Atom-Ecology

  • Or a bit more than 1/20th of a mol of Deuterium =0.1g for 20kW over a year.

    I do not think so. That's too high. There are 3.154e+7 seconds per year, so that is 630,800 MJ/0.1 g, or 6,308,000 MJ per gram. Based on the helium measured by Miles and others, assuming this is a d-d reaction, the reaction produces 24 MeV of energy per helium atom. That is the energy listed for d-d reactions. It comes to 345,000 MJ/g of deuterium. That's ~1 kW continuously for a year for 0.1 g.


    I am not good at arithmetic, but I asked several physicists to confirm that calculation, and it was also published here: S. K. Borowski, NASA Technical Memorandum 107030 AIAA–87–1814, “Comparison of Fusion/Antiproton Propulsion Systems for Interplanetary Travel,” Table 1, “Cat-DD” data. It shows 3.45 * 10^14 J/kg (345,000 MJ/g).


    http://www.projectrho.com/publ…risonFusionAntiproton.pdf

  • I have some sad news. 'Androcles' died today, after 9 months of faithful service. Just to be clear, that's not the fuel that died, but the reactor whose heating coil succumbed to oxidation. The first failure of this component I can remember over 4 years of pretty intensive furnace building.

    But not all bad, the reactor was the last of an older design, and is now being upgraded to take more and better sensors and so on. I had been waiting for the chance to do that for some time.

  • Alas poor Androcles has been a faithful steed, only to suddenly fail due to a thermal event. His pure crystal quartz heart was all but destroyed though recovered with a mysterious reddish tint. Just in time to become a St. Valentine's relic to add to our atom-ecology reliquery. Perhaps some generous and amorous follower would like to buy this for their sweetheart (there is only 9 days left.)


    UPDATE: Alas my fishing skills are proven to be terrible, not even a nibble was attracted with this terrible bait...

  • more flesh on the bones of the theory


    Wyttenbach ls seeking the bones of the universe

    Where does gravity come from?

    The Standard Model can't find where in its 3D+T closet.

    and IMHO never will.

    It appears to be "a magnetic residual force of 5 rotation

    somewhere in SO(4 ) condensed space..."

    Maybe someone more competent than I can check.

    I can check for spelling errors..thta's about all..

  • Yes- and it was received with great interest, particularly from somebody working for the US government in a very senior role who has been deeply involved as a researcher in the atomic energy field. I was chairing the session, so know it happened.

  • Yes- and it was received with great interest, particularly from somebody working for the US government in a very senior role who has been deeply involved as a researcher in the atomic energy field. I was chairing the session, so know it happened.


    I'm afraid I am having trouble with this. What forum would you be chairing that would include an audience of theoretical physicists? By "expert audience" I didn't mean one that would occur at an LENR conference. I meant a forum in which the audience would be composed almost exclusively of theoretical physicists.

  • Then why didn't you say so? I didn't realise that the audience at a LENR conference would be too lower-class for you. Does this mean you consider yourself to be slumming by posting on LENR Forum?


    You and Wyttenbach are riding the back of what would be, if true, the most important set of developments in physics in the 21 century. At some point you are going to have to leave amateurism behind.


    I made the point that, for whatever reason, Wyttenbach has not exposed his theory to the sort of expert opinion that is needed if is to survive. Whatever your emotions are on the subject, that point is 100% valid. As far as I can see, the last time Wyttenbach exposed himself to rigorous review by an expert audience was during his PhD and that was not in the field of theoretical physics -- so I would have to describe his abilities as entirely untested. If you think otherwise then it just shows what a small pond you live in.


    Wyttenbach needs to publish a real paper.

  • And which 'better papers' you have published.


    You do not have the ability to assess Wyttenbach's work. Neither do I. Wyttenbach needs to submit a manuscript to a high quality journal where the editor will send it out to 2 or more expert reviewers who will sit down with it and make detailed comments.


    I find it extraordinary that you don't understand this.

  • I find it extraordinary that you don't understand this.


    I find it extraordinary that you keep feeling the need to throw peanuts from your armchair. I am an experimenter, not a theoretician, but i do know that when a theory tells me that if I do 'X' then the result will be 'Y' and that prediction is realised, not once but many times, then the theory is probably both useful and significant portions of it likely to be true. That is what i base my assessment of Wyttenbach's theory on, multi-dimensional math not being my field.

  • You do not have the ability to assess Wyttenbach's work. Neither do I. Wyttenbach needs to submit a manuscript to a high quality journal where the editor will send it out to 2 or more expert reviewers who will sit down with it and make detailed comments.


    Got some 300 reads in halve a day, That's more than you get in a mainstream journal and more than I had in the first year... But still nobody is willing to discuss the demanding parts...


    The problem with publishing is, that almost all physicists (reviewers) have the wrong "math education" and ask some silly questions like where is my beloved Einstein Stress Tensor... There is one last open question in NPP2.0. After that I will possibly write a book because the material is > 100 pages now.