QuoteClever experimental design by Mizuno minimized measurement difficulty.
Agreed. So what went wrong when he visited IH?
Mizuno : Publication of kW/COP2 excess heat results
-
-
Quote
People like this and equipment like this have not been available for cold fusion research for 20 years. If anyone today were to suggest that the instruments and experts at places like Los Alamos or China Lake should be used in a cold fusion experiment, that person would be fired in a week, and would never be allowed to work in academic science again. It would instant career suicide. The opposition to cold fusion is a strong today as it was a week after the announcement, when the plasma fusion researchers at MIT, journal editors and scientists elsewhere began flooding the mass media with accusations that cold fusion researchers were lunatics, criminals and frauds. That is exactly what they would do today if anyone suggested an experiment. That's what they tell me they would d
I hope Shanahan can chime in on Jed's post because he knows vastly more about it than I do. But my take is that Jed's responding to straw men. The critiques did not have to do with the specific parameters and measurements he cites. And no, I am not going to sift through reams of materials to prove it.
As for China Lake and Los Alamos and ORNL, etc., it seems they were not impressed with the results. If they had been, they would have pursued them. I don't buy the dog crap conspiracy theories. And it's not "opposition" so much as lack of interest. I don't recall anyone opposing IH's efforts apart from Rossi's obvious con. I don't recall anyone opposing Mizuno. I didn't notice opposition to U of Missouri, Kansas, SKINR etc. getting Kimmel money to do research. Some object to the claims of the usual suspects in LENR but I know of nobody who complains about them trying.
-
But my take is that Jed's responding to straw men. The critiques did not have to do with the specific parameters and measurements he cites.
Which critiques are you talking about? Who wrote them, and where were they published? There are no published technical critiques, unless you count the crackpot nonsense from Shanahan and Morrison. I am talking about the "critiques" (if you want to call them that) made by MIT plasma fusion scientists and by Robert Park in the mass media. They accused cold fusion researchers of being frauds, lunatics and criminals. I don't mean they insinuated that. I mean those are the words they used.
As for China Lake and Los Alamos and ORNL, etc., it seems they were not impressed with the results. If they had been, they would have pursued them.
When Miles published his results, the management at China Lake locked him out of the lab, took away his telephone, and assigned him to a menial job as a stock room clerk. Miles was a "Distinguished Fellow" of China Lake, meaning a professor who was allowed to do any research he liked. It is like having tenure at a university. He had national and international awards from many leading institutions. So they did not fire him outright. Instead, they made it impossible for him to do any more research. He soon quit.
If he had not been a Distinguished Fellow and one of the world's top electrochemists, they would have fired him that afternoon.
And it's not "opposition" so much as lack of interest.
I would call what they did to Miles and the others "opposition." You, of course, have read nothing and you know nothing, so you have no idea what they did to these people, even though it is well documented at LENR-CANR.org and in Beaudette's book. As I said, you just make shit up.
I don't recall anyone opposing IH's efforts apart from Rossi's obvious con.
As anyone can see, I was talking about research in national laboratories and universities. Obviously, influential people such as Robert Park or the editors of Nature have no way to oppose research at I.H., and no interest in doing so.
I.H. did not have one-hundredth of the instruments and expertise available to researchers in the 1990s at places like China Lake or Los Alamos. They would have purchase a $1 billion worth of instruments and hire dozens of top experts to achieve that. No institution now researching cold fusion has even one-hundredth of what is needed.
-
So what went wrong when he visited IH?
The problems were described by Mizuno in this discussion, previously.
Oh! I forgot. You never read anything.
-
Predictable
-
maryyugo wrote: So what went wrong when he visited IH?
Jedwrote "Oh! I forgot. You never read anything"
For those who can read
Sendai went right Mizuno : Publication of kW/COP2 excess heat results
IH went wrong. Mizuno : Publication of kW/COP2 excess heat results
-
Quote
Miles was a "Distinguished Fellow" of China Lake, meaning a professor who was allowed to do any research he liked. It is like having tenure at a university. He had national and international awards from many leading institutions. So they did not fire him outright. Instead, they made it impossible for him to do any more research. He soon quit.
If he had not been a Distinguished Fellow and one of the world's top electrochemists, they would have fired him that afternoon.0
I assume Miles documented this in his own words somewhere. Anyone know where?
-
For those who can read
Thanks for locating this. I have difficulty finding text with this message system.
Mary Yugo can read, but she will not read. There are none so blind as those who will not see.
She wrote "predictable." Yes, it is predictable that she would ask for information that was already presented, that she did not read the first time, did not know about, and will not read this time either.
Mizuno told me about some other possible problems with the I.H. replication. In my experience, a replication of something like this will fail the first time, the second time, and for several months. That is normal. It is no reason to give up. If I.H. had not been in a battle with Rossi with hundreds of millions of dollars at stake, I suppose they would have kept their research going. They might have had it working by now.
-
Mizuno patent 2014
Reactant, heating device, and heating method
WO 2015008859 A3Abstract A reactant capable of generating heat more stably than conventionally possible, a heating device, and a heating method are provided. This reactant (26) comprises a hydrogen storage metal comprising nanosize metal nanoparticles (metal nano protrusions) formed on the surface, and is placed in a reacting furnace having a deuterium gas atmosphere so that when hydrogen atoms are stored in the metal nanoparticles on the reactant (26), the electrons in said metal nanoparticles, strongly influenced by the surrounding metal atoms and other electrons, act as heavy electrons, and as a result, cause the internuclear distance between the hydrogen atoms in the metal nanoparticles to contract, making it possible to increase the probability of the occurrence of tunnel nuclear fusion reactions, and thus making it possible to generate heat more stably than conventionally possible.
The Chinese version cites 'Frye Xu Man' (Fleischmann)
The Chinese version mistranslates 氨气 an qi ,ammonia, for deuterium 氘气 dao qi.
The Chinese industrial machine may dwarf anything in Japan in a decade.
http://www.google.co.nz/patents/CN105493196A?cl=en
-
Heavy electrons.
But do they happen in the Nickel lattice
https://resonance.is/heavy-ele…tum-mechanics-relativity/
Axil?
-
Display More
Heavy electrons.
But do they happen in the Nickel lattice
https://resonance.is/heavy-ele…tum-mechanics-relativity/
Axil?
Hot electrons do the impossible in catalytic chemistry
http://phys.org/news/2012-12-h…-catalytic-chemistry.html
Hot electrons are generated in pumped transition metal micro and nano particles
-
Hot electrons
these ones aren't heavy enough
they do the possible..not the impossible
520 nm laser = 2 eV..which is about the size of the activation energy needed for H2 dissociation.
with deuterium fusion the calculated barriers are in the order of 1000 eV much higher than 2eV.
Perhaps these can be brought down to 50-100 eV by the Ni Lattice defects.+"heavy electrons????
-
Display More
Hot electrons
these ones aren't heavy enough
they do the possible..not the impossible
520 nm laser = 2 eV..which is about the size of the activation energy needed for H2 dissociation.
with deuterium fusion the calculated barriers are in the order of 1000 eV much higher than 2eV.
Perhaps these can be brought down to 50-100 eV by the Ni Lattice defects.+"heavy electrons????
We have been down this road before when we discussed the meme that Holmlid was supporting. LENR has nothing to do with fusion. It is a process where EMF (Light) is converted to magnetic flux lines which produce hadron decay. Those protrusions are where the light accumulates and are localized in optical cavities to form polaritons.
-
"It is a process where EMF (Light) is converted to magnetic flux lines which produce hadron decay"
I'll go down that road only in the light of a modicum of experimental proof
-
"It is a process where EMF (Light) is converted to magnetic flux lines which produce hadron decay"
I'll go down that road only in the light of a modicum of experimental proof
In the same way, what is the experimental proof for fusion? As we decided before, proton / proton fusion is so improbable that it is virtually impossible.
Remember, 14,000,0000,000 years per reaction in the core of the Sun.
See
The possible Role of Axions in LENR
for theory and experimental proof.
-
As we decided before, proton / proton fusion is so improbable that it is virtually impossible.
Remember, 14,000,0000,000 years per reaction in the core of the Sun.As each gram of matter contains around 1024 protons this leaves us some room for manouver.
-
"Isoperibolic" calorimetry is....extremely error prone.
Well, it turns out that Yugo is incapable of defending the above, clearly BS statement... But I bet we'll still be hearing it repeated several times by him in the future though.
Are you still claiming you are a "world-class expert in calorimetry" these days, Mary?
-
Axil "As we decided before, proton / proton fusion is so improbable that it is virtually impossible"
Evidence for meson emission inducing fusion in ultra-dense deuterium is from Holmlid's 2017 paper.
http://atom-ecology.russgeorge…hysicsenergy-magnum-opus/But extrapolating it to "It is a process where EMF (Light) is converted to magnetic flux lines which produce hadron decay"
seems a bit of a stretch.
Experimental support is waited from Holmlid or Mizuno.
.
-
with deuterium fusion the calculated barriers are in the order of 1000 eV much higher than 2eV.
Perhaps these can be brought down to 50-100 eV by the Ni Lattice defects.+"heavy electrons????
Yes, in near vacuum with both collisional entities essentially free, only at very high energies is coulombic repulsion overcome. By dimensional restraints these activation energies can by greatly lowered. The question may be how can the restraints be simultaneously and oppositely applied to both fusile entities down to a femtometer scale w/o disrupting those restraints. Surface associated phenomena of several sorts may be a route to such restraints. Keeping in mind that the nano to picometer scale of electronic orbitals and atomic structure at say solid to gas or solid to liquid interfaces over sustained times might only contribute up to some limit at lattice or surface dissociation energies. Pulses offer the opportunity to convert lattice inertia into a virtual sub-picometer "vise" to enable fusion. Shielding by oppositely charged entities can greatly lower the collisional barrier, especially when the collisional matrix/interface is nearly static. There are many other categories of surface associated "focusing" phenomena which can also contribute. So besides phase interfaces, there are easily impressed field gradients, chemical and electrochemical discontinuities, as well as surface confined electromagnetic transmission phenomena such as the "skin effect" and surface plasmon resonance. All such have been reported or speculated to be associated with changes in effective mass of electrons-- and likely also, and perhaps not accidentally, with LENR / CANR / LANR / CF AHE reports.
-
As each gram of matter contains around 1024 protons this leaves us some room for manouver.
If you consider the micrograph in the referenced thread, the amount of carbon that has been transmuted into metal nanowires in that 50 micron pile is estimated to be about 1024 reactions.
The time that the LENR reaction needed to produce that pile is a few minutes to an hour, that being the time that was required to prepare the sample of LENR fuel for the SEM examination.
The number of LENR reactions required to produce all that nanowire far exceed the maximum possible PP fusion reaction rate.
The lightened carbon edge is the results of the increased atomic weight of the carbon isotope, possibly from C12 to C13 that subatomic particle emissions produced in that reaction duration timeframe. This implies that there was a boatload of neutrons generated to increase that atomic weight of all that carbon. Yet me356 is not dead. There was no tritium produced so no fusion was active.
