BLP update

Quote from Drgenek

Help me with definitions. Is H* a dense state of matter

Quote from Wyttenbach

Further: The energy density of H*-H* is to low to replace conventional reactors. But if he can manage to find a cyclic (cooling) process H* --> H again he is back in the game.

Same thoughts I have. I can't find any easily accessible discussions with definitions of "H*-H*" etc. I am familiar with Mills notation H(1/4) etc.

And where did this knowledge about the properties of H* come from? Is H* the complex conjugate of the Hermitian H

Is this in some of your papers Mr. Wyttenbach for which you can send a link? Thanks.

Quote from Drgenek

Help me with definitions. Is H* a dense state of matter that has released energy (hydrino) or a dense state of matter due to added energy and therefore and energy source relative to the ground state? Is the pico-chemistry due to magnetic bonding or what force? Are you suggesting that if a hydrino state, then as a below the ground state is should be better for high energy waste containment?

H* is "dense" hydrogen or the only stable "Hydrino". It is a EM bond between two protons that can be exactly calculated. H*-H* is as said needed because it's nuclear bond.

https://www.researchgate.net/p…physics_Main_achievements

Quote from Wyttenbach

H* is "dense" hydrogen or the only stable "Hydrino". It is a EM bond between two protons that can be exactly calculated. H*-H* is as said needed because it's nuclear bond.

https://www.researchgate.net/p…physics_Main_achievements

Interesting you don't think there are picoscale constructs of hydrogen bonded with other elements?

Drgenek Yes, it's a lower energy state as far as I am concerned, a magnetic bond. And useful energy is released during the catalytic reaction. I personally think the truth combines elements of multiple theories. Apparently it can bond within lower orbital planes of other elements, changing properties like in the middle of an isomer and a molecule. Pico-chemistry could be a more spread term (Dufour). Have a restful weekend!

Here is the full pdf of the Mills '828 Jan 2, 2020 patent application:

http://www.freepatentsonline.com/20200002828.pdf

This is a continuation of patent 10,443,139 that was issued in Oct of 2019

https://patentimages.storage.g…0737b2a2ec/US10443139.pdf

As with most continuations, it has identical figures and a nearly identical specification. The only important differences are in the claims.

The '828 application has only a single claim and looks to me like it was filed just before the '139 patent issued to keep this patent family active in the USPTO. They will likely amend it to add more claims later.

Quote from LeBob

Interesting you don't think there are picoscale constructs of hydrogen bonded with other elements or monoatomic?

Of course H* can bind to a nuclear bound proton, but there are not many nuclei that have a single free proton orbit. But Holmlid did also show H* clusters. But this is not high priority for my modeling as it is not my current LENR situation.

Formation of pico-hydrides/chemicals and di-hydrinos could be the main mechanisms behind what we call LENR and all actual nuclear reactions still for the most part produce radiation and/or depend on a specific energy level. Any larger than keV scale release of energy without harmful output could be attributed to proton annihilation in a dense hydrogen cluster, or a small number of nuclear reactions shielded/defused in a much larger cluster of super-chemical reactions. Transmutation (possibly including accelerated stabilization of isotopes) would be mostly attributed to pico-hydrides/molecules formed and deformed at subnuclear energies but with property fluctuations that would tell someone not versed it must be a different element. The whole "when you push it to hard you get neutral/damaging high energy particles" pattern in this field of experiments is probably just the crossing from the pico/keV scale to the nuclear/MeV scale of energy. The thing is to avoid fast neutrons/gammas and stuff we can stay in the keV area or skip straight to popping protons in condensed hydrogen aggregates to mesons/neutrinos/light on the GeV scale! Someone should do a test about if transmutations are reversible on the same relatively low energy levels. This would explain the lack of MeV energy levels expected if the transmutations merged and broke stable elements. You could be making pico-chemical/hydride pseudo-elements with similar features on the surface but with alternate formations underneath.

Dofour talked about changes in melting point, spectral analysis, conductivity/superconductivity and there is probably more. All I noticed while reading a couple papers is that in some experiments the isotope or element ratios would fluctuate between measurements while the device was running or between runs with relatively little energy output. Some amazing ideas then came to my mind, this partially is the shuffling around of picoscale hydrogen bonds in lower level electron orbits, of course there still is probably an elevated higher than background frequency of nuclear interactions. Mostly it's these strange stable, safer for compact systems, and more manageable to guide than nuclear bonds "Pico-chemistry". Was thinking Mills along with some others already probably knows that a good fraction of what some may call stable nuclear transmutation are manifestations of a peculiar production of flexible hydrides with a multitude of features!

Dufour says the hydrex concept is based the hypothesis that at "a short distance from the proton, the electron/proton interaction must take into account the action of the electron on the quarks of the proton (polarizability of the proton)." He then proposes an energy minimum for a state above the ground state (5 to 10 fm in size) with a life time in days that reverts to normal hydrogen with emission of a photon. He supposes that the hydride lattice contributes to yield this different proton/electron recombination than the one yielding the normal hydrogen atom observed in free space. Fusion/fission then happens due to a local decrease in the Coulomb barrier and in a local overlapping of the nuclear wave function of the target and projectile. So basically pico-chemistry of hydrogen forced by high concentrations of hydrogen in a metal hydride that converts to fusion followed by fission.

Does anyone have a more up to date understanding of Dufour's concept that is different than above? Does it seem reasonable that hydrinos which are below the ground state could have similar reactions? What would be the basis for hydrinos causing a local decrease in the Coulomb barrier to fusion?

Quote from Drgenek

Dufour says the hydrex concept is based the hypothesis that at "a short distance from the proton, the electron/proton interaction must take into account the action of the electron on the quarks of the proton (polarizability of the proton)." He then proposes an energy minimum for a state above the ground state (5 to 10 fm in size) with a life time in days that reverts to normal hydrogen with emission of a photon. He supposes that the hydride lattice contributes to yield this different proton/electron recombination than the one yielding the normal hydrogen atom observed in free space. Fusion/fission then happens due to a local decrease in the Coulomb barrier and in a local overlapping of the nuclear wave function of the target and projectile. So basically pico-chemistry of hydrogen forced by high concentrations of hydrogen in a metal hydride that converts to fusion followed by fission.

Does anyone have a more up to date understanding of Dufour's concept that is different than above? Does it seem reasonable that hydrinos which are below the ground state could have similar reactions? What would be the basis for hydrinos causing a local decrease in the Coulomb barrier to fusion?

Stable clusters of dense hydrogen condensed at even high temperatures would have a lot lower barrier to nuclear/annihilation reactions. I'm not saying Dufour is one hundred percent correct in all his papers, I'm saying he has a piece to the puzzle.

The energy in these compact devices doesn't have to mostly come from combustion, fission, fusion or some speculative unlimited dark energy ( Think like Mills, Thermacore etc. claims ish.. but not them obviously lol)

My point was that the pico-hydrides/pico-molecules spectra could convince people who believe they are impossible or unlikely that more nuclear transmutation/fission/fusion has occurred than has in actuality, based on measurements interpreted on general theoretical assumptions. It would also account for any missing energy in the reaction equations, many keV versus the claimed MeV. The point I'm actually getting at is the nuclear core reaction we are claiming fits the results may not be nuclear at all, nuclear reactions in this scenario are an increased probability side reaction. All the devices that produce greater than chemical excess heat, light or charged particles without expected high energy particle/reaction data could most simply just not be the reactions most assume they have to be. A resulting pico-hydride could have properties leading one who was told they are impossible (or frankly hasn't considered the Idea) to believe it is comprised of another synthesized element or something stranger. I'm saying even though it probably is, this anomalous excess energy hydrogen phenomena doesn't have to be fundamentally nuclear to fit the data. I'm combining his concept with other knowledge instead of taking one researchers word, this is just an alternate interpretation of the data.

Agreed:

1) A local drop in the Coulomb barrier would could result in colder fusion and the closer the containment is the Lawson criteria the greater the fusion and resultant nuclear reactions.

2) Given stable pico-chemistry, then when a sample is introduced into a mass spectrometer, the different mass sectors could have unknowns.

If hydrinos could create stable pico-chemistry, there would appear unknown elements in mass sectors in mass spectrometry. For example if the unknown were a mass like copper but could not produce an excitation or absorption spectra like copper. If the pico-chemical states are unstable outside of the matrix, then the spectra would change with time due to decay. If the reactions produce enough pico-chemistry, it is likely there true identity can be discovered. We would just need to learn the rules that determine pico-chemical bonding. Which becomes very easy if dense hydrogen states are not stable or are magnecules. A magnecule bonds like a magnet to a magnet, hence has no rules for bonding.

So given enough information it is possible to distinguish "pico-chemistry" from transmutation.

Quote from Drgenek

Agreed:

1) A local drop in the Coulomb barrier would could result in colder fusion and the closer the containment is the Lawson criteria the greater the fusion and resultant nuclear reactions.

2) Given stable pico-chemistry, then when a sample is introduced into a mass spectrometer, the different mass sectors could have unknowns.

If hydrinos could create stable pico-chemistry, there would appear unknown elements in mass sectors in mass spectrometry. For example if the unknown were a mass like copper but could not produce an excitation or absorption spectra like copper. If the pico-chemical states are unstable outside of the matrix, then the spectra would change with time due to decay. If the reactions produce enough pico-chemistry, it is likely there true identity can be discovered. We would just need to learn the rules that determine pico-chemical bonding. Which becomes very easy if dense hydrogen states are not stable or are magnecules. A magnecule bonds like a magnet to a magnet, hence has no rules for bonding.

So given enough information it is possible to distinguish "pico-chemistry" from transmutation.

Display More

I would say fusion/fission does not have to be the desired result. A practical, cheap, plentiful, non intermittent energy source is what we should be looking for. If Pico-chemistry and/or some hydrogen state change is energy dense enough and the simplest more practical everyday solution globally then wonderful! We haven't even fully exhausted the known potential of Ur/Pu/Th fission. We are possibly discovering a near equal functionally to nuclear fission, taking into account the horrible efficiency and costly bulk of PWR vs the orders of magnitude lower density of pico-chemical reactions (the safe compactness is superior though). An equal that is hydrocarbon energies superior replacement.

Quote from LeBob

I would say fusion/fission does not have to be the desired result. A practical, cheap, plentiful, non intermittent energy source is what we should be looking for. If Pico-chemistry and/or some hydrogen state change is energy dense enough and the simplest more practical everyday solution globally then wonderful! ... An equal that is hydrocarbon energies superior replacement.

The possibility of exothermic pico-chemistry (hydrinos production) could be a wonderful fuel source. But is that what really happens? I think an argument can be made that magnecule fusion explains the energy production and spectra that is attributed to production of hydrinos. If so then it is magnecule fusion rather than hydrino production that produces a wonderful fuel source. It isn't that I don't appreciate all the work and data produced by BLP. I just think the weight of evidence is on the side of magnecule fusion. I don't see how both exothermic and endothermic pico-chemistry with the same spectra are possible. I am not trying to poke the bear, I am just expressing by bias opinion.

Quote from Drgenek

The possibility of exothermic pico-chemistry (hydrinos production) could be a wonderful fuel source. But is that what really happens? I think an argument can be made that magnecule fusion explains the energy production and spectra that is attributed to production of hydrinos. If so then it is magnecule fusion rather than hydrino production that produces a wonderful fuel source. It isn't that I don't appreciate all the work and data produced by BLP. I just think the weight of evidence is on the side of magnecule fusion. I don't see how both exothermic and endothermic pico-chemistry with the same spectra are possible. I am not trying to poke the bear, I am just expressing by bias opinion.

H2* production wouldn't be the full extent of pico-chemistry. This wasn't coined by BLP this guy is French. An even more energy dense reaction involving a lower orbit bond with a metal atom could play a role as promoted by Dr Dufours?

Edit: All I am saying is various hydrogen/metal devices can work mostly through pico-hydride formation. Doesn't mean stable hydrinos are/aren't apart of it but it's a related concept. When you say "magnecule fusion" are you refering to the same pico-chemical process Dufour is or actual nuclear fusion?

Quote from LeBob

When you say "magnecule fusion" are you refering to the same pico-chemical process Dufour is or actual nuclear fusion?

Dufour suggested a process (pico-chemical) that causes polarization within the nucleus which hence causes a lowering of the Coulomb barrier. Magnecules are evidence of such a polarization. Elements in their natural or ground state can not bond like magnets. But by increasing weak force interactions in the nucleus, the nucleus becomes polarized. The movement of electrons relative to that polarization causes a magnetic field strong enough to cause bonding between atoms as if the atoms where magnets. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1TKSfAkWWN0

These pico-chemical states are a result of weak interacting states superimposed on the hydrogen atom. The formula for these states is E=n*n*hv. At n=1, hv is approximate the ionization energy of hydrogen. There are 240 accessible states between hydrogen ionization and neutron decay (13.5878925 ev to 0.7824260693 MeV specific to within 2.0E-5 ev).

Magnecule fusion is actual fusion. One can prove fusion by deriving balanced nuclear reactions using mass balance and accounting for chemical and magnecule reactions. The total change by reaction is chemical, pico-chemical and transmutation. By removing the chemical and magnecule reactions, the remaining change is transmutation. One has only the to apply stoichiometry and one gets data derived balanced nuclear equations. Those equations are equations of state. Think about how impossible it should be to derive (from data) precise and accurate primary and secondary nuclear reaction equations if the reactions are not real. https://patentimages.storage.g…ade2b/US20180322974A1.pdf

Quote from Drgenek

Dufour suggested a process (pico-chemical) that causes polarization within the nucleus which hence causes a lowering of the Coulomb barrier. Magnecules are evidence of such a polarization. Elements in their natural or ground state can not bond like magnets. But by increasing weak force interactions in the nucleus, the nucleus becomes polarized. The movement of electrons relative to that polarization causes a magnetic field strong enough to cause bonding between atoms as if the atoms where magnets. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1TKSfAkWWN0

These pico-chemical states are a result of weak interacting states superimposed on the hydrogen atom. The formula for these states is E=n*n*hv. At n=1, hv is approximate the ionization energy of hydrogen. There are 240 accessible states between hydrogen ionization and neutron decay (13.5878925 ev to 0.7824260693 MeV specific to within 2.0E-5 ev).

Magnecule fusion is actual fusion. One can prove fusion by deriving balanced nuclear reactions using mass balance and accounting for chemical and magnecule reactions. The total change by reaction is chemical, pico-chemical and transmutation. By removing the chemical and magnecule reactions, the remaining change is transmutation. One has only the to apply stoichiometry and one gets data derived balanced nuclear equations. Those equations are equations of state. Think about how impossible it should be to derive (from data) precise and accurate primary and secondary nuclear reaction equations if the reactions are not real. https://patentimages.storage.g…ade2b/US20180322974A1.pdf

Reality isn't the question, I believe pico-chemistry/magnecules increase the chance of nuclear reactions, working as described. Civilian practicality, priority of development, ease of engineered efficiency, convenience, speed of producing a public product and diversity of potencial applications are the real questions. To me pico-chemical reactions are enough alone to satisfy all of the worlds energy urges, as I have read about it. Just because compact Pu fission (example) is possible doesn't mean it is the solution for everything energy. Sometimes something less dense and more flexable pushes all the right buttons, and deep pico bonds are still a couple orders of magnitude more dense in energy content than H oxidations. Have a restful weekend.

Quote from LeBob

Reality isn't the question, I believe pico-chemistry/magnecules increase the chance of nuclear reactions, working as described. Civilian practicality, priority of development, ease of engineered efficiency, convenience, speed of producing a public product and diversity of potencial applications are the real questions. To me pico-chemical reactions are enough alone to satisfy all of the worlds energy urges, as I have read about it. Just because compact Pu fission (example) is possible doesn't mean it is the solution for everything energy. Sometimes something less dense and more flexable pushes all the right buttons, and deep pico bonds are still a couple orders of magnitude more dense in energy content than H oxidations. Have a restful weekend.

Our point of view differs only in that you believe in hydrino formation releasing energy and I see the decay or reaction of the pico-chemicals as releasing the energy. I have shown where this new fuel source originates. I am exploring this fuel which for now I call immobilized antimatter, IAM. Thanks, you have a restful weekend also.

Quote from Drgenek

Our point of view differs only in that you believe in hydrino formation releasing energy and I see the decay or reaction of the pico-chemicals as releasing the energy. I have shown where this new fuel source originates. I am exploring this fuel which for now I call immobilized antimatter, IAM. Thanks, you have a restful weekend also.

Ahh, pico-chemicals and hydrinos are not synonymous though. Condensed hydrogen is a form of pico structure. There is also the proposition bonds between hydrogen atoms and lower electron orbits in certain metals form and are exothermic. In that case the proton of the hydrogen is strongly linked in a stable atom sized dipole without fusing to the nucleus. Have you read Dofour's work over in the other thread?

Okay I just looked at the iron hydride pico-chemical thread. I can make sense of it except that chemical bonding rules say that 1) the hydrogen and inner shell iron orbital needs to overlap (they do) but 2) both orbital can only have two electrons. The iron inner orbital are filled (two electron per orbital), so three (the other from hydrogen) is too many. If it were not for that an exothermic bonding reaction would be possible. Rule violations happen, but usually there is a reason. Why would this happen?

Quote from Drgenek

Okay I just looked at the iron hydride pico-chemical thread. I can make sense of it except that chemical bonding rules say that 1) the hydrogen and inner shell iron orbital needs to overlap (they do) but 2) both orbital can only have two electrons. The iron inner orbital are filled (two electron per orbital), so three (the other from hydrogen) is too many. If it were not for that an exothermic bonding reaction would be possible. Rule violations happen, but usually there is a reason. Why would this happen?

A very good question Sir. Derive something from the structure graphs in the papers? Did you check the nickel one?

Let's reason by methodology. We need to eject the electron. Let’s use the auger effect as the method basis. The sequence then is something energetic (high energy photon substitute) creates an inner-shell vacancy. Then, pico-sized hydrogen bonds with the remaining inner-shell electron. As a high energy photon substitute, let’s use a hydrogen atom energized into weak interacting quantum state. These pico-chemical states are a result of weak interacting states superimposed on the hydrogen atom. The formula for these states is E=n*n*hv. At n=1, hv is approximate the ionization energy of hydrogen. The energy and higher n states are created by phats. There are 240 accessible states between hydrogen ionization and neutron decay (13.5878925 ev to 0.7824260693 MeV specific to within 2.0E-5 ev). Luckily, that works because condition at the
metal surface (free electrons and hydrogen) are right for the formation of pico-sized hydrogen. So pico-size hydrogen penetrates to the inner-shell electron to cause the reaction. So, there would be a reaction of a sufficiently energetic pico-sized hydrogen with the inner shell to which causes the eject the electron and bonding.

The energy released then comes from magnecule fusion (an autocatalytic reaction) or from the chemical reaction that started the method sequence.