[split] A Mizuno replicaton video...

  • I am intrigued by this video:


    External Content m.youtube.com
    Content embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.
    Through the activation of external content, you agree that personal data may be transferred to third party platforms. We have provided more information on this in our privacy policy.


    It is a very simple way of making a high electron density at a tungsten rod, giving a COP > 10 (!) over 30 minutes and with enough error margin to use simple garage calorimetry.


    If this really works - it can be scaled up quite easily. What is your take on this?

  • If this really works - it can be scaled up quite easily. What is your take on this?


    It looks very interesting. Since the cathode just barely enters into the surface of the water, the current density must be high. Tungsten is a relatively heavy element; perhaps it will begin fission at small but detectable levels at that high a current density. I did not follow the COP calculations towards the end of the video, but they looked kind of hand-wavy.


    An experiment like this would make an interesting test bed for investigating transmutations.

  • Quote

    But perhaps (since the equipment is si simple THH would try?


    I guess I'd be less afraid of death by unexpected radiation poisoning than many, but I'll leave the experimental stuff to those more convinced of positive outcome and more capable than me. In fact, if you really want positive outcome the best thing is to pay no attention to me and other skeptics and do an experiment with many loopholes which you then ignore. It has happened... Skeptics can rightly point out, as MFMP was doing when it started and still I'm sure intends, that rigorous testing and retesting of setups is necessary before any conclusions can be drawn. And that includes setups with scintillators as they have found over the not repeated "Signal". The point being that hard-working experimentalists are under no obligation to listen - but equally mainstream scientists are under no obligation to take any interest in experimental results claiming extraordinary new physics that are not very robust.

  • If this really works - it can be scaled up quite easily. What is your take on this?


    I gave up after about 15 minutes of mostly nothing being said of interest. There are many videos on Youtube purporting to show "cold fusion," which generally show a plasma with high obvious power going in. What makes it "cold fusion"?


    Not said. Looks like this guy is doing some kind of calorimetry. There are hundreds of ways to get calorimetry wrong. If someone has the time to spare to summarize what is shown and explained, or if there is a readable summary of this somewhere, I'll look at it.


    So you run 50 V or so into a tungsten cathode and you get a plasma. This means?

  • Thanks for your comments about the video.


    I am thinking of ways to scale up the electron density. Am I correct in thinking that the larger area of the anode (the metal container) the more electrons will go towards the cathode (the tip of the rod)?


    If so, would a metal foam inside the container increase the area and by that increase the electron density at the cathode?

  • I am thinking of ways to scale up the electron density. Am I correct in thinking that the larger area of the anode (the metal container) the more electrons will go towards the cathode (the tip of the rod)?


    First, I would buy a gamma spectrometer as Tungsten transmutes to some strange isotops.


    Second, electron density has two dimensions: Current and Area, but unluckily they are related over resistance.


    What count's is the Kathode surface, which should have just the optimal contact (optimal current/area size) with the electrolyt.


    This calls for a large series of experiments to find the optimal point.


    For the calorimetry: I would not used an ampere/voltmeter: Just reload the batteries an measure the inputed watts!

  • Wyttenbach wrote "What count's is the Kathode surface, which should have just the optimal contact (optimal current/area size) with the electrolyt."


    From this I make the conclusion that scale up should be done by having many cathodes (rods) in the same electrolyte. That would make a higher power in the same volume.


    After that multiply the setup in parallell connections to scale up output heat-mass (power).


    COP 10 is more than needed to drive a sterling engine-to-electricity converter and it should end up in self sustain mode.


    See http://power.eecs.berkeley.edu…esign_stirling_engine.pdf


    Or?

  • From this I make the conclusion that scale up should be done by having many cathodes (rods) in the same electrolyte. That would make a higher power in the same volume.


    But each cathode needs his own power supply! It's current/surface that counts.


    But this is not the clue! To enhance the COP You have to find the optimal working point!


    Which (voltage,current/surface,Temperature, pressure) leads to an optimal COP.


    And don't forget to buy at least a gamma scout!