/craf…-science-behind-beer-foam
Do alkali metal hydroxide solutions boil and FOAM?
Rather than relying on a grainy video as your justification of foam + endless Ascoli armchair hours.
Prepare
1. 0.4 gm NaOH/100 mls water
2. 0.4 gm NaOH/100 mls beer
Please boil and observe what kind of foam occurs.
Ascoli:
Of course Fleischmann is correct 
Which means I was wrong. I forgot the overpotential.
Or another way of saying it: My assumed electrolysis efficiency figures of 50-60% is way too high for the F&P cell.
Which means my excess energy calculations between the 60 degC and 98 degC area was too high.
I will do a correction, but will have to also look into the heat losses in the gasses (steam / H2/O2 than was expelled during the period)
Well Kirk, so ATER is another ghostly phenomenon you propose, or do you have a paper proving the effect?
Not another, the same. And in case you forgot, it has the same characteristics as LENR, so your attempt to insult my proposed mechanism equally insults LENR as a 'ghostly' phenomenon.
I do have a paper proposing ATER as the cause of a heat distribution shift in F&P electrolysis cells, which in turn causes a calibration constant shift. ATER is a proposed mechanism, and if you can think of another one that causes heat distribution shifts, or one that explains the systematic trend noted in my paper, have at it! The more the merrier.
I believe the attachéd graph sums it up nicely.
If drawn in a way to make it clear, yes, I agree, and I've written it up somehwere that I can't recall at the moment. The point is the Will model for electrochemical recombination does connect several points in the Figure, and drawing said line then revels a couple of clusters of data that lie above that line, i.e., with greater excess heat than expected by the model. So I have pointed to that very graph as evidence for ATER (which derives from non-electrochemical recombination in my parlance).
{EDIT: Storms used this graph in his 2006 attempt to rebutt my arguments, and I explained the problem in my response. Thermochimica Acta 441 (2006) 210 (Storms' paper is at p. 207.)}
F&P ran their cells well above 0,1 A/cm2, so there would be less than 5% recombination expected.
As I just remarked to Jed over in the 'Does LENR...' thread, your statement is based on a truism held in the CF community. That truism does not account for ATER. That's the point of my papers in the field.
And even 100% recombination would not explain my last calculation above.
By not working it out, you have stated something untrue.
Recombination should be accounted for in the F&P calorimetric equation with a gamma coefficient in the P/(P*-P) term, but F&P and others drop this because they believe their own truism mentioned in prior posts. This arbitrarily sets gamma = 1, and per Will, may allow for up to a 4% error.
The values of the P/(1-P) term (which I will call the Pterm below) for 25, 55, and 95C are respectively 0.0323, 0.1838, and 5.0317.
In F&P's Fig. 6A, the first excess heat value they indicate is 0.303W, which occurs at a rough cell temp of 55C. If we divide the reported excess heat by the Pterm value at 55C and then multiply by the 25C value, we get 0.053W or 53mW, which could certainly be a small % electrochemical recombination. Now, do the same from 95C and we get an estimated excess heat of 8.21W, just because of the change in the Pterm.
So to summarize, the reported excess heat could easily be a 'math trick'. It would seem to be about 50-60 mW at lower cell temps, but the Pterm effect magnifies this tremendously, for an approx. 600% error at 55C and a whopping approx. 15,500% error at 95C. Its obvious why F&P don't use their calorimetric approach at high T (close to boiling) but what they failed to realize is that the effect is big at their nominal operating temps too.
BTW, at 500mA current, the potential recombination heat is 770mW. 10% of that is 77mW. The estimated 53mW then is about 7% (so maybe there's a little ATER going on after all). The 303 mW is still less than 100% recombination (approx. 40%).
No. Any kind of recombination, from any source, would always result in more water left in the cell than the expected amount. The amount of water in a cell and the amount added as make-up water is measured with precision. After a day or two it would be obvious there is recombination.
And if we could believe they accurately measured this water volume number you might be right, except for the fact that the one time it was reported in the literature, they measure 7% more volume coming out than they were supposed to get. So conservatively their measurements are in the +/- 10% range, which is not accurate enough. Further, they do not consider entrainment, which I believe ATER would alter, so that's an additional problem.
Your position on this is based in your faith in the CFR researchers. I base my position on reported facts.
This is enough on the invalidity of the CF field's truism on %recombination and how well it is measured from me.
Well Kirk, so ATER is another ghostly phenomenon you propose, or do you have a paper proving the effect?
Well oystla, so LENR is anotehr ghostly phenomenon you propose, or do you have a paper proving the effect?
Sauce for the goose, sauce for the gander.
No-one needs to prove ATER for it to be a possibility, just as no-one needs to prove LENR for it to be a possibility. Both are unexpected, both in principle possible.
I'd like you to be objective in your judgements here.
Well oystla, so LENR is anotehr ghostly phenomenon you propose, or do you have a paper proving the effect?
Kirk has one ATER paper AFAIK. LENR has thousands., but proof is in the eye of the beholder.
LENR has thousands.,
That all repeat the same mistakes. Isn't it a definition of insanity to repeat the same thing over and over and expect a different result?
Isn't it a definition of insanity to repeat the same thing over and over and expect a different result?
Indeed it is, but also reminiscent of your attempts to persuade Jed to throw his towel into Mizuno's bucket.
The Ascoli Frothology (AF effect) impact on Italian CF research
Ascoli will share a cappuccino with Daniele Gozzi in the piazza cafe
and sympathetically enlighten him how the " AF effect" negates
1. The confirmation of F&P excess heat
2. The production of helium
3. The emission of 89 KeV gammas
Journal of Electroanalytical Chemistry 452 (1998)
X-ray, heat excess and 4 He in the D/Pd system
D. Gozzi , F. Cellucci P.L. Cignini G. Gigli M. Tomellini E. Cisbani S. Frullani G.M. Urciuoli
Dipartimeno di Chimica, Universita` di Roma La Sapienza, P. le Aldo Moro 5, 00185 Roma, Italy L
Received 29 January 1997; received in revised form 2 May 1997
Indeed it is, but also reminiscent of your attempts to persuade Jed to throw his towel into Mizuno's bucket.
You are right. I keep thinking there are lurkers who might benefit though. Probably just another sign of my insanity.
there are lurkers
seek local advice when visiting the piazza at night.. but 2.53 pm should be OK
Cold Frotthology (CF) dans la Côte d'Azur
Do alkali metal hydroxide solutions boil and FOAM?
Yes, the electrolyte solutions used in the F&P cells boil and make FOAM, a lot of, as shown by the available documentation.
If you want a demonstration, please look attentively at the previous jpeg (*) and read carefully its explanation (**).
(*) FP's experiments discussion
(**) FP's experiments discussion
QuoteAttributing Lipid Transfer Protein 1 to Fleischmann and Pons is Ascoli Frothology
If, instead, you are more interested in satire rather than seriously debating the foam issue, you can enjoy this jpeg.
The Ascoli Frothology (AF effect) impact on Italian CF research
Ascoli will share a cappuccino with Daniele Gozzi in the piazza cafe
and sympathetically enlighten him how the " AF effect" negates
1. The confirmation of F&P excess heat
...
CF has spread all over the world and, unfortunately, it took solid root in Italy. We like frothy cappuccinos and bier.
But the report you mentioned is too old. The last achievement of the Italian research on CF integrates perfectly this foamy tradition, with an even older tradition which goes back to the habit of the Franciscan friars, "i frati Cappuccini". This name comes from their hooded headgear (cappuccio) and, in turn, the name of today's hot drink comes from the color of their poor habits (1).
It seems that the next ICCF22 will be celebrated in Assisi, in an hotel managed by the Franciscans. Maybe the fate of the CF is to finish where it began, that is in the foam. In this case, that of warm cappuccinos served by Capuchins wearing their ropes made of capuchin knots, the last and only remedy to get some holy excess heat (2).
(1) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Order_of_Friars_Minor_Capuchin
(2) https://www.researchgate.net/p…ower_at_high_temperatures
But the report you mentioned is too old
The 1998 report , by your compatriots Daniele Gozzi et al. http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/GozziDxrayheatex.pdf
is at least six years younger than the grainy video
you are using as the basis for your Lake Bled presentation.
Perhaps you have your own 2018 lab work ready by October.
The 1998 report , by your compatriots Daniele Gozzi et al.http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/GozziDxrayheatex.pdf
is at least six years younger than the grainy video
you are using as the basis for your Lake Bled presentation.
The grainy video, as you called it, has been published on the web in order to accompany the video "Introduction to Cold Fusion" in order "to shows the dramatic heat effect of the cold fusion reaction on the water fuel" (1).
If its quality was deemed sufficient to show an inexistent nuclear phenomenon, it is for sure more than sufficient to see the foam, a lot of foam, that really filled the cells.
As for the ICCF2, this is the last location announced.
| From https://www.infinite-energy.co…azine/issue141/ICCF21.pdf ICCF22 The chairman and location, and sometimes the dates of the next conference, are decided at each ICCF by the International Advisory Committee (IAC). That group is made up of the past Chairmen and Co-Chairmen of a conference in this series. The IAC met on the evening of June 6 to consider a proposal from Bill Collis to hold ICCF22 at Lake Bled in Slovenia in the fall of 2019. That proposal was accepted. Subsequently, Bill Collis determined that the conference could be held in Assisi, Italy, at a more favorable cost. The IAC concurred with this possibility. So, ICCF22 is slated to occur in the center of Assisi during September 8-13, 2019. The location will be the Hotel Domus Pacis. |
If you want to listen the "intellectually honest" explications of the "foam issue" that you are invoking and that will be certainly provided by the CF experts, be careful, book for the right destination. You will also have the opportunity to learn by ancient experts and modern scientists how to weave electric wires in order to enhance nuclear reactions in them.
(1) https://coldfusionnow.org/flei…roduction-to-cold-fusion/
ancient experts and modern scientists
Which do you prefer as your title? for the abstract writeup?
Ascoli65 PhD (AF) ? or Ascoli65 (Anon) Frothologist?
Assisi? are you booked in? It has nice scenery.. some ancient, some not so ancient..
Perhaps you can humbly share a cappucino with Researchers Celani and Violante
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/V_Violante
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Francesco_Celani
La santa umiltà confonde l'orgoglio e tutti gli uomini di questo mondo e tutte le cose che sono nel mondo. Francesco d'Assisi
Huxley;
What I would like to see is a laboratory test destined for ATER specifically and proves how ATER impacts the test results. SO: There is none such tests performed.
But wait, we have 1000's of laboratory tests that was done specifically to prove various LENR phenomenon's. Which really just was ATER...no it was LENR...no it was ATER...no it was LENR...
and so goes life
3. The emission of 89 KeV gammas
Journal of Electroanalytical Chemistry 452 (1998)
X-ray, heat excess and 4 He in the D/Pd system
D. Gozzi , F. Cellucci P.L. Cignini G. Gigli M. Tomellini E. Cisbani S. Frullani G.M. Urciuoli
Dipartimeno di Chimica, Universita` di Roma La Sapienza, P. le Aldo Moro 5, 00185 Roma, Italy L
Received 29 January 1997; received in revised form 2 May 1997
They did just deduce the radiation, but could not measure it. The problem is that they assume alphas get added to Pt what is very unlikely. Two times Pt +D is looking somewhat different!
Citation of the above paper: Unfortunately, in these experiments, the measured intensity of the radiation and number of particles is so low that the confidence in the detection statistics is always questioned.
