me356: Reactor parameters [part 2]

  • @me356 : Please consider Bob Greenyer's offer to visit your lab. There has to be a way to demonstrate to him the existence of LENR without revealing all your secrets at this point.


    My skepticism with me356 hinges heavily on this exact point. Until this happens, or serious information is revealed, I must put him in the "me356 says" category.

  • "Dear me356,


    I am very excited for you. I am convinced that LENR requires a new
    theory of physics to explain it. Please look at this .pdf document that
    outlines how a new theory of physics can be used to explain LENR: goo.gl/osIiWS"


    I tried to read this paper, but I could only see the first page. Is there something wrong with it?

  • Thank you very much for the comments.


    Hank Mills: Please understand, that just sharing with the community right now can have also negative impact on the LENR. In any way, you can't predict what will really happen.
    At the moment I have no reason to convince anybody. If you see clear nuclear events, I guess that nobody will think it is an inflatable castle.
    I am just telling you that it is real. You can call me fraud. Also you can ban me, if you wish. I have nothing to loose.
    I believe that my results can be replicated without any problem.


    I have not changed any of my decision and will do what promised. Things are going just slower. But again, I am not the only one.


    Right now, I dont want to team up with anybody else until the device will be in a testable condition, without my intervention. Yes, in case of any accident, my knowledge is already in a safe place. The plan will happen in any way.


    I have few kinds of particle/radiation detectors and all are confirming what I am observing without any doubt (either electric and non-electric/analog).

  • Hank Mills: You are very impatient. Yes, days may become months. But it will definitively happen.
    I am sure that you would behave in the same way as I am, with all the circumstances.
    Explaining is useless, you have to just wait.


    If one will know how to start the LENR process, he will continue for sure..
    You have to look in the future with all possibilities and expect what is unexpected.
    Things are not always just great, even that original intention was very good.

  • What I really recommend is to use your intuition and not try to use replication guides as guaranteed and correct ways.
    For example there are descriptions what replicator did during initial phases, but there is not too much explanation why. What exactly happened and why is it needed?
    Conditions when excess heat is occuring are not documented nearly at all, nobody is asking what happened inside and why.
    When you will find the answers, you will learn the value of such knowledge.


    Replicators are spending a lot of time with things that are not necessary, waiting hours - days for "something". Known recipes are incorrect.
    You have to control the process, not that process is controlling you.

  • Dear me356,
    Have you considered that the 1 liter of H2 that seems to "disappear" has been replaced by just vaccum ? Of course at first glance it seems to break the rule of conservation of matter-energy but only if you consider that there's only one Universe..Facing the problem of the observed antisymetry between matter and anti-matter in our Universe, Andreï Sakharov suggested that there was not only one Universe but two (His theory is known as "Twin Universe Theory"). In such case there is conservation of matter-energy if you consider both universes and not just one. So, if you see a true "annihilation" = true disparition of matter then you may have accomplished what Jean-Pierre Petit (French astrophysicist who worked on a cosmological model inspired by Sakharov) call a "local swapping between our universe and the shadow universe.

  • me356,


    I am retired so I really have no desire to start a commercial enterprise. Also my field is computational science not physics, I am MIT trained (class of 71) so I can learn quickly. I am more than willing to sign NDAs and non-competes if my skill would be of some use to you in putting a testable experiment together. Just let me know how I can help.

  • NI: 0.852 X 100/9.133 = 9.32 %
    Li: 7.492 X 100/9.133 = 82.032 %
    Al: 0.789 X 100/9.133 = 8.639 %


    Hi David. Since Li/Al alloys are readily formed, have you considered that the contents of a reactor may be a suspension of Nano-Ni particles in a molten metal matrix? Rather like soup with peas in. Thermal turbulence alone could provide the mixing, and since all three metals readily accept Hydrogen we might be looking at a surface effect, a bulk (dissolved Hydrogen) effect, or some combination of both. The inside of a reactor running at 1000C plus is a busy place - and full of EM fields from the heaters/trigger system. It seems unlikely to me that it would be the kind of tranquil space where things would readily stratify under gravity alone.

  • I have few kinds of particle/radiation detectors and all are confirming what I am observing without any doubt (either electric and non-electric/analog).


    Why will the release of the data recorded by particle/radiation detectors reveal too much info regarding the LENR reaction that me356 is generating? Such info is a result and possibly the ultimate cause of the reaction(like the COP) and has no practical value in informing the way that the LENR reaction is created and/or controlled.


    ME might be overestimating the analytical power that we here who express LENR interests have in interpreting this type of data as to deducing the practical ways and means of the LENR system.


    I can understand any concern coming from the revelation that neutrons and gammas are produced by EM's reaction since the NRC would become involved with this type of system.


    Outside of neutrons, the identification of other particle types are involved and take a great deal of experimental design thinking to setup. I am addressing the production of mesons, muons and electrons, which is my particular interest.

  • Dear me356,
    Have you considered that the 1 liter of H2 that seems to "disappear" has been replaced by just vaccum ? Of course at first glance it seems to break the rule of conservation of matter-energy but only if you consider that there's only one Universe..Facing the problem of the observed antisymetry between matter and anti-matter in our Universe, Andreï Sakharov suggested that there was not only one Universe but two (His theory is known as "Twin Universe Theory"). In such case there is conservation of matter-energy if you consider both universes and not just one. So, if you see a true "annihilation" = true disparition of matter then you may have accomplished what Jean-Pierre Petit (French astrophysicist who worked on a cosmological model inspired by Sakharov) call a "local swapping between our universe and the shadow universe.


    The large amount of hydrogen gas could have been converted to a small amount of coulombic crystal...gas to solid conversion. This crystal could well be nanoscopic in particle size and therefore not visible to the naked eye.


  • You mention that you do not want to team up with anybody, which is absolutely acceptable, but why have you rejected MFMP's offer to at least substantiate what you have? Also, I do not see the logic in holding back basic information that you have that would help replicators as they are already trying combinations in the labs. You don't have to give the more advanced details of what you have created, just the basics.

  • The large amount of hydrogen gas could have been converted to a small amount of coulombic crystal...gas to solid conversion.


    This is funny guessing... 1L of H disappears about 1000x in a properly sized and an unloaded metallic nano structre.


    The question is under what conditions this happens. Of course H resorption always leaves a vacuum behind. There are many papers reporting this fact, even that the vacuum was stronger than achievable by the used vacuum pump.


    So: ME is just telling a fact we know since a long time. But I guess he wants to tell us, that this 1L of H was a kind of shock converted to heat with all measureable consequences.

  • Quote from axil: “The large amount of hydrogen gas could have been converted to a small amount of coulombic crystal...gas to solid conversion.”


    This is funny guessing... 1L of H disappears about 1000x in a properly sized and an unloaded metallic…


    These reactions happen in crust where participates not only hydrogen, but also carbon! Diamonds turn out! It is necessary to create conditions like layer collector, from where extract water and oil. The nature prompts to us a way to Cold fusion !

    Images

    Нефть - это кровь планеты, надо сделать модель планеты и мы получим генератор Тарасенко, эта энергия покорит вселенную! :lenr:

  • Progress with my reactors is on the good way. Now it is not that easy to melt it and even if it happen, the outer shell will survive.


    I have also found new directions where to go. Observed phenomenons are so strange that I can't understand, how…


    I was about to like your post until I read your last sentence.


    You definitely can't see nuclear transmutations optically. There is no way to optically distinguish if heat is coming from chemical or nuclear reactions.
    You will have to observe higher energy photons (x-ray or gammas) for this.


    The TOF SIMS analysis of the ashes of the Padua Cell that MFMP and the Danish University performed clearly show that there are
    no nuclear transmutations occuring in the Padua cell. Thus the power it yields is of chemical origin.


    You will have to conduct or let somebody conduct an own TOF/SIMS ICP-MS Analysis, like MFMP did, if you want the appreciation
    of real scientists. And you will need this approval, even if you think you don't, if you want to have any
    impact with your inventions.


    You won't earn the Euros you are longing for so much, if you don't do this.