The Industrial Heat Answer

  • I don't know about the "similar result at SRI." Citation, please.


    See experiment HH from SRI Technical Report TR-107843-V1, by McKubre et al., starting on p. 3-26. Here is part of the relevant discussion, which is necessarily abridged:



    For comparison with the M4 experiment: these HH samples are associated with about a tenth of the excess power of the M4 power levels, over a comparable period of time, and with helium measurements that are in the ppbv versus ppm and which are more or less indistinguishable from null helium measurements. Similarly to Miles, the cathode material was Pd:Ce:Sm, with samarium included where it was not reported in Miles (if I recall). I do not have a strong handle on the HH experiments (or the M-series ones), so I might be reading something incorrectly into this. But at some point I recall making a connection to the Pd-Ce/D experiments that Miles reported on.

  • I will go along with your request, Alan. But I honestly don't see why you and others imagine that the threads on this forum will ever be nicely organized. I suggest you abandon the thought as impractical and not worthwhile. It disrupts the natural flow of conversation and does not make following the threads, which are already a jumble, any easier.

  • I will go along with your request, Alan. But I honestly don't see why you and others imagine that the threads on this forum will ever be nicely organized. I suggest you abandon the thought as impractical and not worthwhile. It disrupts the natural flow of conversation and does not make following the threads, which are already a jumble, any easier.


    Damned if I do, and damned if I don't. Some complain about thread drift, and some enjoy it. I conclude that in general, 'people are never happy'. :(

  • Damned if I do, and damned if I don't. Some complain about thread drift, and some enjoy it. I conclude that in general, 'people are never happy'.


    It is nice to keep threads on topic - but not nice enough to avoid the temptation of replying to an off topic thread on the post it was made...


  • Yet, I am telling you what people who have actually spent significant time with him have said to me (or to others I trust, conveyed to me confidentially). People who are not naive and who understand the situation, which they consider tragic.


    It sure seems to me that the ones who trusted Rossi and were fooled by his charade of likability are the ones in fact who are now showing to be the naive. Often the one who is reaching his hand farthest into your pocket to steal from you is the one who is shaking your other hand with the largest warmest most loving smile. Remember...blind faith allows for so much justification in a person's character.

  • Admirable in principle - but how would you know for sure? But not my worry, not being an Admin.

    It is not necessary to know for sure. Preponderance of the evidence is quite enough. "George Hody," given that we know who the real George Hody is with relation to this field, is almost proof of impersonation, enough to assert it and then allow the person to establish "not impersonation," if it is not.


    Which "George Hody" is quite unlikely to bother with.

  • When your family name is Smith you get used to sharing it.



    Mr Smith now that we know how to fabricated a nickel particle that is 100 times more effective than the stuff that you currently sell, when will the upgraded nickel catalyst be available from LookingForHeat?


    https://www.google.com/patents/US9023754


    Nano-skeletal catalyst US 9023754 B2


    https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwizqNPa4sbOAhUKSyYKHY2jBMwQFggcMAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fjoam.inoe.ro%2Farhiva%2Fpdf6_3%2FLucaci.pdf&usg=AFQjCNFD6PupiXQBYhTwMgdX_rYlmfXBPw&sig2=j-18ndlZWnb-giCI5qvchw&bvm=bv.129759880,d.eWE


    A NEW FAMILY OF NICKEL POWDER FOR ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING. APPLICATIONS

  • The bizarre part is that people say things about the experimental record without having studied it. Hydrogen controls have been included in experimental studies. Off the top of my head, Miles and McKubre (Case). With hydrogen, no anomalous heat and no elevated helium.


    Another bizarre part is that pundits think that the Q/4He ratio can be meaured when there is no heat and no helium. The fact is, nobody has tried to measure helium in heat producing natural hydrogen systems. This illustrates the the bizarre non-scientific nature of this research field. People are far more interested in appearing to be right at any cost than in discovering new science. It's pathological.


    I appreciate there may sometimes be non-scientific reasons for say demonstrations. But I suggest that excess heat, with or without helium has not been very successful so far and is unlikely to be so in the future. On the other hand nuclear measurements, isotopic anomalies, etc. are orders of magnitude more sensitive and allow the measurement of multiple correlated parameters. (e.g. intesity, energy, decay pattern of gamma peaks).

  • Mr Smith now that we know how to fabricated a nickel particle that is 100 times more effective than the stuff that you currently sell, when will the upgraded nickel catalyst be available from LookingForHeat?


    This is another version of Raney Nickel. The patent is 12 years old and contains nothing much that was new at the time -where is the product available?

  • Abd Ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:


    Another bizarre part is that pundits think that the Q/4He ratio can be meaured when there is no heat and no helium.


    That is freaking ridiculous. 0/0 is part of the evidence for correlation. It supports the ratio, but obviously cannot be used in determining its value. There is no "pundit" who thinks as Hermes states.


    (To be more accurate, there are no "0/0" results. There are results where the values are in the noise. So what actually exists are results of heat < X and helium <Y, and a calculated ratio will be scattered. There was a plot in Storms (2007) showing the ratio vs average power for the collection interval for results from Miles and from Bush and Lagowski. You can see how the measurements at the lowest power have high scatter, and as power increases (and helium increases), the results settle. (Storms, The Science of Low Energy Nuclear Reaction, 2007, p. 87, seems to settle around 60% of the theoretical ratio, indicating that about 40% is held in the palladium).


    Quote

    The fact is, nobody has tried to measure helium in heat producing natural hydrogen systems.


    That may be true. Heat producing natural hydrogen systems are rare, and measuring helium is difficult, it takes special care both to collect the helium and to measure it. The mass spectrometer must be able to resolve He-4+ and D2+.


    Quote

    This illustrates the the bizarre non-scientific nature of this research field. People are far more interested in appearing to be right at any cost than in discovering new science. It's pathological.


    Again, that is freaking ridiculous. To do this measurement, one would need a substantial heat production with natural hydrogen. One would not waste time with only a little heat, even if it is significant. Then, helium is *extremely unlikely* as a product. Yes, if access is available to heat producing H systems, helium should be checked if possible. But where has that existed?


    Hydrogen was used, as I mentioned, as a control in experiments with deuterium, including the FP Heat Effect. Under FPHE conditions, hydrogen produces no heat or only a little. I think that Hermes is describing himself, as one of the "people interested in appearing to be right." That motivation is common for human beings, but would not suppress the investigation of hydrogen systems and helium; what suppresses it is the body of experimental evidence so far, and, yes, what is known, leads to no expectation of payback for the substantial work involved. Quite simply, this is not a research priority. Finding ways to generate heat is. And if a way can be sustained for a long time, even at low power, then testing for ash is obviously on the menu. The one to look for, though, is deuterium, probably, and that is present as a major impurity already.


    I appreciate there may sometimes be non-scientific reasons for say demonstrations. But I suggest that excess heat, with or without helium has not been very successful so far and is unlikely to be so in the future. On the other hand nuclear measurements, isotopic anomalies, etc. are orders of magnitude more sensitive and allow the measurement of multiple correlated parameters. (e.g. intesity, energy, decay pattern of gamma peaks).[/quote]
    This ignores the experimental evidence. The FP Heat Effect does not produce other effects that can easily be detected. These other effects have long been sought; some are found, but at very low levels, obviously having nothing to do with the "main show." I usually state it this way: with the FPHE, tritium is a million times down from helium, and neutrons are a million times down from tritium. Neither have been well-correlated with heat. Helium has.


    "Isotopic anomalies" have not been confirmed at levels higher than tritium. These searches come up with nearly useless information. They show "something nuclear" might be happening, but artifacts abound, and the studies tend to be unconfirmed. There is a huge body of unconfirmed results of possible interest. Cold fusion researchers have done what they can, given the limitations that existed with funding and institutional and similar support (such as the availability of grad student labor, a major factor that is starting to shift toward normal).


    Heat is readily detected with enough precision to be used for correlation studies. The no-heat experiments become controls.


    "Successful" or "Not successful" is a weird non-scientific description of excess heat. The scientific issue is whether or not there is significant heat and then the quantitative study of it.


    Now, there is one part of the suggestion that is open. I take it as an operating assumption that the FPHE is deuterium -> helium + 23.8 MeV that shows up as heat. The actual reaction is unlikely to be as simple as d+d -> 4He, and that would be expected to produce a 23.8 MeV gamma, which is not detected (and it would be unavoidable and dangerous). However, how is the fusion energy converted to heat? One of the common proposals is a "burst of low-energy photons." Those would be in the frequency region we think of as soft X-rays. They are difficult to detect because they are absorbed in the experimental materials, but it may be possible to detect some of them. There are results from exposing X-ray film (dental films) to the materials, radioautographs have been shown.


    The quantitative detection of soft X-rays, under properly controlled conditions, would be a fundamental investigation. (Technically, these would be gammas, as being nuclear in origin.) Even if most of the X-rays are absorbed, I would expect detected X-rays to be correlated with heat. If the heat is produced by the absorption of these X-rays, that would be obvious!


    First things first. The research priority that I suggested started with the measurement of the heat/helium ratio with increased precision. Since the last time this was done, it's been over a decade as far as I know, we have realized that anodic stripping probably releases all the helium; this is a trivially easy step that should tighten up the results, since they will now scatter around the actual production ratio, rather than the gas-release ratio without stripping. That is being done. I hope to have more news about it soon.


    That was first because, while the work is difficult and somewhat expensive, it is known how to do it, and, with people with skill and experience involved, the money won't be wasted. And then because the ratio is the only truly direct evidence that the FP Heat Effect is not only real, it is nuclear in nature, and because this will be new work, it should be eminently publishable, and could puncture the balloon of the rejection cascade. This is not something to publish in JCMNS!


    However, identifying X-ray emissions, if they exist regularly, could be extremely valuable and could point to a possible immediate measure of the reaction other than heat. There may be others.


    For years, research was focused on dealing with the collective chip on the shoulder, trying to prove that the effect was nuclear and mostly trying to get More Heat, instead of studying the reaction-as-it-is. Scientifically, this was a huge distraction.


    The basic study will eventually lead to improved technlogy. Peter Gluck wants to jump the gun. "LENR+!" is his motto. When we have LENR, and clearly and reliably, then we can develop Plus. It will be a natural progression. Peter is trying to push the river, and this colored, and still colors, his feelings about Rossi. Only Rossi's results were "plus." But every little trickle of heat from NiH was considered a 'confirmation" of Rossi.


    At this point, the focus returns to what is known: PdD. NiH investigations will continue, and the long-term future of LENR might well be there. But first things first! With NiH, what is first is establishing reproducible results, and not just file-drawer effect results. Results that are robust, at least statistically. The sample space for statistical analysis cannot be just the collection of "successful" results. It must be all results, at least from a pre-defined experimental series.


    I'm waiting for skeptics to show up who are excited at the possibility of helping design the future of LENR research. That would be turning the corner, for sure.

  • Its ironic. Sometimes a snake eats a meal that is too big for its stomach and it explodes and dies a horrendous death. That is what will happen to IH. IH wanted to appropriated through whatever means the systems designs of any willing LENR inventor. This unfortunately for IH included Rossi. Rossi is a poison pill. Rossi's tech took a wrong turn and now IH's stomach will explode. Rossi will take IH down with him in his backwash. They backed the wrong horse and now will pay the price. With both IH and Rossi currently engaged in a death struggle, both will be flushed down the tubes by Mills who has an open field to sprint through with his superlative technology.


    If IH had any smarts, they would have tried to steal Mills' stuff instead of the garbage that the trolls around here are trying to promote, but IH played their cards wrong, oh so wrong, deadly wrong. Now it's time for them to pay the piper, now they will pay the price and it could not have happened to a more deserving crew.

  • @axil


    Quote


    Its ironic. Sometimes a snake eats a meal that is too big for its stomach and it explodes and dies a horrendous death. That is what will happen to IH. IH wanted to appropriated through whatever means the systems designs of any willing LENR inventor. This unfortunately for IH included Rossi. Rossi is a poison pill. Rossi's tech took a wrong turn and now IH's stomach will explode. Rossi will take IH down with him in his backwash. They backed the wrong horse and now will pay the price. With both IH and Rossi currently engaged in a death struggle, both will be flushed down the tubes by Mills who has an open field to sprint through with his superlative technology.


    If IH had any smarts, they would have tried to steal Mills' stuff instead of the garbage that the trolls around here are trying to promote, but IH played their cards wrong, oh so wrong, deadly wrong. Now it's time for them to pay the piper, now they will pay the price and it could not have happened to a more deserving crew.


    Most people would say this is highly unlikely. When you make these speculative statements about science it is OK, since you are using words which are not precise anyway, and the predictive content is small.


    In this case you present as fact that IH are corrupt and stupid. No "this is what I think" or "probably".


    Are you prepared to man up to this and state either:
    (1) How long do we have to wait before telling you your confidence in the BLP technology (which has been unsubstantiated for 25 years and still is) is wrong?
    (2) Under what circumstances would you apologise to IH for such libel? No-one is gpoing to sue you, Im sure, but it seems discourteous to me.


    You state that Rossi's tech took a wrong turn. That seems to contradict your very strong and definite statements over a long period when you were convinced his tech would revolutionise the world? Maybe BLP tech will also take a wrong turn...


  • You state that Rossi's tech took a wrong turn. That seems to contradict your very strong and definite statements over a long period when you were convinced his tech would revolutionise the world? Maybe BLP tech will also take a wrong turn...


    I said that Rossi's technology...a lithium 7 burner... would be regulated by the nuclear authorities. I said that Rossi's tech would be restricted to the electric utilities. I said that Rossi's reaction is producing muons by the ton and would disable any electronics within a mile. Rossi's tech would not be a trillion dollar technology because of these limitations. Rossi's tech is a low density power producer so that his reactors are stable and will not melt down. BLP produces high density power without lithium and the fear of meltdown.


    I just am down on IH becuase of ethical violations, stealing IP, not living up to contracts, there is following the law and just doing what is right, of paying for a FUD storm that damages LENR. I blame IH for brainwashing many good LENR workers who undercut good people like Peter and yes Rossi who only just wants to be a trillionaire.

  • How long do we have to wait before telling you your confidence in the BLP technology (which has been unsubstantiated for 25 years and still is) is wrong?


    My strong hunch: Axil is just being a provocateur, having fun playing one set of fans (Mills fans) off of another (Rossi fans) and yet another (IH fans), and, finally, off of any skeptics here, all in one post. I would say he does this with some amount of skill.

  • Provoking trouble, causing dissension and agitation is just a playful diversion that springs from my about face on LENR systems' evaluation.


    Yes.


    There once was a troller named Axil.
    Who neglected his dosage of Paxil.
    His clarity fell, but whatever his pain,
    We can be sure that it wasn't premenstrual.


    --- added ----
    Axil replaced the post I quoted above with one that quotes this post (before this note). He then added


    Quote

    I thought I was on your exclusion list. If not please put me back on.


    The result is that his response to my post is prior to my response to him. I do have him blocked, but I also see new posts in the Unread Posts, that includes blocked users. And I often look, anyway, but that I need to do this reminds me that reading and response may not be of high value. Here, I responded because Axil had acknowledged exactly what runs a troll, a desire to cause dissension and agitation. -- and "playful diversion."


    Because Alan had just written a limerick, I decided to go for some limerick-like something-or-other, certainly not of high seriousness. "Paxil" came simply from the rhyme and does not indicate any psychiatric diagnosis or accusation like that, and among friends, this would engender a laugh.


    "I've been thinking about getting back together with my girlfriend."


    "Have you forgotten to take your medication?"

  • @Adb @axil,
    Why 'youse guys' did not start this (limericks/rhymes) It's not your best work. Clear and interesting points with citations are (and you both are very good with that). I have noticed by following you both for a while that people take potshots at you both, and quite often. Please consider taking the high road since you both post so much. Years ago you would have handled this differently, people with strong opinions should expect to be challenged. It's the response when it gets personal that shows character. Slough it off.

  • Thanks, Rigel. I don't know if the reference was at all clear, but "premenstrual" was about something very obvious. Trolls and flame warriors and the hyperconfident are rarely female. There are exceptions, but most apparently female such are actually men, that's a standard internet meme.

  • I am now an ardent admirer of Mills who has solved most of the issues inherent in high power density LENR reactor design. I love high power density in a reactor.


    Mills can get top of the line power density out of just hydrogen fuel without melting down the reactor, something that Rossi has been trying to do for years now. Have you noticed, all hydrogen only based LENR reactors will get out of control and melt down unless they are liquid already.


    The liquid electrode idea is great and its implementation is even better. A miracle upon miracles is the self-driven plasma reaction that can last for minutes without input stimulation. No one would have ever imagined that this astounding feat was even possible.


    And the most satisfying trait of all, Mills is completely open and will explain how his tech works.


    Rossi on the other hand has sacrificed power density for 5 sigma. When he reduced his reactor unit to 20 watts, Rossi cut his power density again by a factor of 1000 to keep his reactor from early destruction. Low reactor power density paves the road to system commercial failure.


    Mills can improve power density even more by adding CAT/MOUSE based multi electrode operation. Instead of just one liquid electrode pair, Mills can setup an array of 100 pairs that work in parallel with each electrode producing a plasma ball the size of a teacup with only one of those electrodes receiving power. Mills can add magnetic protection to his structure to produce a hot fusion/LENR hybrid design with huge power density...a 100 megawatt reactor in a breadbox.


    The limitation of the size of this reactor type is the amount of light conversion surface that is required to convert light to electric current.


    A technology beyond photovoltaics can be developed and is currently in development that converts photon energy directly into electron flow by downshifting the EUV to longer wavelength EMF and generating current from that converted EMF. See nanoantenna


    http://epjam.edp-open.org/arti…f/2015/01/epjam150012.pdf