Measurement of the enthalpy of formation of an iron pico-hydride and of its main properties (2017)

    If iron pico-hydride existed then could a hydrogen (i.e. a free proton) atom trapped inside *any* electron shell of the iron atom somehow get spit out with a single electron orbiting it ? And could that hydrogen have an electron at tens or hundreds or thousands of ev below the typical ground state of hydrogen?


    If so, then the iron would be a catalyst for creating hydrogen with a below ground state electron (i.e. hydrino).


    This would take place at high temperatures (and as we know, high temperatures have some small percentage of atoms and electrons at much higher temperatures).


    Is this how catalysts work?


    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catalysis


    https://www.chemicool.com/definition/catalyst.html

    In my opinion such novel hydrides would be too strongly bound together for the hydrogen atom to be able to get out still in its picometric state, but it's likely that the same process that formed them in the first place would also produce picometer-sized clusters composed of only hydrogen atoms ([ultra-]dense hydrogen/hydrino/etc), whose formation would too be strongly exothermic.


    Since the pico-compounds are apparently relatively stable keV energy deep bonds, it would take more energy to break the bond than would theoretically be gained by reducing 1 hydrogen atom. I have heard others say they have no evidence of mono-atomic hydrino-like states only shrunken H2 and hydrogen based pico-clusters.


    Quote from can

    In my opinion such novel hydrides would be too strongly bound together for the hydrogen atom to be able to get out still in its picometric state, but it's likely that the same process that formed them in the first place would also produce picometer-sized clusters composed of only hydrogen atoms ([ultra-]dense hydrogen/hydrino/etc), whose formation would too be strongly exothermic.

    Amazing, exactly what I thought in slightly better words!

    Quote from RobertBryant

    The magnetic gamma states of odd isotopes may have some influence..


    Fe57 14Kev...Fe57 makes up 2% of natural iron.


    Edit: I did some research and it makes sense but it's a bit more complex than orbit excitation I'm guessing according the the papers posted. I see the energy levels ruffly match up in the same order of magnitude as this reaction. Yes!

    Quote from can

    it's likely that the same process that formed them in the first place would also produce picometer-sized clusters composed of only hydrogen atoms ([ultra-]dense hydrogen/hydrino/etc), whose formation would too be strongly exothermic.


    DId Holmlid report relevant heat produced while creating UDD/UDH?

    (I don't recall)

    Quote from Rob Woudenberg

    DId Holmlid report relevant heat produced while creating UDD/UDH?

    (I don't recall)

    Quote from Alan Smith

    Holmlid has never done or at least never published AFAIK extensive calorimetric studies.


    There is what could be considered a thermometric experiment, but it feels like it might have been done under deliberately sub-par conditions and so power results weren't so impressive, at least on the surface:


    Heat generation above break-even from laser-induced fusion in ultra-dense deuterium (2015)


    EDIT: however if you mean the heat of formation of UDH, no papers have been published on this regard. He did mention elsewhere (link) that the process is exothermic (at least in theory) however.

    Quote from Alan Smith

    Holmlid has never done or at least never published AFAIK extensive calorimetric studies.


    No, indeed, Holmlid never posted calorimetric measurements.

    But in one of his early papers on Rydberg formation he mentioned following:

    Quote

    1. Introduction

    It has been shown previously that alkali metal atoms form long-lived Rydberg states by thermal excitation at metal oxide surfaces (typical alkali promoted catalysts). Such results are given for example in Refs. [1±7]. Rydberg states [8,9] carry an excitation energy of several eV (up to 4.34 eV for K), i.e. several hundred kJ molÿ1 (up to 419 kJ molÿ1 for K)




    Article heading:


    Formation of long-lived Rydberg states of H2 at K impregnated surfaces

    Jiaxi Wang 1, Leif Holmlid *

    Reaction Dynamics Group, Department of Chemistry, Goteborg University, SE-412 96 Goteborg, Sweden

    Regarding UDH/UDD as a dedicated form of pico-hydride: Jacques Dufour mentioned that once created these new atoms form an irreversable pico-hydride form.

    UDD/UDH does not seem to be an irreversable pico-hydride form, it's only relative stable at certain conditions according to my interpretations of Holmlid's papers.

    Rob Woudenberg

    In the previously linked paper (Leif Holmlid and Sindre Zeiner-Gundersen 2019 Phys. Scr. 94 075005) Holmlid writes on this regard:


    Quote

    4.1. Stability of H(0)

    Speculations about a low stability of H(0) are of course completely meaningless. Due to the bond energies close to 500 eV (see section 2 above), this is the most stable form of condensed matter that exists in the Universe. H(0) is stable at temperatures at least up to 1 MK (Holmlid 2018b) and thus it exists even in most stars. It is likely that this was the primordial form of hydrogen in the Universe before star formation started. In experiments at low pressure, it exists virtually unchanged for days and weeks as shown by the TOF and TOF-MS spectra from the first single-shot laser pulse. The spontaneous nuclear processes in H(0) can be monitored for weeks. These processes are stimulated somewhat by light from fluorescent tubes in the laboratory, so covering the windows in the apparatus is useful for keeping the H(0) stable for long times.



    I was thinking two things limiting the rate of reaction would be free electron count, and the solid state non-plasma approach. Devices like the SKL, SAFIRE and the Suncell would have extremely fine molten nano particles of metal and catalysts suspended in a self organizing plasma of pico-chemical reactions/constructs, from Metal to H* cluster pico-hydride bonds. I know this may sound overly simplistic, but the way to avoid unwanted ionizing/neutral particles would be to just have a below biologically significant rate of nuclear reaction products in a reactor. What do I mean? Well, any type of ~100 eV to 100 keV phenomena among denser forms of matter would increase the rate of nuclear reactions, but not necessarily enough to cause health/regulation problems or be a significant fraction of the excess power. And that is ok, there could be forms of hydrogen clusters that mimic He4 and a few expected nuclear products in hasty measurements.


    Pico-chemistry that causes various observational anomalies would lead some to either over estimate or under estimate the actual results based on their personal theoretical conclusions. It's like how we didn't understand fire and described it as a hot flower or a minuscule piece of the sun/stars. A lot of engineers and experimenters are experimenting with the conclusion that optimizing for fusion or proton capture/decay reactions is the best way to go. Maybe it is, but I also think that we are growing nutritious grain and legumes to feed pigs because we like the taste/market demand of pork. A much better approach with less complexity would be to directly ingest the grains and legumes!


    Grains and legumes would be analogous to pico-chemistry including proposed catalyzed hydrogen cluster reactions and metal pico-hydride reactions. The contribution of the small fraction of nuclear/annihilation reactions that do accure would be like collecting the eggs from the chickens that glean the extra seeds that fall, a notable fraction but not the main crop. We should move to directly use this energy if it's there. Also they produce valuable "waste" and products in greater quantities to nuclear reactions (due to higher mass need for similar energy output, higher metabolism lol!) as far as I've read/observed. A practical safe aneutronic device that uses pico-chemistry to produce useful fusion on a desktop is like free range pigs fed the same grain and legumes on the farm while ignoring the grains, efficiency comparison. I mean wouldn't it be poetic if the replacement for hydrocarbon chemical energy was a mucho grande level up of new pico-chemical phenomena in there own right?


    Got me thinking about SAFIRE, SKL and Suncell apparently getting much better energy levels than other less plasma based approaches that don't constantly input hydrogen. When we assume the energy density is higher than it actually may be then you won't get satisfactory results based on that engineering. This is unless you push it to far with no shielding, then you have researcher health declining with neutron/hard x-ray/gamma release. Why I believe Mills apparently getting high energy, whether it verifies details of his theory or not, makes sense. The SAFIRE approach and Suncell approach have a high temperature, high electron density, a consistent flow of hydrogen above that needed for nuclear reactions, with catalysts and bond prone metals present. Though maybe structural components would take a beating with wrong theory behind the design. In the SAFIRE approach the hydrogen is consistently pressure fed through the solid metal spherical cathode/anode creating an environment right on the boundary between the sphere and the inside of the chamber ripe for reactions. The part feeding the chamber with hydrogen was the part that "melted" and "transmuted" along with the organised layers of plasma... superconducting, electron dense and dipole atomic constructs could definitely help with that. Maybe we will see awesome results when we stop assuming nuclear reaction power densities are dominant in what we call LENR, condensed matter reactions. Yea and don't be afraid to turn up the power/fuel flow within reason, we don't need anything near what conventional fusion experiments are using. Edited stream of consciousness rant over!

    LeBob

    Common requirements in the formation process, taking into account similar theories, seem to be the following:

    • Large density of hydrogen in its atomic form
      • Not just in the atmosphere (mostly at low pressure as otherwise it will very rapidly form H2), but also loosely bound to the surface of metal catalysts and other surfaces by adsorption. More strongly bound hydrogen (e.g. in a regular hydride) will probably not be directly useful for the reaction but would have to be released first.
    • Large amount of excess electrons in the environment
      • Might come from high current densities when an electric current is applied as in Mills' case (generally), or from gaseous alkali atoms as in Dufour's case. Holmlid's K-Fe oxide catalysts also provide this function as their surface gives off an alkali "cloud" upon heating.
    • The presence of a third body in the reaction acting as a heat sink.
      • Energy must be efficiently removed from the newly formed dense clusters, or they will revert back to the ordinary form without giving off energy to the environment: this is after all a condensation process.

    I think in low-temperature (up to perhaps 1000–1500°C) static gas systems the first point might be the limiting factor, but in ordinary "clean" plasma discharge systems the third one could be instead, together with H density.


    Note that in the hot tube iron-sodium (+SiC) experiment by Dufour as referred in this thread the average excess power was in the order of 0.5 W (actual input power not clear, but it appears to have been in the order of several watts). Just applying heat under static conditions doesn't seem to usually give off appreciable excess heat as many other similar experiments have shown over the past years.

    I present some notes from Pico-Chemistry The possibility of new phases in some hydrogen-metal systems. Pdf. (see post #14). Dufour postulates “an electrical dipole, formed between an electron and a proton”, … could “penetrate into the inner electronic shells of the metal.” He discusses reaction conditions then proposed the result “A dipole … with a sizeable charge separation is thus formed between the proton and the electron and is attracted by the positive nucleus…” He proposes chemical state (a chemical bond) with an enthalpy of formation (680MJ/mole) Fe.


    I can understand part of this from the point of view of magnecules. Magnecules are formed due to reaction conditions at the metal surface involving electromotive force and hydrogen. The weak interacting states which cause magnecules have an electrical dipole. The electrical dipole become a strong magnetic field when the w-wave penetrates the nuclear region. These magnetronite states are of such small size they may penetrate to inner electronic shells. The more energy in the state, the smaller it gets. Normal size exclusion prevents penetration of hydrogen but not necessarily these smaller states. But bonding is not expected because the K shell of Iron is filled. Bond theory requires and overlap of the hydrogen and iron orbitals but also that both orbitals have no more than two electrons. It seems an electron would need to be ejected from the k shell of iron to accommodate the electron of any magnetronite to allow bonding. I am using magnetronite to refer any mineral having hydrogen which has weak interacting quantum states.


    From post #18 we get a k shell x-ray at 7057.98 eV. (Did I get this right?). The formula for the energy of various n levels for weak interacting quantum states of hydrogen is n*n*(13.5878925) eV. The closest match is n= 23 at 7188 eV. As with the photoelectron effect, the energy to eject an electron just needs to be above the energy that binds the k shell electron. If the x-ray above is the energy emitted when the electron is knocked out of it’s place and reabsorbed, then we have an approximate match to explain inner shell bonding of hydrogen to iron.

    Quote from Drgenek

    I present some notes from Pico-Chemistry The possibility of new phases in some hydrogen-metal systems. Pdf. (see post #14). Dufour postulates “an electrical dipole, formed between an electron and a proton”, … could “penetrate into the inner electronic shells of the metal.” He discusses reaction conditions then proposed the result “A dipole … with a sizeable charge separation is thus formed between the proton and the electron and is attracted by the positive nucleus…” He proposes chemical state (a chemical bond) with an enthalpy of formation (680MJ/mole) Fe.


    I can understand part of this from the point of view of magnecules. Magnecules are formed due to reaction conditions at the metal surface involving electromotive force and hydrogen. The weak interacting states which cause magnecules have an electrical dipole. The electrical dipole become a strong magnetic field when the w-wave penetrates the nuclear region. These magnetronite states are of such small size they may penetrate to inner electronic shells. The more energy in the state, the smaller it gets. Normal size exclusion prevents penetration of hydrogen but not necessarily these smaller states. But bonding is not expected because the K shell of Iron is filled. Bond theory requires and overlap of the hydrogen and iron orbitals but also that both orbitals have no more than two electrons. It seems an electron would need to be ejected from the k shell of iron to accommodate the electron of any magnetronite to allow bonding. I am using magnetronite to refer any mineral having hydrogen which has weak interacting quantum states.


    From post #18 we get a k shell x-ray at 7057.98 eV. (Did I get this right?). The formula for the energy of various n levels for weak interacting quantum states of hydrogen is n*n*(13.5878925) eV. The closest match is n= 23 at 7188 eV. As with the photoelectron effect, the energy to eject an electron just needs to be above the energy that binds the k shell electron. If the x-ray above is the energy emitted when the electron is knocked out of it’s place and reabsorbed, then we have an approximate match to explain inner shell bonding of hydrogen to iron.

    Yea I read/skimmed all of the papers by Dofours. Was pretty sure an electron would have to get kicked out or something. Magnecules or magnetronite are both just different personal labels for pico-hydrides. I am cautiously hopeful that the formation of these matter states could replace fossil fuel combustion as a compact, environmental and versatile power source. While producing valuable materials that get extracted when pico-chemical reactors get refueled. Probably also could encourage a modular molten salt fission reactor to safely produce power anywhere. Integration of pico-chemistry into waste processing, allows cleaning up after them carefully. With something like this replacing fossil fuels, fuel cells/generators directly and with radioactive waste dampener assisted MSRs replacing all current fission reactors while adding some capacity, I don't think we would leave unfilled gaps.


    Yes, this is speculative and conceptual, but that is what I love about many forums. Productively exercised creativity along with logic, with access to information can open doors.


    People are worried about releasing these substances into the environment and I am arguing that's the last thing you want to do even if they are inert. The theoretical characteristics of pico hydrides would almost guarantee a company would collect and make good use of them. Dense hydrogen may decay completely into mesons (more likely forms a stable polymer with interesting magnetic properties), would be useful for extreme energy situations! Metal dipole constructs could make RT superconductors, and awesome ultracapacitors. Open to the possibilities, this is without even considering potencial fusion applications which may be redundant considering energy levels and lack of neutron/gamma energy.

    Quote from Drgenek

    But bondingis not expected because the K shell of Iron is filled.


    This reasoning is incomplete as the presence of H* virtually promotes iron to cobalt ( As shown by Dufour in Asti). Cobalt needs one more electron and of course the deepest one is missing!


    But until somebody reproduces the experiment such reasoning is virtual too...

    Quote from Wyttenbach

    This reasoning is incomplete as the presence of H* virtually promotes iron to cobalt ( As shown by Dufour in Asti). Cobalt needs one more electron and of course the deepest one is missing!


    But until somebody reproduces the experiment such reasoning is virtual too...


    Do you have a link for (Dufour in Asti)? I am curious about the data. What would suggest cobalt 57 rather than iron 57 as the dominate result from iron 56?

Subscribe to our newsletter

It's sent once a month, you can unsubscribe at anytime!

View archive of previous newsletters

* indicates required

Your email address will be used to send you email newsletters only. See our Privacy Policy for more information.

Our Partners

Supporting researchers for over 20 years
Want to Advertise or Sponsor LENR Forum?
CLICK HERE to contact us.