Paper with experimental results included in NASA US20170263338 application.
NASA: New Paper about Experimental Progress
-
Very interesting!
Seems to be fresh out the oven!
-
The version below has a consistent font, where is yours from?
-
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
Display Morehttps://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/….nasa.gov/20170002584.pdf
http://www.worldcat.org/title/…hoton-beam/oclc/989873622
Summary of Results
Exposure of highly deuterated materials to a low-energy (nom. 2-MeV) photon beam resulted in nuclear activity
of both the parent metals of hafnium and erbium and a witness material (molybdenum) mixed with the reactants:- Gamma spectrum: Gamma spectral analysis of all of the deuterated materials ErDx+C36D74+Mo and the HfD2+C36D74+Mo materials showed that nuclear processes had occurred during exposure as shown by unique gamma signatures. For the deuterated erbium specimens, posttest gamma spectra showed evidence of radioisotopes of erbium (163Er and 171Er) and molybdenum (99Mo and 101Mo) and by beta decay, technetium (99mTc and 101Tc). For the deuterated hafnium specimens, posttest gamma spectra showed evidence of radioisotopes of hafnium (180mHf and 181Hf) and of molybdenum (99Mo and 101Mo) and by beta decay, technetium (99mTc and 101Tc). In contrast, when either the hydrogenated or non-gas-loaded erbium or hafnium materials were exposed to the gamma flux, the gamma spectra revealed no new radioisotopes. The gamma spectra peaks showed only background decay lines. Further study is required to determine the mechanism by which the neutron activity is happening.
- Alpha/beta results: The alpha/beta counting performed showed that there was no activity above background prior to exposure. However, the deuterated samples all exhibited net counts of beta activity multiple times background (5 to 190 background) after exposure. The hydrogenated samples showed no activity above background after exposure.
- Neutron energy: When deuterated materials were exposed, neutron activity was observed. The cadmium and gadolinium witness materials (placed in vials adjacent to the primary vials) showed evidence of thermal energy neutrons. The Bubble Detector dosimeters showed clear evidence that when deuterated specimens were exposed to the beam, a significant flux of neutrons were created in the >100- to 200-keV energy range. The CR–39 polycarbonate detectors placed above the LINAC head showed clear evidence of fast neutrons (1.4 to 2.5 MeV) during fueled shots. Also, in some fueled experiments the CR–39 detectors recorded triple tracks, indicating neutrons with energies 10 MeV.
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->101Mo
Mo-> 99Tc (from 100Mo? after beta-)
Hf Z=72 A=180,178,177,179,176,172
Hf-> 180m Hf
Hf->181Hf
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.
-
http://news.newenergytimes.net…rsen-theory-inside-story/
Could be...you never know. Looks like the NASA rumors mentioned here were right on. Very interesting.
The other patent app by Sullivan is LENR, but he calls it EER (Enhanced Exothermic Reaction). References an old 2011 Rossi patent app that never went anywhere, and also Mark Godes (Brillouin Energy).
Thx Lou and Ahlfors!
-
"[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.” "
-
this paper is very interesting, deserving it's own thread IMHO.
Right, because of that I created a dedicated one.
Go on here please
-
-
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.
-
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 though...so 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.
LENR Partners
