So.
If I were working with Pd, maybe with hydrogen, lithium, and especially with other perhaps exotic materials, under high heat and pressure, I'd also be concerned. A big burst of unexpected energy in a sealed pressure vessel would ruin one's whole day.
With this post Mary, you demonstrate zero logic. You are worried that something you are adamant does not exist might cause an explosion.
Mary Yugo wrote
"If I were working with Pd, maybe with hydrogen, lithium, and especially with other perhaps exotic materials, under high heat and pressure"
100 ~ 700 pascals is a really really high pressure and 120 Celsius is a really really high temperature and even 1 mg of hydrogen is really really dangerous.
Mizuno is so reckless. .
As well my incandescent 100w lightbulb should be banned .
Pressure = 100,000 pascals, Temperature = 3000C. tungsten is too 'exotic'. Just in case there is one mg of hydrogen in the vicinity.
With this post Alan, you demonstrate zero logic. I am not adamant about the nonexistence of LENR. I maintain it has not been proven to exist at low levels of power. And all high power results I've seen either are a one of anecdote or some type of fraudulent claim or sketchy and arguable work. But I have never said LENR was not possible. From what I know of physics, I'd say it's unlikely, but my physics, especially of very small things, is rusty. I am happy to say I don't know. Always have been. I'd love to be convinced it DOES exist, which is why I examined Rossi's and Defkalion's claims to begin with. Because if true, they were so large as to be easily testable. And you see how that went. Or maybe you STILL don't see how that went, which wouldn't surprise me.
RobertBryant I will let Dr. Shanahan speak for himself but I think the devices he works with *are* *especially* dangerous if an explosion happens inside them, maybe in part because he works with radioactive materials. As for LENR workers blowing themselves up, we have read that it happens, probably due to hydrogen and oxygen explosions. It's not as frequent or flagrantly negligent as the blowups by "HHO" dummies but fatal accidents during LENR tests have happened. Or maybe I didn't get what you were trying to say-- I rarely do because you write in a very cryptic manner. IMHO of course.
Professor Mizuno and indeed all university researchers are required to undertake proper safety precautions in their research.
Every effort is taken to remove oxygen from the small reactor chamber because it eliminates the LENR reactivity of the specially prepared
nickel palladium surface. The possibility of an explosion of deuterium with oxygen is very low.
Palladium is a noble metal which is much less reactive than metals on the left side of the periodic table, such as Lithium
Lithium is not used in the Mizuno report which is subject of this thread
If one goes through the data available from Professor Mizuno, one will be impressed by the effort that is taken to control
and measure as many variables as possible. There are no reports of spontaneous, unforeseen temperature excursions in these controlled experiments
Most people on this forum are aware that 500 Pascals is not a high pressure but indeed it is very low pressure and almost vacuous
like some comments on this forum.
LENR reactions only occur under specific and very narrowly defined sets of circumstances. That is the principal reason they are difficult to replicate. They are very unlikely to occur just because someone is using 'similar materials' in a lab with a 'fusion lab' sign on the door. So Dr. Shanahan need have no fears he will get blown up.
Alan, with respect that just does not make sense. If LENR reactions can ever do real nuclear nasty things, then given that no-one understands what is needed to switch them on, except that metal hydrides or deuterides seem implicated, no H&S dept in the world would tolerate a "we don't know what is the risk so will ignore attitude".
However, the flip side of this (which is why only virtuous outliers like Kirk care) is that currently, due to the lack of replicability you hint at, LENR does not obviously happen at all. There are excess heat effects that are never pinned down to something that can be retested and remain positive.
With respect to the Mizuno paper it appears that LENR reactions are only occurring under very narrowly defined sets of circumstances.
If we compare Figure 20 with Figure 26, the time-temp integral is 76% greater for the active reactor than the inactive reactor
for similar power inputs.
The time-temp integral for the two reactors is 590 kilosecond.degrees for the active, 335 for the inactive.
The time-temperature integral between the inlet and outlet air temperatures is a quick way of
estimating the reactor heat outputs.
The slight differences in air densities and specific heats at these mild temperatures do not change the
basic conclusion that the active reactor is producing a lot of excess heat as compared to the inactive reactor
which is producing no excess relative to input.
One reactor is inactive because it has a slightly different surface preparation for the nickel.
Deuterium pressure, masses , dimensions are exactly the same for both the inactive and active reactors.
In Mizuno's controlled situation the excess heat power is of the order of 50W,, similar to a household lightbulb.
Professor Mizuno is much more likely to be blown up by an errant Korean missile than by this reactor.
Alan, with respect that just does not make sense. If LENR reactions can ever do real nuclear nasty things, then given that no-one understands what is needed to switch them on, except that metal hydrides or deuterides seem implicated, no H&S dept in the world would tolerate a "we don't know what is the risk so will ignore attitude".
Oh yes they do. Try working outside of Academia and you will soon find out.
So Dr. Shanahan need have no fears he will get blown up.
I love to see the proof of that. make sure you do so for all the hydrides I and my company uses under all the conditions we use that. That will include significant (up to 100%) tritium content.
Kirk - is it safe to assume that you have access to real time tritium detection during R&D, engineering and production work? If yes, is it okay to ask what is your measurement standard is (in ppb) for detecting / measuring tritium output on a real time basis?
Kirk - is it safe to assume that you have access to real time tritium detection during R&D, engineering and production work? If yes, is it okay to ask what is your measurement standard is (in ppb) for detecting / measuring tritium output on a real time basis?
Actually I'm not sure. We have two basic systems for monitoring for tritium releases. (We normally like to keep our tritium inside the pipes, but being a hydrogen isotope, it is very leaky (~4X leakier than 4-He).) The first system is ionization chambers. These monitor for gas phase tritium. When tritium enters the detection zone, it increases the current, and our health protection folks decide what the alarm levels are. I'm not sure how to translate this into ppb, it could certainly be done though. I was involved once in calibrating a new ionization chamber, and for that I made up D/T mixes and took samples of the gas mix to a high res mass spec lab for analysis. Once the calibration is established, I don't think they are recalibrated at any point, except by running electronics checks (i.e. 'simulated' T presence). This is based on my experience of '96-'04. Might have changed since then.
The second system is to detect tritiated water. We assume the water bonds to various surfaces, so we rub them with a standard brand of filter paper (smearing) and then put the paper in a liquid scintillation vial, where scintillant is added, and the T content measured by standard LSC techniques. The LSC techniques are calibrated with standard solutions, but I'm not familiar with them. It also depends on the lab. The ones associated with T processes tend to deal with higher levels than the ones associated with the environmental protection folks that check air, water, grass, fish, animals, etc. for T contamination.
Those environmental folks also have a way of doing trace T measurements from water where they convert the water to gases, then measure the T in the gas phase, but I have no experience with that.
All of these LSC methods are not real time of course. The ionization chambers are what gives us real time signals.
Sorry I couldn't be of more help.
Your attempts to turn my safety concerns into a joke aren't really appreciated. Yes, I know that Mizuno's work is done with minimal hydrogen, as is most of the CF field. But the point is that if there truly are LENRs, then what would stop them from occurring in my systems? I am talking now about metal hydride beds with 15 kg of alloy holding 900 or so standard liters of mixed isotope hydrogen gas, often including tritium (radioactive) at appreciable concentrations. We use all the same metals the CFers do. We use Pd on kieselguhr to separate T from H and D, in kilogram quantities. We store all possible H/D/T mixes on La-Ni-Al alloys, as well as others. We even use things the CF community doesn't, like U and Li. Our R&D groups go even further, we look at *anything* that can store hydrogen. Our problem is not so much an explosion, although we certainly do worry about that too, but primarily simple overpressurization of a vessel causing a rupture or even just a leak. We spend thousands of dollars worrying about fire scenarios that would do that. What's the difference between an external heat source and an internal one? Answer: None. So if LENR suddenly started to occur in one of our beds/processes, we would have a problem. And no we don't just run a 500Pa, we can get up in the vicinity of 10 kpsi in some cases. Further, if LENR occurs with D and H, why wouldn't it occur with T? The financial outfall from an unexpected rupture of a tank/vessel would be tremendous, since it would certainly shut down everything here for months!
This is why I find it so disappointing to see the lack of progress at defining what is apparently going on in these systems. As MY pointed out, when Mizuno got his famous 'bucket result', why didn't he follow up? When Storms got his highly controlled responses from Pt cathodes, why did he abandon that system? None of these behaviors make any sense. And finally, why do the CFers close ranks to reject a non-nuclear explanation that might lead them to full reproducibility , using fallacious strawman arguments and insults and innuendo instead of jumping on the idea and conducting experiments aimed at testing it? The reason usually lies in the human factors arena, not electrochemistry or calorimetry. So while the stakes seem high, there doesn't really seem to be a reason to get excited. But it is a truth that just because it doesn't seem real today, what it looks like tomorrow is unknown. So I watch.
@Kirk
Has there been any events at your worksite that might point to an anomalous heat source being present??
@Kirk
Has there been any events at your worksite that might point to an anomalous heat source being present??
No.
QuoteIf one goes through the data available from Professor Mizuno, one will be impressed by the effort that is taken to control
and measure as many variables as possible. There are no reports of spontaneous, unforeseen temperature excursions in these controlled experiments
Most people on this forum are aware that 500 Pascals is not a high pressure but indeed it is very low pressure and almost vacuous
You seem to miss studiously AVOID the point. There are processes which are used in industry and research which use the SAME MATERIALS as LENR experiments but under conditions of HIGH HEAT and PRESSURE. THAT is the concern if LENR is real-- not what LENR researchers do in their labs. Unless you assume weirdly that what happens at low pressure won't happen at high.
QuoteOh yes they do. Try working outside of Academia and you will soon find out.
You can find out all sorts of things working outside of Academia. Things like angels, communications with the dead, psychic powers, telekinesis, precognition, and the magical properties of HHO (Brown's) gas, to name a few. Not to mention crop circles, Big Foot, and UFO people with rectal probes.
You can find out all sorts of things working outside of Academia. Things like angels, communications with the dead, psychic powers, telekinesis, precognition, and the magical properties of HHO (Brown's) gas, to name a few. Not to mention crop circles, Big Foot, and UFO people with rectal probes.
Please keep your other interests for the appropriate fora.
From the paper Jed is convinced I wouldn't ever read:
QuoteDisplay MoreIt is a terrible shame that Mizuno did not call in a dozen other scientists to see and feel
the hot cell. I would have set up a 24-hour vigil with graduate students and video cameras to
observe the cell and measure the evaporated water carefully. This is one of history’s
heartbreaking lost opportunities. News of this event, properly documented and attested to by
many people, might have convinced thousands of scientists worldwide that cold fusion is real.
This might have been one of the most effective scientific demonstrations in history.
Unfortunately, it occurred during an extended national holiday, and Mizuno decided to
disconnect the cell from the recording equipment and hide it in his laboratory.
With due respect to Dr. Mizuno who is most probably honest, this reminds me of the scammer who takes apart his best performing proof of concept model because he needs the components to make a new machine! It's so frustrating! But the obvious question is why, since this happened, Dr. Mizuno and others have not simply repeated the experiment under proper conditions. If this were my lab, my assistants and students would be spending every available minute since the event, working to duplicate it under proper observation, calibration and documentation. And they would work on NOTHING ELSE. As Shanahan points out, such things never seem to happen in LENR work. It all has the flavor of a slow motion dream in a horror movie-- the characters never behave as expected if they, themselves, believe the claims to be real.
Quote100 ~ 700 pascals is a really really high pressure and 120 Celsius is a really really high temperature and even 1 mg of hydrogen is really really dangerous.
Mizuno is so reckless. .
As well my incandescent 100w lightbulb should be banned .
Pressure = 100,000 pascals, Temperature = 3000C. tungsten is too 'exotic'. Just in case there is one mg of hydrogen in the vicinity.
QuoteMizuno and a graduate student worked long days building and testing the
cell, and preparing the anode, cathode, electrolyte, and controls. They planned to run at 100EC
and 10 atmospheres of pressure, so they ran pressure tests at 150EC and 50 atmospheres,
Alan, with respect that just does not make sense. If LENR reactions can ever do real nuclear nasty things, then given that no-one understands what is needed to switch them on
That is incorrect. People know what is needed to switch them on. They discovered this by trial and error, and by empirical methods. There is no theory, so the situation resembles people's ability to control fire before the discovery of oxygen and modern chemistry. You might compare the difficulties of turning on a cold fusion reaction to starting a fire with wet green wood in the rain. An experienced camper knows how to do this, but it isn't easy.
Control is limited, and not good enough to make commercial devices. But it is an exaggeration to say "no one understands what is needed to switch them on." The literature describes what is needed in detail.
But the obvious question is why, since this happened, Dr. Mizuno and others have not simply repeated the experiment under proper conditions.
And the obvious answers are:
That experiment was dangerous so Mizuno and others scaled down, by a factor of 10 to 100.
100 g of Pd is very expensive and difficult to work with, which is another reason they scaled down.
They did try again, but no one succeeded in producing that much heat after death, probably because the Pd samples were smaller.
Fleischmann and Pons, and a few others, succeeded in producing reactions on this scale (~100 W), in both heat after death and with continuous input. They repeated these tests hundreds of times, 16 cells at a time.
There is no technological advantage to heat after death. On the contrary, it is difficult to control and undesirable, so there is no good reason to pursue it. It is not inherently more convincing than ordinary calorimetry with input power. It would never convince pathological skeptics such as Mary Yugo and crackpots such as Shanahan, who do not believe any result at any power level, no matter how many times it was repeated, and who think that 20 L of water can evaporate overnight in normal room temperature conditions. People who think such things can happen are irrational and incapable of judging experiments or, indeed, everyday events.
Kirk - thank you for the response and yes, this answers my question. Finding gas products from a small scale reaction is very difficult especially with the gas volumes that we're all dealing with. We have access to a 5ppb Finnigan and so far have not seen anything that is substantially enough above background to get too excited about. I didn't realize that tritium wants out more than H2.
