NASA: New Paper about Experimental Progress

  • "That work resulted in a highly sensitive and proprietary intellectual property that has been a subject of multiple patent applications filed and jointly owned by the Government. Description of the supplies or services required, include an estimated value: I recommend that GRC negotiate only with PineSci Consulting for development of highly advanced theoretical models <redacted>"…lications?pubType=article

  • Paper presenting experimental results included in NASA US20170263338 application.

    this paper is very interesting, deserving it's own thread IMHO.

    It is not LENR as F&P have seen, but it seems an interesting anomaly ate mild energies, not far from Holmlid, Igekami...

    the decay observed

    the transmutations observed may be

    Er Z=68 A=166,168,167,170,164,162

    Er-> 163Er

    Er-> 171Er

    Mo Z=42 A=98,96,95,92,100,97,94,

    Mo-> 99Mo

    Mo-> 99m Tc


    Mo-> 99Tc (from 100Mo? after beta-)

    Hf Z=72 A=180,178,177,179,176,172

    Hf-> 180m Hf


    of course the only observed istopose are the radioactive one (some are excited state).

    Er is interesting as both too heavy and too light reason to decay are observed, and given the abondance of stable , it seems that simplest possibility is one neutron absorbed...

    for me it could explains all...

    very different from iwamura experiments where it is 2/6/6 d added to a nucleus.

  • "[On Jan. 12], Larsen told New Energy Times that he spoke with both NASA employees by phone to help them learn about LENRs and his theory.

    “I spent six months tutoring Zawodny so he had the basics of the theory,” Larsen said.

    Larsen told New Energy Times that Bushnell and Zawodny also led [Larsen] to believe that NASA might provide some funding for his company [Lattice Energy LLC].

    “In a series of telephone calls I had during the spring and summer of 2008 with Zawodny and Bushnell, they dangled a carrot ­- the possibly of significant funding from NASA,” Larsen said. “I told them that I was wiling to teach them the basic physics but I would not transfer Lattice’s proprietary knowledge about how to use nanotechnology to improve the reliability of LENRs without having a contract.

    “I told them, ‘Under contract, I will show you how to make transmutations every time, but I will not show you how to reliably make large amounts of heat.’

    “In January 2009, after an internal NASA meeting, Bushnell and Zawodny informed Lattice that they would not be funding us but they would welcome any free advice we wanted to offer NASA. We declined.” "

  • Quote

    In January 2009, after an internal NASA meeting, Bushnell and Zawodny informed Lattice that they would not be funding us

    My guess: Both of these people are burned out because they went out on a limb about various high power LENR claims and none ever panned out. (sorry about the cliches)

  • This is an interesting anomaly but far from LENR and not actually v impressive.

    2.26MeV photons photodissociate deuterium to make free neutrons which even if v low energy would react to make other products.

    They find evidence (measured via neutron counts, expected transmutations, and controlled) of neutrons when deuterium-in-metal is hit with a photon beam 15% below this threshold...

    I'm not certain how they check the beam is monoenergetic - the endpoint test maybe does this or maybe would be insensitive to low levels of higher energy.

    Or there will always be nonlinearities in the lattice propagation that allow (at low levels) the generation of harmonic photons, e.g. double energy.

    We could determine more if they had a good test of product amplitude vs beam energy, but I guess they cannot easily tune beam energy.

    What is notable is how solid the evidence of nuclear reactions is here when compared with LENR data.

  • USPTO Public Pair dossier for NASA US20170263338 - 15/064,649 is now on-line.


    US 20090147906 / US 20130266106 Methods of generating energetic particles using nanotubes

    US 20130064338 Composite target

    US 20140034116 / US 20160232989 Energizing energy converters by stimulating three-body association radiation reactions

    WO 2013154177 - Combined-type target, ... , neutron-generating device ...

    WO 2009070043 - Method and apparatus for generation of thermal energy

    JP 2001083297 - Radioactive nuclide generator for positron emission tomography

  • I thought this was big news. Enough so maybe to make it into some of the standard online tech/science sites, i.e. Pop Sci. Sci Am, Science Digest, etc. Nothing far. Yes, it is just a patent application, but this is NASA! They even make an effort to avoid saying LENR. Nothing stopping this from being reported on.

  • It's a news.

    Maybe if they slip in AGW somewhere, it will not only be news, but make the news:

    "Experimental Observations of Nuclear Activity in Deuterated
    Materials Subjected to a Low-Energy Photon Beam could reverse Global Warming"

    or something like that. Randall Mills made CNN this past Jan. 1st, so why not NASA today?

  • M. Lipoglavšek et al.: "Observation of electron emission in the nuclear reaction between protons and deuterons" - Available on-line 6 September 2017

    ... "Our result clearly shows that during the electron screening effect the electrons do not just lower the Coulomb barrier from an atomic shell, but actively participate in the reaction at a much closer distance than the atomic radius."

    ... "Our result is the first indication that nuclear reactions behave differently at low projectile energies than at higher ones."

  • Related to electron screening, I have wondered about the following possibility for fission rather than fusion:

    Consider a moderate to heavy nucleus. In heavy nuclei, the balance between the Coulomb force and the nuclear force is a very delicate one. The sensitivity of this balance can be seen in the case of alpha emission in oblong deformed nuclei, where alpha particles are more likely to be emitted at the poles, where the Coulomb barrier is thinner, than at the waist; and in the spontaneous fission of synthetic elements, where the nuclear force is inadequate to compensate for Coulomb repulsion. I propose that if you could get nontrivial asymmetric electron screening for any amount of time, e.g., a gradient of electron density in which the nucleus momentarily resides, the tidal force caused by the differential balance of nuclear and Coulomb forces at either end of the gradient would cause the nucleus to become unstable and (more) liable to fission.

    At some point I might raise a question along these lines on Physics StackExchange.

    (The fact that the nucleus is likely to be spinning extremely rapidly with respect to the laboratory frame does not hurt this proposal.)

  • Interesting point of nucleus shape... I cannot judge.

    However if i follow my usual position inspired by Storms, reaction can only happen if something linked to "quantum coherence" have an impact on the nucleus... don't forget that not only the nuclei should pass the coulomb barrier, but also slowly, step by step, which is impossible is the nuclei are not coherent... any pair of nucleus who fusion, even if the coulomb barrier is missing, shoudl emit 24MeV in few energetic events (gamma, ejections)... the huge miracle is absence of those energetic particle, not the fusion.

    It seems very hard to swallow that cristal property, cracks, vacancies, allow many nucleus to interact so far away... but it have to happen.

    however if the electronic environnement is heavily anisotropic like in a linear crack (eg hydroton), maybe the nucleus can be deformed...

    As I understand it cannot be the 2H or 1H, but the heavy nuclei in the metallic environnement... surprising and not much considered, but maybe this is why nobody found yet the key...

    if I stay to a LENR reaction involving only hydrogen isotopes, anisotropy can do few things.

    one is to align nuclei along one axis... not much usefulness, except for creating quantum coherence? hum... need math.

    another is to create very elliptic electron orbits, and this connect to Storms ideas of oscillating nuclei slowly tunneling, but also ti picochemictry, deep ortbits, inverted rydberg matter...

    about the hypothesis of fission/alpha, it is finally easier to accept at first sight...

    the problem is that iwamura rather observed alpha absorption (1/2/3 alpha added to a nucleus)...

    Storms even reports some fission/decay induced by fusion

    maybe not fission but fusion/absorption involving heavily deformed nucleus in an anisotropic environnement like a crack or a twin cristal defect

  • I thought this was big news. Enough so maybe to make it into some of the standard online tech/science sites, i.e. Pop Sci. Sci Am, Science Digest, etc. Nothing far. Yes, it is just a patent application, but this is NASA! They even make an effort to avoid saying LENR. Nothing stopping this from being reported on.

    I thought that too, but even within the LENR community this is facing very less interest.

    Even at ECW, where they usally disassemble and sniff each fart of Rossi in super prolonged discussions, the post covering this paper has not even 20 comments 8|:rolleyes:

    Guess this is too scientific and unspectacular for the general reader.