Clearance Items

    Wyttenbach - the problem is that computer that is doing data processing must be moved with the detector outside the lab.

    This isn't too easy due to few issues. Another issue is that when doing the measurement everywhere else it will not pickup spectrum from walls, floor, etc...

    So the background must be taken in the lab with reactor. But it could be already contaminated. So background could hide something that is important.

    Unfortunately I can't exclude that the room was not contaminated by earlier experiments in whatever way.

    The best is to move everything somewhere else - ideally in hermetically closed space. Before starting any experiment background must measured first.


    As you might know there are not too many rooms where you can play with radioactive stuff.


    Actually it is required that the Anode surface is oxidized.


    UPDATE: After returning original Anode and re-starting the experiment radiation readings were 4x of background within few seconds.

    Please note - NaI detector is not picking up ANY changes even that it is extremely sensitive.

    What is really sensitive for this radiation is Pancake detector connected with Ludlums survey meter.

    Quote from Alan Smith

    The background needs to be taken in the lab, otherwise it is meaningless. Simply move it as far away as you can. Put shielding between the GS detector and your experiment if you have any. No lab background, no meaningful results.


    I fully agree with Alan regarding that we need a background base line. Ideally you make a long run (>= 10 hours) and even changing the NAL position after some hours is Ok.


    I personally are interested in a long e.g. >= 10 hours spectrum of the active system. There were some interesting lines from Nickel byproducts, but we must know that they are well above background. Thus we need the inactive run too.


    For theoretical purposes the combination of Ti/Ni is interesting as we have some good approaches to explain LENR for such a system.


    What is the maximal voltage you use? And what is the distance between anode & cathode?

    Yes, I have lead blocks. But if room is contaminated in any way with a vapor - what seems to be very likely after measurements - it could be meaningless.

    Moreover after days of tests there is very strange soft and sweet smell noticeable even through a mask and good air conditioning. I have quite bad feeling so I am in the room just for a few seconds. But it is just a side note.


    Definitively it has nothing to do with a paper. Whatever I will place over the cell it become clearly radioactive.


    I am preparing experiment with green laser now.

    Thanks.


    UPDATE: Electrolysis was manually stopped right now. Radiation level is still few times background with same behavior.

    Maybe in 3 days I will try to fire laser pulses. Laser is 70mW green 532nm with focus lens.

    Quote from JohnyFive

    Thanks.


    UPDATE: Electrolysis was manually stopped right now. Radiation level is still few times background with same behavior.

    Maybe in 3 days I will try to fire laser pulses. Laser is 70mW green 532nm with focus lens.

    I took a quick look back, but may have missed a photo of the reactor. Can you describe (or show a photo) of how the laser will be implemented to fire upon the fuel mixture?

    Is this a fuel "preparation" function or are you going to fire the laser continuously while the reactor is "online" and operating?


    Is your reactor housing transparent? Many clear materials will scatter a laser beams focus to a great extent, especially natural materials such as quartz. Can you reveal the

    reactor wall material?


    Also, what is your thoughts on what the laser will accomplish? Do you have a theory if this is to excite atoms via some laser resonance or some other function?


    Thanks,

    The reactor is just a jar with electrodes and piece of electrical tape.


    Because glass and water can reflect the laser it is not good idea to fire there. So my plan is to remove cathode and fire at this directly.

    What will happen? I don't know. But it is possible that various radiation could be generated - for example muons, gamma rays.

    This could be well measurable with NaI.

    If nothing, then laser will heat the surface very suddenly. This could be good stimulation


    In case muons will be abundant there is nothing that can stop muon-catalyzed fusion. And that is my intention.

    For what it's worth...


    Quote from JohnyFive

    The reactor is just a jar with electrodes and piece of electrical tape.


    So, keeping the spirit of low-cost experimentation, will/does it still show heightened radiation emission with:

    • H2O instead of D2O
    • Sodium or potassium carbonate instead of Lithium carbonate (not that it's significantly more expensive but the former are more readily available)
    • Large current through the wire (short-circuit or capacitor bank discharge) instead of a laser
    Quote from JohnyFive

    Laser is 70mW green 532nm with focus lens.


    If you're trying to replicate to some extent Holmlid's work, you're doing it wrong. He does not use continuous wave lasers, but instead pulsed nanosecond lasers that provide much more intense triggering. When focused, such lasers are capable of quickly ablating metal surfaces.


    Here's an excerpt from the experimental section of his latest paper.



    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laser_ablation

    Quote from Wikipedia

    Laser ablation is the process of removing material from a solid (or occasionally liquid) surface by irradiating it with a laser beam. At low laser flux, the material is heated by the absorbed laser energy and evaporates or sublimates. At high laser flux, the material is typically converted to a plasma. Usually, laser ablation refers to removing material with a pulsed laser, but it is possible to ablate material with a continuous wave laser beam if the laser intensity is high enough.

    Yes, I want to find answer for all these questions.


    Regarding Laser I am well aware of Holmlid's work. And yes, I will use pulsed laser of course. It can be modulated in any way since electronics is prepared for this.

    Quote from JohnyFive

    And yes, I will use pulsed laser of course. It can be modulated in any way since electronics is prepared for this.


    A continuous wave (CW) laser electronically modulated to irradiate the target impulsively will not work as a pulsed laser.

    The energy of each individual pulse will be several orders of magnitude lower.


    In the excerpt above Holmlid used his laser at 0.4 J/pulse, with each pulse having a 7 nanosecond duration.

    Since [W=J/s], each pulse would have a peak power of about 57 megawatts.


    These lasers are actually not that much specialized or expensive, but they're on a different category than ordinary laser pointers.

    • Official Post

    A thorough new article about the hot fusion controversy. It gives CF a mention, but Teleyarkhan of all people. Have not heard his name in years:


    https://www.powermag.com/fusio…ng-as-research-continues/


    "In March 1989, two electro chemists, Martin Fleischmann of the UK and Stanley Pons of the University of Utah, through leaks to the Financial Times in London and The Wall Street Journal in the U.S., said they had captured fusion in a bottle at room temperatures. “Cold fusion” was an instant international sensation. Only months later, physicists attempted and failed to recreate the Pons and Fleischmann claims, giving them, in the words of Salt Lake City’s Deseret News, “the cold shoulder.”
    While thoroughly debunked, there remain to this day enthusiasts for cold fusion. Attempts to repeat the original findings continue, hope springs eternal, but reality continues to rule.
    One offshoot of the Pons and Fleischmann work came from Rusi Taleyarkhan, who submitted an article in the peer-review journal Science, based on his work as an engineer at the Department of Energy’s Oak Ridge National Laboratory. Taleyarkhan said he had demonstrated nuclear fusion in a tabletop device with tiny, energetic bubbles in a liquid, caused by sound waves, known as “sonoluminescence.” Noted physicist Luis W. Alvarez had speculated on the possibility of “bubble fusion” decades earlier, but it had not been demonstrated.
    Prior to the publication in Science and fearing a repeat of the cold fusion fiasco, Oak Ridge commissioned researchers to attempt to replicate Taleyarkhan’s work. They failed, but Sciencerefused to withdraw the paper. It appeared in March 2002, creating only a brief stir in the general public. In 2005, the BBC produced a documentary recounting Taleyarkhan’s experiment, hiring sonoluminescence expert and UCLA physicist Seth Putterman to advise the BBC on the work. Putterman had been a peer reviewer of the Science article and argued against publication. He failed to find the neutrons expected from a fusion reaction in Taleyarkhan’s work, debunking the claim."


    And while Teleyarkhan has disappeared from public, bubblefusion has not: https://firstlightfusion.com/

    Quote

    Putting that together and checking consistency across all the facts is what shows Rossi to be an inveterate liar, at minimum, and (to any objective person reading the evidence) a chancer with no product who tried to extract $100M from IH.


    Look at Trump....


    Well, his father told him, "You're a killer, you're a king," and expected him to be those things. His older brother Freddy, who died young, suffered for not living up the father's expectations that a man be incredibly tough and almost merciless. Donald was willing to be those things, and that's exactly who his father expected him to be. So he did achieve what his father expected of him. He is the person his father wanted him to be.



    Rossi is a killer...good for him and good for LENR.

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.