LFH sees XSH - But is it LENR?

  • Have been running the lead/activated coal version now, no "events" seen, but the anode region seemed to get slightly hot, and the reason seemed to be resistive heating, or most of the voltage drop was near anode. This was most clear when there was only a little water inside the carbon. After changing polarity voltage drop has been more even. Maybe there is conductive lead buildup near cathode?

  • This version a few days, not during the night. For example i just let the cell go dry, got somewhat higher temp near anode (54C at 17V and 300 mA), but then current started dropping, is now 30 mA.

    Seems that higher current makes anode oxidize faster, could be useful if lead or lead oxide is the active part.

  • Well done. Keep it up a bit longer. The good (if a little crazy) ol' boys in the Texas wing of the CC research group have been doing a run - the second of two which have ended with containment failure. Not seen any data yet, but I am taking the liberty of reproducing an email reporting on the cell about 30 hours before containment failure.

    "Micro bubbles less than 1mm, bubbles the size of BB's, are easy to comprehend with normal fluid physics, electrode reactions under polarizing voltage, and possibly entrapment of coalescing gas bubbles in the CC matrix. Neal is reporting something beyond this.
    He keeps hear ing sharp crack (seems originating at cathode locale), this accompanied by very large bubbles. I may be foolish, but I think this is the telltale, or smoking gun, of initial bump boiling due to XSH. I feel that a nuclear active environment, will not be just one happy particle, but that a statistically significant ensemble builds or starts building the moment current is active through CC-LENR reactor cells.
    One successful He formation, or other nuclear transmutation (likely, considering the absorption cross sections of cold neutrons with all nuclei), could release sufficient energy to either increase the NAE ensemble, or trigger a small chain nuclear reaction, thus releasing macroscopically detected events.Such an event could be a macro-bubble. This might be followed by cavitation, that sparks additional electron capture by protons, deuterons, and triton nuclei.
    N*** hears the sound, I also have heard it, we have seen the bubble, and an transverse wave from cathode toward anode. Next we undertake to capture these events on film lighted, and unlit, to check for possible scintillating transients, or cavitation plasma emission of light. I cannot fathom why these would ignite the electrolysis gases, unless partial pressures are outside the explosion limits for hydrogen-oxygen. Odd indeed, but we will see what we see. We needradiation detectors in the worst way."

  • To a certain extent Eric. I don't have permission to tell you all the names - if you want to know more it would best be managed privately. Group leader in the US is Dr. Howard Phillips. There are six group members (plus Howard) in the US, mostly based in Texas/Oklahoma. Howard is the guy who discovered how to make Catalytic Carbon btw, he is one smart cookie. This is the CV of his company, also based in Oklahoma. As well as the US group, there are 4 of us in the EU, me and one other in the UK, and one each in Holland and Italy.


  • If the activated carbon is serendipitously getting loaded with Pb during the activation process, what about intentionally loading in a separate reactor freshly produced activated carbon with a more active metal from a salt solution (e.g nickel nitrate), and then repeating/continuing the activation process in the wet cell?

    Couldn't it be that the anomalous reaction is indirectly occurring due to this - perhaps slowly progressing - Pb loading process which is making the carbon grains catalytically more active than plain activated carbon, with electrolysis doing the rest of the job?

  • CC is definitely not just 'ordinary' activated carbon as used in filter systems etc. I suspect that it is the lead doping which turns the carbon grains into a quasi-polar oxide after the required perioud of exposure to current (12AH). This electrolysis needs to continue for a lot longer -maybe 100 hours - before anything unexpected happens. This is not in the public record, but I am told recently there has been a closely - but not exactly- related XSH event at a commercial company who were using a variation of this method to make hydrogen under pressure- in order to be able to fill cylinders directly. I suspect the variation is the problem, but right now can't disclose any more. Not my experiment.

  • Since it might have not been immediately clear: activated carbon is often used as a catalyst support due to its stability and large surface area. There is abundant information on the subject in the scientific literature. If the electrolytic activation process used is doping it ("loading") and the anomalies are a result of this it might be worth pursuing more direct techniques with potentially better metals. Of course, it might still turn out that Pb (and the electrolysis) is required.

  • This comment is from one of our research group on reading the paper you pointed out to me...some of it may be unclear - the referecnce to HDO for example, but you can see it got people thinking.

    "A very interesting paper.

    Pd is a whisker away from Pb and as such this may have a very direct interest in relation to CC-LENR.

    If Pb doped Carbon becomes ultra-absorbent… there is just so much to think about here.

    Refilling of tanks, the reduction of H2O and the possible concomitant concentration of HDO.

    Why does heat seem to originate at the base of the Anodes… could this possibly be a point of major Pb doped Carbon absorption?

    Is it simply Protium that is being absorbed?

    Gosh… it touches on so many aspects of our thoughts and work."

  • Alan Smith

    Has electrolytic activation of the carbon grains already been attempted by placing them close to one of the electrodes instead of homogeneously arranged in the water tank?

    EDIT: to be more specific, after giving a detailed look at the actual methods generally used for the production of activated carbon I'm unsure of how the electrolytic activation process would operate in this case. A combination (one or more) of acid wash, pyrolysis or exposure to high temperature oxidizing atmosphere seem to be common and I've been unable to find any reference to electrolytic production. I guess that conditions close to these treatments may be achieved with electrolysis, but if the starting carbon powder remains fixed in place the resulting grains may end up having different properties depending on their location during activation.

    Perhaps I'm misunderstanding something here?

  • Has electrolytic activation of the carbon grains already been attempted by placing them close to one of the electrodes instead of homogeneously arranged in the water tank?

    Well, some grains are close, and some are far away, the tanks are looseley filled with carbon grains, there is little totally free space. This arrangement might in theory (some theories;)) change the grains individual environments a lot, but in practice there is a steady voltage gradient right down the tank. You can see this gradient effect in what fans call 'HHO' cells, where only the electrodes at each end of the stack are connected directly, and the others in between show a 'floating voltage'. It may be that those carbon grains nearer the electrodes would show more catalytic activity, but in practice we have never separated them.

  • Alan Smith

    I'm trying to making sure if my previous assumption that the product here indeed is an alternate/advanced form of otherwise standard activated carbon was correct or if the term "activation" is being loosely used. Has its surface area ever been characterized?

  • It is confusing, and you are not the first victim. The CC is made using ordinary granulated carbon. It can be crushed coal, coconut shell carbon, crushed wood charcoal or carbon black powder derived from burning natural gas ( gas-black). All these items have been used. We 'activate' these materials - turn then into catalytic carbon - using the simple electrolytic process we have described elswhere and detailed in Howard Phillip's patents..

    That's it.

  • Ordinary activated carbon can be produced from many different carbon sources as well. I guess the question would have been better posed as: "does the activation here roughly cause the same transformations occurring during standard activated carbon manufacturing?"