Can we talk about Holmlid?

  • FLiBe is a molten salt made from a mixture of lithium fluoride (LiF) and beryllium fluoride (BeF2). FLiBe is a highly researched nuclear based coolant that can be used in LENR cavatation. FLiBe cavitation erosion rate were found to be 10X greater than water: this is very good for LENR cavitation.


    The 2:1 mixture forms a stoichiometric compound, Li2BeF4, which has a melting point of 459 °C, a boiling point of 1430 °C, and a density of 1.94 g/cm3. Its volumetric heat capacity is 4540 kJ/m3K, which is similar to that of water, more than four times that of sodium, and more than 200 times that of helium at typical reactor conditions. Its appearance is white as a solid to transparent when a liquid, with crystalline grains in a solid state, morphing into a completely clear liquid upon melting.


    The eutectic mixture is slightly greater than 50% BeF2 and has a melting point of 360 °C. This mixture was never used in practice due to the overwhelming increase in viscosity caused by the BeF2 addition in the eutectic mixture. BeF2, which behaves as a glass, is only fluid in salt mixtures containing enough molar percent of Lewis base. Lewis bases, such as the alkali fluorides, will donate fluoride ions to the beryllium, breaking the glassy bonds which increase viscosity. In FLiBe, beryllium fluoride is able to sequester two fluoride ions from two lithium fluorides in a liquid state, converting it into the tetrafluorberyllate ion BeF4−2.



    Liquid flibe flowing in a quartz pipe (courtesy of ORNL) - melting point is 460 C


    Quartz pipe can be used to allow laser beam access to the FLiBe.



    Hydrogen is introduced into the FLiBe through bubbling a 1:1 mixture of hydrogen fluoride and hydrogen through the salt. Some of structural materials used in conjunction with FLiBe are tungsten, carbon, molybdenum, platinum, iridium, and nickel.

  • "FLiBe is a toxic salt. Both components, LiF and BeF2 are toxic, but BeF2 is worse than LiF.
    BeF2 is considered an acute health hazard, illness or death can occur within a week if enough
    of it is inhaled. Beryllium metal or oxide can also cause a long-term illness called chronic
    beryllium disease. Because of chronic beryllium disease,our laboratory must not only control
    the acute hazard of inhaling the salt, but also clean up any loose beryllium on surfaces. BeF2
    is not believed to cause chronic beryllium disease, but our beryllium detection methods do not
    differentiate between BeF2 and BeO."


    http://prod.sandia.gov/techlib…ntrol.cgi/2004/046000.pdf



  • From your reference: "We also suggest that KF/LiF salt be used as an alternative to FLiBe in early experiments"


    KF replaced BeF2 without impact to improve safety, so let us change the formulation to KF/LiF.

  • @axil,
    Sounds much better. Using pure Li7 should make things interesting.


    On another note, I saw that Li6-7 separation used Hg in the process (China and Russia supposedly still do), but Oak Ridge stopped, partially due to huge losses of Hg. I wonder how that works.


    Edit: And I found some answers.


    http://www.world-nuclear.org/i…e-generation/lithium.aspx


    This was neat: "Atomic vapour laser isotope separation (AVLIS) appears appropriate for smaller quantities to serve the needs of PWRs. At about 700°C Li-7 is photo-ionised selectively, giving highly-effective separation in an electromagnetic field, sufficient in one pass for PWR use. Several features of AVLIS mean that pure Li-6 is not produced."


    (PWR = Pressurized Water Reactor)

  • Anyway: I believe that it should be apparent by now that if the storage or anyway the accumulation of large amounts of the ultra-dense metallic hydrogen material studied in detail by Holmlid was possible (for example within a hydride-forming low melting point metal as I previously speculated) it would mean that enormous energy and (likely) power densities could be achieved easily, which would be quite an issue regardless of the potential for easily building a novel nuclear bomb.


    Which, made me think of one of the experiments described in the recently released DTRA report by Mosier-Boss and Forsley:




    Cavitation was not used here, but instead the energy impulse was provided by an explosive charge detonated on a Pd-D foil that was supposedly made active with suitable loading techniques.

  • Anyway, after a search I found that according to Randell Mills the Hydrino is still a gas "lighter than air". This would contradict a great lot of Holmlid's findings with time-of-flight studies with laser probing that determined that many of the properties of ultra-dense hydrogen H(0) and Rydberg matter H(1).


    From the experiments/measurements I read, one can not conclude that something like a "hydrino" is a free particle because at deeper orbits it should behave like cold neutron and been absorbed. Mill's believes he measured the larmor exitations of bound H1/3 which is something Holmlid should do too.
    But who is dooing the correct calculations? Mills model seems to be only a first approach, which, may be, works for the first few levels. But how many levels do really physically exist?? - and are not just resonances/intermediate states?


    On this regard it should also be interesting to consider that if a suitable metal that could store efficiently H(0) existed it would potentially also allow to indirectly prove its existence by gravimetric analysis.


    Pd can be loaded up to 110% I saw Ni papers with up 150%!!. I recommend to leave the LENR field and dig into the H2 metall storage research (for fuel cell cars!)which got hundreds of Millions to do their research. They published plenty of interesting papers with new materials.

  • Pd can be loaded up to 110% I saw Ni papers with up 150%!!. I recommend to leave the LENR field and dig into the H2 metall storage research (for fuel cell cars!)which got hundreds of Millions to do their research. They published plenty of interesting papers with new materials.


    What I meant was that, potentially, more suitable materials could be loaded directly with ultra-dense hydrogen by an arbitrarily large amount (made-up number: 100000%) because it is composed of very small atoms that seem in certain cases to readily diffuse in the surface. If such materials could absorb so much hydrogen they would become macroscopically heavier.



    http://scitation.aip.org/conte…dva/6/4/10.1063/1.4947276

    Quote

    [...] Due to the large difference in scale between the ultra-dense material and the carrier surface (typically 2 pm instead of 200 pm for the carrier), many novel effects may be possible. It means for example that an entire chain cluster H2N may fit in between two metal atoms on the surface, and that diffusion of small clusters into the surface may be fast


    Quote

    [...] Results have also been obtained for the behavior of H(0) at high temperatures. For example, on Ni the signal due to D4(0) clusters decreases at higher temperatures, as shown in Fig. 7. This behavior is more pronounced for D(0) than for p(0). This effect is not observed on Ta surfaces, and is concluded to be due to diffusion of the hydrogen atoms into the metal surface.

  • Cavitation was not used here, but instead the energy impulse was provided by an explosive charge detonated on a Pd-D foil that was supposedly made active with suitable loading techniques.


    http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/MosierBossinvestigat.pdf ... page 75 begins the description of the loading technique, the explosive compression experiment description begins on page 78.


    "Activity" was not asserted. Read these reports carefully, folks! Rather, a technique was used to load and there was an "appearance" that codeposition palladium did load. Loading was not measured, nor even estimated (this is a common deficiency in SPAWAR reports, if my memory serves.)


    (and "deficiency" is just something missing, this is not blaming them. They had limited resources.)


    The reporting here is shallow. What was the depth of the crater? what would a normal crater with no loading be like?


    They properly disclose that attempts to replicate failed, but these were not exact replications. The bane of cold fusion, attempts to improve an experiment that make it, instead, show different results that are inconclusive.


    With the neutron display, I'd have been a lot happier with a longer time span shown. What did the detector show before detonation? Exactly when was the detonation? Is the time shown time after detonation?


    What were the absolute levels of neutron counts?


    Neutron generation from explosive compression of materials is not terribly surprising. There is fractofusion. Further, it is reasonably well understood or at least plausibly suspected that the fusion cross-section in condensed matter, particularly loaded PdD, is higher than estimated from naive free-space calculations. Takahashi, early on, had some results that indicated that the occurrence of 3D fusion was 10^26 higher than naive expectation.


    (but to explain the FP results, an increase of 10^50 or so was required.)


    "cold fusion," it is quite well-established, does not generate significant neutrons. This is often missing in SPAWAR neutron reports, but their own explanations telegraph it: they explain the neutrons by rare D-T reactions caused by low levels of tritium in the work. Tritium is a known product from cold fusion, though at levels a million times down from helium, (approximately, a clear correlation has not been experimentally established).


    This known experimental fact (confirmed by many investigations), then leads to a default assumption. The rapid compression led to some level of hot fusion.


    I would not make too much of this report. It is like much CF work. Evidence is found of "something nuclear" going on where naive expectation would not expect it. "Something nuclear" is not at all enough. We need much more specific evidence to overcome mainstream skepticism, entrenched through a rejection cascade.


    This is not to deprecate exploratory research, which has its place. It has created a large body of circumstantial evidence which can later be explored in detail.

  • What I meant was that, potentially, more suitable materials could be loaded directly with ultra-dense hydrogen by an arbitrarily large amount (made-up number: 100000%) because it is composed of very small atoms that seem in certain cases to readily diffuse in the surface. If such materials could absorb so much hydrogen they would become macroscopically heavier.



    So far H(0) clusters have been a surface effect. Of course inner surfaces are allowed too, but always keep in mind they must be in 2D, because magnetic attraction only works in "one" direction!


    Read: https://arxiv.org/pdf/1204.2858.pdf


    Thus if Holmlid is talking of a density, he is just extrapolating the one layer to a bulk volume!

  • Ultra dense condinsation of elements may be more widespread that we might expect. Mills has identified all sorts of reaction catalysts, one being argon.


    Joe Papp produced a machine he has patented that he used to condensed ultra dense noble gas clusters. He used water to store these clusters of noble gases. One demo where this can be seen is the Papp cannon demo. He put 10 cc of this ultra dense crystal fortified water into his 5/8 inch stainless steel barrel and shredded it in an explosion like the one seen in the page 78 experiment on the DTRA report by Mosier-Boss and Forsley as noted above in this tread. Papp used and electric spark to set off the ultra dense metalized noble gas mix and release its energy content.



    The 5/8 inch pipe was packed in concrete and sandbags that was turned to powder by the blast.


    at about 3:00. we can see Papp loading each of the 5 noble gas/water mixtures into the cannon using a few drops of solution of each type.


  • This experiment uses an old chinese manufactured depleted nickel–metal hydride battery as a fuel source.


    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/…0%93metal_hydride_battery


    "A nickel–metal hydride battery, abbreviated NiMH or Ni–MH, is a type of rechargeable battery. The chemical reaction at the positive electrode is similar to that of the nickel–cadmium cell (NiCd), with both using nickel oxyhydroxide (NiOOH). However, the negative electrodes use a hydrogen-absorbing alloy instead of cadmium."



    Disassembled NiMH AA battery:


    1 - Positive terminal
    2 - Outer metal casing (also negative terminal)
    3 - Positive electrode
    4 - Negative electrode with current collector (metal grid, connected to metal casing)
    5 - Separator (between electrodes)


    http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1312/1312.6851.pdf


    How to extract metalized hydrogen (HRM) from a 5 year old battery.


    Quote

    "In our earlier study, it was demonstrated, that as a result of the thermal runaway of nickel–cadmium batteries, large amounts of hydrogen are released 19. The thermal decomposition of electrodes demonstrated that hydrogen accumulates in the electrodes of nickel–cadmium batteries in the process of their operation. So KSX-25 battery with the service period of over five years contains approximately 800 liters of hydrogen. The capacity of an oxide-nickel electrode as a hydrogen absorber was quantified as 13.4 wt% and 0.4 g сm −3 (ref. 20). The obtained result exceeds the earlier obtained results for nickel hydride (obtained using traditional methods) by 10 times21, and for any reversible metal hydrides, including magnesium hydride or complex hydrides by 2 times 22,23. This article is devoted to the determination of where and in what form hydrogen accumulates in electrodes of nickel–cadmium batteries. It is possible to physically divide oxide-nickel electrode into two phases – active substance (nickel hydroxide) and metal–ceramic matrix (in the case of sintered electrodes present in KSX-25 batteries). If hydrogen is intercalated into nickel hydroxides then, when nickel hydroxides reacts with acids and forms soluble salts, intercalary hydrogen will be released, because nickel hydroxides disappear and the salt dissolves into the solution. Any type of acid, which forms soluble salts with nickel hydroxide, but does not interact or poorly interact with metal matrix, can be used for this purpose. For example, it possible to use sulfuric acid, which interacts with nickel hydroxides with the formation of soluble salt of nickel sulfate"...and so on...


    One of my criteria for HRM formation is time. This paper illustrates that a nickel battery used for 5 years will produce HRM.

  • http://www.pnas.org/content/106/42/17640.full


    Quote

    Abstract


    From detailed assessments of electronic structure, we find that a combination of significantly quantal elements, six of seven atoms being hydrogen, becomes a stable metal at a pressure approximately 1/4 of that required to metalize pure hydrogen itself. The system, LiH6 (and other LiHn), may well have extensions beyond the constituent lithium. These hypothetical materials demonstrate that nontraditional stoichiometries can considerably expand the view of chemical combination under moderate pressure.




  • Wyttenbach wrote:

    So far H(0) clusters have been a surface effect. Of course inner surfaces are allowed too, but always keep in mind they must be in 2D, because magnetic attraction only works in "one" direction!


    Read: http://arxiv.org/pdf/1204.2858.pdf


    Thus if Holmlid is talking of a density, he is just extrapolating the one layer to a bulk volume!


    I could not readily find references disproving this in the papers from Holmlid et al. that I have read so far, so I tried asking him directly (I usually refrain from doing so due to his amount of publications and the possibility that the answers could be already there somewhere, and because I do not exactly have any relevant credentials unlike others here).


    According to him it seems that there is no depth limit to H(0) cluster diffusion into the bulk (just like ordinary hydrogen) and that it is "certainly expected" that small H(0) clusters would eventually fill the interstices of a non-porous metal lattice. However, H(0) cluster diffusion has not been studied in depth, and due to the strong bonding the diffused clusters may be "not easily recoverable" (I am assuming recoverable in the ultra-dense form).




    axil wrote:

    "A little bit of lithium does a lot for hydrogen" [...]


    I think a natural deduction from these excerpts is that transient lattice stresses (or for example large bubble collapse during cavitation in liquid hydrogenated metals) may in some cases, depending on the materials used and experimental conditions, form stable or metastable metallic hydrogen.

  • With the realization that small H(0) clusters may penetrate at any depth into a non-porous solid lattice, I am wondering: if as previously indicated the application of a large magnetic field causes the H(0) clusters (2.3 pm size) to transition to higher energy levels (H(1), H(2), etc) that have a significantly larger size (150 pm and above), what would happen if after enough of the H(0) clusters were loaded into a metal lattice a strong magnetic field was suddenly applied?


    My suspicion is that enormous pressures would be generated within the lattice, causing a large enough shock that all or part of the remaining H(0) would transition to the denser state (0.56 pm) where nuclear fusion processes and other processes (neutral particle ejection) are supposed to be spontaneous. This may also cause the ejection of protons from the material as some (notably, Piantelli) have seen.


    This process could even happen at room temperature, but it would require the concentration of enough H(0) clusters in the lattice, which probably does not easily happen under a magnetic field (as H(0) formation is prevented according to the linked paper).

  • I previously had the following assumption about the 2016 paper on the superfluid transition temperature of H(0) by Holmlid and Kotzias. This excerpt is from private notes:


    Quote

    [...] my assumption was that above the transition point the large clusters would somehow reorganize themselves into smaller non-superfluid clusters, implying that the total amount of H(0) on the carrier does not change. [...]


    The previous assumption was probably incorrect, and the following is likely the right one, from the same notes:

    Quote

    However, this [assumption] would be incorrect if above the superfluid transition temperature the large H(0) clusters would instead transition to higher energy states (H(1), H(2), etc), implying a loss of the overall H(0) amount. After paying a bit more attention to the TOF spectra in the paper it looks like this could indeed be the case.



    After thinking a bit more about it, I realized that if 2.3 pm H(0) clusters are present inside a suitable metal lattice exceeding the temperature threshold where the clusters are superconductive would cause the formation of higher energy states (H(1), H(2), etc) of much larger size (150 pm). This would cause a condition similar to the previous “magnetic ignition” suggestion, where enormous stresses and possibly a shock to the lattice, if fast enough, could force the remaining H(0) to the denser state where nuclear processes are spontaneous. A similar behavior has been often described in the LENR field.


    This threshold temperature has been found by Holmlid et al. to be proportional to the melting point of the material used to carry the H(0), and therefore it is not fixed. This temperature is also lower for D(0) than p(0). For p(0) on Ni, it is approximately 150°C. I find conceivable that Piantelli thought that this transition temperature that had to be exceeded to obtain excess heat was related with the Debye temperature of Ni since it is so similar.


    A further deduction is that if temperature is decreased below this superfluid transition temperature of H(0), the H(1) should spontaneously transition back to H(0), since it is a lower energy state. This will cause the lattice to be relieved and any stress-induced reaction should stop. However the process should preferably be slow (or heat be removed very quickly), otherwise the energy of formation of H(0) could induce a shock in the existing H(0) layer, potentially causing additional reactions analogue to a “heat after death” effect. Holmlid described a similar effect in a paper I cited a few pages back.



    I find that within the framework of Rydberg matter/ultra-dense hydrogen this explanation could also work for the neutron production by thermal shock in some deuterated materials that has been recently suggested as a possible MFMP experiment, and that Storms calls fractofusion (a hot fusion derivative). This would have some implications: are minute amounts of ultra-dense metallic hydrogen (generally speaking) formed in certain hydrides?

  • With the realization that small H(0) clusters may penetrate at any depth into a non-porous solid lattice, I am wondering: if as previously indicated the application of a large magnetic field causes the H(0) clusters (2.3 pm size) to transition to higher energy levels (H(1), H(2), etc) that have a significantly larger size (150 pm and above), what would happen if after enough of the H(0) clusters were loaded into a metal lattice a strong magnetic field was suddenly applied?


    Somewhere above you calculated a bond energy of ~ 630 eV for H(0), which means the transition to H(0) is highly exothermic. Let's go with this thought for the sake of argument. I believe you would need a thermal distribution with a high energy tail in the range of 630+ eV to get an appreciable portion of those H(0) out of that state. Also recall that (1) the temperature of the lattice sites in a metal is sub-eV and that (2) the energy needed to dislocate a lattice site is ~ 25 eV. So if there were a thermal distribution with a tail that approached an energy in the range of 600 eV (~ 7,000,000 C), the host metal would no longer be in the solid phase.


    Am I misconstruing your proposal or missing an important detail?

  • if 2.3 pm H(0) clusters are present inside a suitable metal lattice exceeding the temperature threshold where the clusters are superconductive would cause the formation of higher energy states (H(1), H(2), etc) of much larger size (150 pm). This would cause a condition similar to the previous “magnetic ignition” suggestion, where enormous stresses and possibly a shock to the lattice,


    About two years ago I asked a group of Hydrogen Embrittlement experts about the cause of embrittlement.
    Hydrogen Embrittlement is often a problem where metals are welded by atomic Hydrogen welding (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atomic_hydrogen_welding).
    Hydrogen embrittlement is not a well understood mechanism. There may be a relation with UDH.

  • Eric Walker wrote:

    Somewhere above you calculated a bond energy of ~ 630 eV for H(0), which means the transition to H(0) is highly exothermic. Let's go with this thought for the sake of argument.


    I only calculated the possible energy release in joule in a specific example. The 630 eV (later revised to 640 eV) value comes from papers by Holmlid et al. He has indeed written that this transition releases "a few hundred eV per atom", so believe he must be aware that it is strongly exothermic. See this post from page 21 which contains some excerpts where he writes it clearly. You must have already seen it:


    "https://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/index.php/Thread/3728-Can-we-talk-about-Homlid/?postID=38015#post38015"


    I also wrote in later posts that in my opinion many excess heat claims in watt- or subwatt-scale cold fusion experiments may be explained by this energy release alone. I do not know if Holmlid has written this.


    Quote

    I believe you would need a thermal distribution with a high energy tail in the range of 630+ eV to get an appreciable portion of those H(0) out of that state.


    Holmlid has written that it this H(0) material has a strong bond and that it is stable so I believe that he must be aware of this as well.


    Yet a strong magnetic field can apparently cause it to easily transition to H(1). I do not think I am able to provide a precise explanation of why this occurs. However, since it is supposed to be a room-temperature superfluid and superconductor, it may also be a consequence of these properties.


    Quote

    Also recall that (1) the temperature of the lattice sites in a metal is sub-eV and that (2) the energy needed to dislocate a lattice site is ~ 25 eV. So if there were a thermal distribution with a tail that approached an energy in the range of 600 eV (~ 7,000,000 C), the host metal would no longer be in the solid phase.


    The same could be said if any nuclear reaction occurred within the lattice as in countless other LENR claims. The reaction sites would eventually all get destroyed. Craters and local melting may visibly appear too. I think these are common problems in LENR systems that have been reported to be working.


    While I used that example as an explanation of some LENR claims (for example Piantelli), my proposal is that the production of H(0) should occur in a separated area from where the reaction actually takes place. If the H(0) diffuses into "carrier" metals as well as Holmlid appears to suggest, there is no need to have a nanostructured metal for the reaction to take place. It could simply happen in the lattice interstices. So, local melting would not be a long term problem.


    At least this is my 2c. Do not take too seriously what I write; this is not too much more than brainstorming.