Early NiH Scamming: The Unfounded Work, Fake Hydrogen Absorption, and False Test Results.

1st Official Post

    I've been accused of making false comments about the early nickel hydrogen work of Focardi, Piantelli, and several other scientists. In particular, the whole concept of how abnormally large quantities or fast rates of hydrogen absorption into nickel can produce an "excited" state of fuel is said to be bunk that I've made up out of thin air.


    Here is a thread where the early excess heat, particle emissions, and other results of NiH is being debated between, ironically, someone I dare not mention his name, Jed Rothwell, and a number of other users. The researcher arguing in support of Focardi and Piantelli's work


    http://www.mail-archive.com/vo…@eskimo.com/msg33306.html


    One contributor in the discussion above even provided the following link which details how Focardi and Piantelli modified their experiment to refute the claims of another party that tried to claim their own test dismissed the NiH technology. Please note you have to scroll down a good ways on this page.


    http://www.newenergytimes.com/…2008/NET29-8dd54geg.shtml


    A large number of links to papers can be found at those two links. More can be found in Jed Rothwell's online library.


    If someone is willing to do the research, they will see that I'm not making up fictitious imaginary concepts when I talk about thermal shocks, pressure shocks, excitation of fuel, nickel pre-processing, (annealing, vacuum degassing, heating in hydrogen, acid etching, etc), and levels of hydrogen absorption BEYOND WHAT MAINSTREAM PHYSICS EXPECTS that seems to result -- according to the authors of these papers -- a wide range of anomalous effects.


    If they are right or wrong (take my opinion of their results seeming solid and real with a grain of salt if you wish since I'm not an engineer/scientist) or somewhere in between, I didn't make up these concepts or "invent" them to spread disinformation. These were the basic concepts that Me356 described using (sometimes with slightly different terminology) to produce fuel that could "breathe" -- absorb or desorb high quantities of hydrogen -- and produce excess heat.


    If you take Piantelli and Focardi's results and extend them to a system that doesn't use bulk nickel wire or rods -- so more than perhaps only .1% of the mass of the nickel samples could participate in the reaction -- the so called Rossi Effect seems like an obvious result.


    So call Piantelli and Focardi and the other scientists who worked with them hoaxers or fakers or deluded individuals. But, for the record, I didn't make up stuff up out of thin air. You have access to the source papers that are available on various internet websites AND the descriptions from Me356 ON THIS VERY FORUM.


    But if you want to continue describing me as someone making up stuff out of thin air, feel free to do so. You're absolutely free to insult me in anyway you so desire: that's crystal clear to me now. With this post anyone who is honest and sincere can do a little research and see that all these concepts originated a long time ago, even if they are described using slightly different terminology today.

    @THEDEBATEISUSELESS - you are in good company. I have been accused of being a surreal moron. We need this debate, this place is pretty open. You and I both know how easy it is to lose scope when you are arguing. I always admired your old threads. You said the topic what you wanted to discuss, and set limits on what was out of bounds. The mods could just sit back you did a good job.

    I have a feeling that it will become heated, when it should become educational. You may notice, I do not argue in Rossi threads anymore. For me why bother? But I still believe in LENR.

    The following is an old paper about hydrogen excitation and anomalous heat in palladium but I think you may find it interesting and strangely relevant.


    http://www.academia.edu/110066…cies_using_metal_hydrides


    I wonder if the beta phase of the metal hydride is sufficienty saturated with atomic hydrogen that it becomes some what constrained in the lattice.


    If so could the constrained hydrogen atoms effectively resonate with each other as a result of ionization and excitations / de excitation. And perhaps even be sustained like a tuning fork to some extent under these conditions? I suppose the energies of photon emissions and absorption for the hydrogen atoms under this constraint would be well matched.


    Is there something about this excitation of hydrogen that allows additional hydrogen absorption? Or is proton release and acceleration from the surface occurring as a result of this excitation?


    It seems to me most of the different kinds of stimuli in LENR devices are there to excite or ionize the hydrogen. Could the LENR itself in what ever form it takes also stimulate this kind of hydrogen excitation and ionization?


    If so perhaps the thermal effect is just from exothermic adsorption of the hydrogen with associated excited hydrogen release or proton release from the surface due to ionization with out normal desorption in the case of protons or with reduced endothermic effect of desorption in the case excited hydrogen.


    Interestingly I have seen this excitation of hydrogen on metal Hydrides called "Activation" here and other papers. It seems to me where activation is mentioned it refers to this excitation of the sorbed Hydrogen and not just the hydrogen loading.


    If 2 protons are a few angstroms apart I wonder what kind of acceleration and final velocities they will achieve at the surface. And what kinds of pressures would result in the bulk.


    Edit: I think excited hydrogen and recombinations after proton release could explain a lot if fusor like glow is present:


    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.


    As well as the potential electrical current generation from a circuit including the released protons, particle lift if the protons/ions are released with higher energy from the surface and of course the line of sight Li7 interaction in LENR plus.


    Edit: Interestingly according to this paper the Al2O3 seems to conserve atomic hydrogen and H+ ions across its surface. Could this be a reason for including Aluminum?


    Edit: if hydrogen spectral line emission resonance occurs would surrounding the device in optical and UV reflective material such as aluminium, silver or gold or perhaps some higher temperature metal or alloy with high UV reflectivity enhance the effect?


    Edit if the MetalHydride is an anode emmitting protons and H+ ions due to ionizing radiation and the reflector is also a cathode could this explain how electricity is produced?

    • Official Post

    don't forget Thermacore incident (NiH)

    Brian Ahern: Thermacore replication


    I hope it can be replicated, as much as Didier Grass Thomson CSF (NiH too)

    RNBE2016: Couche mince de nickel realisé par pulvérisation cathodique par Didier Grass probably.


    these are accident, but this mean that it can work.

    Note that in RNBE2016, Nicolas Armanet of I2HR explained that loading capacity of Ni was very low, but that mixing with some other metal could improve behavior, like do Ag in Pd.

    • Official Post
    Quote from AlainCo

    Note that in RNBE2016, Nicolas Armanet of I2HR explained that loading capacity of Ni was very low, but that mixing with some other metal could improve behavior, like do Ag in Pd.


    And now we have (from Coolescence) Pd doping with lead, Coolescence LLC team in Electochimica Acta : Optimal Surface Doping of Lead for Increased Electrochemical Insertion of Hydrogen into Palladium and in my research the possibility of doping Pb with micron- size carbon black (gas black). Also there is a huge body of industrial chemistry literature on boosting the catalytic effects of nickel in many forms with Cu and other materials.

    As I understand it, hydrogen does not aBsorb into the Ni lattice to any significant extent the way it does in Pd. Hydrogen aDsorbs onto the surface of Ni. In fact, that is how they measure the active surface area of Raney Ni (which reputedly doesn't work for LENR) - they measure the hydrogen aDsorption onto its internal sponge surface area. Piantelli says that for clean Ni, the H2 adsorption takes the form of a catalytic breaking of the H2 molecule into H- and H+ on the properly prepared surface of the Ni. In Piantelli's case, that is a Ni rod.


    Piantelli is a very credible scientist - a scientist's scientist. For each experiment, he will spend a month beforehand in careful calibration. He has had individual Ni-H LENR experiments run continuously for >1 year. Piantelli is content for the moment to reasonably size his experiments while he is discovering the core mechanisms and optimizing performance. He has a high class lab with high class instrumentation for analyzing what works and what products are produced. Instrumentation includes HPGe and large volume NaI gamma spectroscopy, sensitive neutron detection (neutron output once shut down his whole lab), micro-XRD (Bruker), and SEM with EDS to name a few. He has also built a specialized UHV evaporation/sputtering system for applying films to his rods and substrates to "right size" his surface Ni metal grains. I have neither seen nor read of a better outfitted lab for LENR research.


    Piantelli considers Rossi with a great deal of DIS-regard. On the other hand, Piantelli worked for many years with Focardi and had an immense respect for Focardi. Focardi retired from his work with Piantelli due to terminal ill health. He improved and used his later years to work with Rossi. Focardi believed that Rossi's system produced excess heat, and Focardi actually measured and reported gamma emissions from Rossi's early eCats. Focardi knew how to make and interpret gamma spectra. While it is possible to fake gamma emission with radioisotope spiking of the system, Focardi suggested that the gamma was not continuous, an observation harder to fake with a radioisotope. Gamma emissions are a sure sign that something nuclear is happening.


    I disagree with Jed's contention that no credible reports of Ni-H LENR exist. Otherwise, I would not be pursuing Ni-H LENR with my own time and money.

    Quote from BobHiggins

    I disagree with Jed's contention that no credible reports of Ni-H LENR exist.

    I do not think I said that. I said that Themacore was credible. So is Piantelli, although others were not able to replicate his work, and I have some doubts about his calorimetry. There are a few other credible reports of Ni-H, but most Ni work fades away when you look closely.

    Quote from JedRothwell

    I do not think I said that. I said that Themacore was credible. So is Piantelli, although others were not able to replicate his work, and I have some doubts about his calorimetry. There are a few other credible reports of Ni-H, but most Ni work fades away when you look closely.

    I don't know of anyone who has actually tried to replicate Piantelli. Others have made their own experiments, sometimes with some semblance of Piantelli's work, but to my knowledge, there has been no direct replication.


    All it takes is one credible experiment. This is what P&F did. Anyone can fail, and most do. Sometimes expert experimenters are pre-ordained to fail (unethical). Sometimes experimenters are not expert enough in the technologies required. 1000 failures don't invalidate the one credible positive experiment.


    When you say, "fades away when you look closely", usually implies application of worst possible errors (or subterfuge) in evaluation of the experiment. But, you cannot say that ALL experiments will suffer from the worst possible errors (or subterfuge) - on average they have average errors.


    Compared to the way it does in Pd, you are absolutely correct. I don't have the references to instantly post, but hydrogen does indeed absorb into Ni. However, it is a very slow process and the rate limiting step (all of this is not being made up fictitiously but is in the non-LENR scientific literature) is the dissociation of H2 to H1 on the nickel surface. Additionally, H1 that has been dissociated from H2 on the nickel surface has very little kinetic energy which also hinders penetration through the surface. A source of H1 in the atmosphere of the reactor can produce atomic hydrogen atoms and ions that can ping the surface of the nickel and penetrate the surface very easily even at low temperatures.

    Quote from BobHiggins

    I don't know of anyone who has actually tried to replicate Piantelli.

    Cerron-Zeballos et al.:


    http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/CerronZebainvestigat.pdf


    Piantelli strongly disagrees with their analysis.


    Others visited Piantelli and felt that his calorimetry may be lacking because it is what you might call a one-point approach. I agree it is kind of crude. I am not saying I am sure it is wrong, but I'd like to see improvements or a different method.

    And it has been pointed out the Piantelli and Focardi changed their test system after the Cerron-Zeballos report to show they were generating excess heat.


    It is in the Vortex L thread.

    http://www.mail-archive.com/vo…@eskimo.com/msg33323.html


    http://www.newenergytimes.com/…2008/NET29-8dd54geg.shtml


    In November 1998, the Piantelli-Focardi group published "Large Excess Heat
    Production in Ni-H Systems,"[14] again in Il Nuovo Cimento. The paper
    directly responds to the most significant criticism of the 1996 CERN paper.
    In the Piantelli-Focardi authors' introduction to their new paper, they
    state that they modified the cell they reported in 1994 [3] with "an
    improvement which allows the measurement and the monitoring of the external
    surface temperature."


    "With this new set-up," the Piantelli-Focardi group writes, "the external
    temperature increase, together with the internal one, have been utilized to
    characterize the excited state of the Ni sample. The existence of an
    exothermic effect, whose heat yield is well above that of any known
    chemical reaction, has been unambiguously confirmed by evaluating the
    thermal flux coming from the cells."

    It appears that the Cerron-Zeballos experiment was "similar" to that of Piantelli (their description), as reproduced from the Focardi/Piantelli paper in Nuevo Cimento. Such approximate replications are almost always doomed to fail when executed on the basis of a published paper without the support from the original experimenter to fill in the necessary details. I have seen some of Piantelli's process and have been given clues to some of the necessary behaviors that are not included in that paper. Piantelli invokes thermal wave phenomena for which there is almost no literature. I contacted a heat transfer prof at Notre Dame about another application where thermal waves were manifest, and he was unfamiliar with thermal wave (non-Fourier, hyperbolic) heat transfer. This type of wave behavior is clearly implicated in the Ni rod from Piantelli's experiment that melted down (see Krivit's photo). Piantelli goes to a good deal of trouble in his apparatus to setup that thermal wave behavior - Cerron-Zeballos would have been oblivious to this factor by replicating from the paper alone. Note that the thermal waves are not the proximate cause of LENR, but rather a stimulus Piantelli uses to start, stimulate, and sustain LENR on his Ni rod. This is not the only factor Cerron-Zeballos would have missed by not doing a replication under Piantelli's direction.


    There are a thousand ways to screw up a replication, and sometimes only one way to get it right. How many times did we see that in P&F replication attempts?

    Quote from BobHiggins

    Piantelli is a very credible scientist - a scientist's scientist.

    Thank you for the comments.


    My understanding is that Piantelli is of advanced age. Do you know if he has an understudy that has been schooled and trusted with "the secrets"?

    Quote from Bob

    My understanding is that Piantelli is of advanced age. Do you know if he has an understudy that has been schooled and trusted with "the secrets"?

    Piantelli is not so much of advanced age, but the dear man is suffering from serious respiratory problems. I am happy to say that I heard his condition has improved.


    Unfortunately, I believe that Piantelli does not have a true understudy. Apparently he has someone that supports a lot of his work and is able to prepare the experiments the way Piantelli does, but I understand that he would not be capable of moving the technology forward without Piantelli. I hope today Piantelli has a real understudy for his work.

    • Official Post

    Bob,


    Thank you so much for the scoop on Piantelli. No one understands why he has chosen to stay so secluded, for so long, with so much to offer. He is Dr. NiH afterall, and has been for 25 years. I even remember a symposium 3-4 years ago where his assistant filled in for him due declining health, and lectured that they (NichEnergy) should have a commercial product within the year.


    BG also visited him in Italy as you surely know, where he agreed to a cooperation with MFMP. That caused much excitement at the time, as would be expected. Unfortunately, we never heard another thing about that. The gossip afterwards was that Piantelli had been reined in by his company NichEnergy. Lame excuse if you ask me, and sadly par for the course in LENR.


    As you well understand, the peanut gallery is getting a little frustrated with empty rhetoric, and unfulfilled promises, so I would appreciate you shedding a little light on Piantelli. For that matter, whatever you know, that no else knows, but never said because this is LENR after all and that is the norm, :) , that you want to tell us to keep our morale up...well, let us hear that too.

    It looks like there may be the results of another NiH test incoming soon (in this case Ni and LiAlH4 probably). From the abstract, I don't get an indication if they are going to publish positive or negative results.


    If they publish positive results, we must all instantly jump on the universally accepted bandwagon that the experimenters were incompetent brainwashed "believers" who have ignored the one hundred different ways they could have published a false result.


    If they publish negative results, we must all instantly celebrate by claiming another refutation of the idea that NiH could ever possibly work.


    And, of course, if it is negative but they only performed a few tests without significant research into fuel processing (not testing different ways of pre-treating the fuel such as baking, annealing, vacuum degassing, flushing with hydrogen, etc) we are to instantly ignore that fact. If NiH is possible, it should work every single time a researcher throws together the dirtiest most oxidized nickel and LiAlH4.

    The 17th Meeting of Japan CF-Research Society


    JCF17 ABSTRACTS


    March 19-20, 2017


    Japan CF-Research Society


    National Institute of Technology, Tokyo College

    http://jcfrs.org/JCF17/jcf17-abstracts.pdf

    Expectations on the new heat-generation-reaction between metal and hydrogen


    M. Nakamura*, M. Uchimura, H. Takahashi, S. Sumitomo


    Nissan Motor Co., Ltd.


    *[email protected]


    The development of technologies friendly to the global environment is a major theme in the


    automotive industry today. Especially, to reduce CO2 emission and to achieve cleaner exhaust


    emissions, Electrical Vehicle, EV, has received a lot of attention in recent years. The sales numbers


    of 100%-EV was around 6 times higher for the past 5 years. 100%-EV means that it does not have


    any other power source except motors. Nissan launched it, named LEAF, in 2010 and the total


    number of sales exceeded 250,000. But some customers complains the mileage per 1 charge, around


    200km. In particular, the mileage in winter season could decrease by half due to using of heater, this


    should be solved.


    In 2010, A. Rossi reported E-cat, Energy Catalyzer. This equipment can generate heat energy


    from Ni and H2 reaction and the energy is larger than input one. This experiment was replicated by


    A Parkhomov but the reaction mechanism has NOT been clarified [1-2]. If we can use this heat


    energy as a heater application into EV, the problem of short mileage caused by using heater will be


    solved, the EV with this equipment will be a candidate for customers who have a sense of


    dissatisfaction that they should charge very often.


    In this report we will report 2 things. The first one is the experimental results regarding to


    reproducing Parkhomov’s experiment with some disclosing experimental conditions using


    Differential Scanning Calorimetry (STA-PT1600, Linseis Inc.). This DSC can measure generated


    heat within a tolerance of 2%. The second one is our expectation on this reaction for automotive


    potential.


    [1] A.G. Parkhomov; International Journal of Unconventional Science issue 7(3), pp. 68-72, 2015


    [2] A.G. Parkhomov; International Journal of Unconventional Science issue 8(3), pp. 34-38, 2015

    You are absolutely correct. We don't need teasers. After someone has done enough testing to be confident of their results, positive or negative, they need to be willing to present the data openly. I'm sick of the secrecy and game playing. If there are parties with unpublished results from their NiH tests, I wish they would come forward.

Subscribe to our newsletter

It's sent once a month, you can unsubscribe at anytime!

View archive of previous newsletters

* indicates required

Your email address will be used to send you email newsletters only. See our Privacy Policy for more information.

Our Partners

Supporting researchers for over 20 years
Want to Advertise or Sponsor LENR Forum?
CLICK HERE to contact us.