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

  • 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?

    I think he's talking about a change in electron structure due to the presense of H* in the atom not a literal nuclear reaction but a rebalancing of subatomic particles. Considering this is a pico-chemical reaction, am I right Wyttenbach ?

  • I found the data in the article link in post #14 synthesis-and-characterization-of-an-iron-pico-hydride-a-permanent-electric-dipo... Table 3 shows the reactive isotope is Fe-54. The mass produced is shown in fig 13 as mass 55. But rather than being radioactive Fe-55, there was no radiation above background level (bottom of page 12). Dufour expects as I did the energy release to be about would be need to eject the electron (7 keV) but measures 4.06 KeV (681MJ/mole Fe). The confusion with Co 55, Dufour explains as Fe 54 hydride have an effective electrical charge greater than e-. (page 13). Perhaps the measured value is low because the energy come off as an x-ray at about 7 keV. That is to say some of x-rays escape the device and are not detected as heat.

  • How about Tungsten and Palladium?

  • How about Tungsten and Palladium?


    From the tables of the document linked in the quoted comment they could release roughly ("in the order of magnitude of") 67 and 24 keV per reaction respectively, although I imagine tungsten would also be easier to experiment with in larger quantities at higher temperatures.


    Clearer excerpt on the energy of formation of pico-hydrides, from Pico-chemistry: The possibility of new phases in some Hydrogen-Metal systems linked in comment #14 :


  • The documents on lenr-canr.org unfortunately stop at about year 2013 and there's not much from about year either; the patent application documentation that I previously linked was a "free" and relatively easily accessible source for some of the newer papers from the group.

  • From the tables of the document linked in the quoted comment they could release roughly ("in the order of magnitude of") 67 and 24 keV per reaction respectively, although I imagine tungsten would also be easier to experiment with in larger quantities at higher temperatures.


    Clearer excerpt on the energy of formation of pico-hydrides, from Pico-chemistry: The possibility of new phases in some Hydrogen-Metal systems linked in comment #14 :


    Tungsten is that much higher than iron at 7keV??? Well pretty sure a simple look at the periodic table would show me the gap.

  • Proposal of a "purely electromagnetic compound of picometer size" doesn't account for why only Fe-54 reacts. How do the neutrons cause this selection, unless the forces involved in pico-chemistry interact with neutrons. As I proposed an electron could be ejected to allow electronic bonding but there is another possibility that could account for selection of Fe 54. I proposed that the H* has a superpositioned weak-interacting quantum state. Some of energy of a particular state of H* could pass to the nucleus of iron 54 via the w-waves (the proposed exchange boson in H* states as magnetronite). The selection then likely follow some reverse of the phat condensation that creates H*. The other isotopes don't react because the possible quantum states in their nuclei can not accept some of the energy from any one of many H* states. The specificity is due to a necessary matching of energy division to a quantum relationship. Remember possible magnetronite states of H* are proposed to be related as E= n*n*(~13.6 eV). Activation of a weak interacting state in iron 54 would then cause H* and Fe* to bond as magnecules. That bonding would not require the lost of an electron, so the energy produced could be less than the expected 7 keV required to eject a K shell electron from Fe. As explained before magnet to magnet bonding also creates an electric dipole which may account for the change in the charge to mass ratio which lead to the confusion of H*Fe* with Co55.

  • 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.


    Also UDH or H* is not an atom sized dipole like a metal hydrogen pico-scale bond is, would be bad to get them confused. Both are pico-hydrides but one is just hydrogen with itself, so no charge asymmetry and with simpler lower energy reactions.


    Proposal of a "purely electromagnetic compound of picometer size" doesn't account for why only Fe-54 reacts. How do the neutrons cause this selection, unless the forces involved in pico-chemistry interact with neutrons. As I proposed an electron could be ejected to allow electronic bonding but there is another possibility that could account for selection of Fe 54. I proposed that the H* has a superpositioned weak-interacting quantum state. Some of energy of a particular state of H* could pass to the nucleus of iron 54 via the w-waves (the proposed exchange boson in H* states as magnetronite). The selection then likely follow some reverse of the phat condensation that creates H*. The other isotopes don't react because the possible quantum states in their nuclei can not accept some of the energy from any one of many H* states. The specificity is due to a necessary matching of energy division to a quantum relationship. Remember possible magnetronite states of H* are proposed to be related as E= n*n*(~13.6 eV). Activation of a weak interacting state in iron 54 would then cause H* and Fe* to bond as magnecules. That bonding would not require the lost of an electron, so the energy produced could be less than the expected 7 keV required to eject a K shell electron from Fe. As explained before magnet to magnet bonding also creates an electric dipole which may account for the change in the charge to mass ratio which lead to the confusion of H*Fe* with Co55.

    You seem to be right on it in this particular comment! Fit's perfectly with the observation that these pico-states with H/metal would appear like transmutations at low energy, just with some strange magnetic features in the new "element".

  • Also UDH or H* is not an atom sized dipole like a metal hydrogen pico-scale bond is, would be bad to get them confused. Both are pico-hydrides but one is just hydrogen with itself, so no charge asymmetry and with simpler lower energy reactions.


    You seem to be right on it! Fit's perfectly with the observation that these pico-states with H/metal would appear like transmutations at low energy, just with some strange magnetic features in the new "element".


    So iron maybe a co-fuel to release the energy from magnecule fusion stored in H*. Various efforts by BLP and host of other could have data to discover other co-fuels from heat yield experiments.


    Here is another though that is likely relevant to a magnetic field as compared to magnetic field boosted by w-waves. The source is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/…bility_(electromagnetism) . The relative magnetic permeability of iron (99.8% pure) and iron (99.95% pure Fe annealed in H) are 5000 and 200,000 respectively.


    Wouldn't it be nice to use experiments that measure permeability of materials solidified in hydrogen to select for elements (isotopes of elements) that would react like Fe-54?

  • So iron maybe a co-fuel to release the energy from magnecule fusion stored in H*. Various efforts by BLP and host of other could have data to discover other co-fuels from heat yield experiments.


    Here is another though that is likely relevant to a magnetic field as compared to magnetic field boosted by w-waves. The source is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/…bility_(electromagnetism) . The relative magnetic permeability of iron (99.8% pure) and iron (99.95% pure Fe annealed in H) are 5000 and 200,000 respectively.


    Wouldn't it be nice to use experiments that measure permeability of materials solidified in hydrogen to select for elements (isotopes of elements) that would react like Fe-54?


    No that's not what am saying and IDK if that is true.

  • What can we know it true without hypothesis and further experimental data?


    Could you explain what is UDH? How do you understand H*?


    As proposed and per theory magnetronite states of Hydrogen are dense hydrogen but there are a lot of these states of various density. As proposed above we could have Fe*. So it is easier to use a mineral name like magnetronite to refer to minerals where one or more atoms have magnetic fields above the ground state of those atoms.

  • What can we know it true without hypothesis and further experimental data?


    Could you explain what is UDH? How do you understand H*?


    As proposed and per theory magnetronite states of Hydrogen are dense hydrogen but there are a lot of these states of various density. As proposed above we could have Fe*. So it is easier to use a mineral name like magnetronite to refer to minerals where one or more atoms have magnetic fields above the ground state of those atoms.

    I was thinking earlier that any background fusion rates might be enhanced. But my current opinion is that a movement of the H proton down to the lower orbit bond with metal is most of the energy release we see in hydrogen metal systems. And I actually think that simplifies things and solidifies the relative safety of use anywhere if verified. That Wikipedia factoid is extremely interesting though!


    Well H* is a state of more stable hydrogen with a lower electron orbit most likely di-hydrogen and larger clusters. It's reduction supposedly releases quite a bit of energy 400 and something eV. Is magnetronite something you are coining? Maybe, but I prefer pico-hydride. I think that would work because it is a hydride bonded at a picoscale orbit. It only has the features it has or produces the energy it does because of the exothermic reaction that bonds Fe closely to a hydrogen atom. At least according to Dofours. Sure the special metal hydride is an atom sized dipole magnet, the term makes sense but there are more than enough labels for the same phenomina already tbh.

  • The magnecule bonding is evidence of energy added to the nucleus to cause charge separation in the nucleus. If H* and Fe* bond magnetically then both elements have energy in the nucleus above their nuclear ground state. The chemical reaction above the metal creates H*. H* causes a fusion reaction which creates more H*. H* as a fuel penetrate to K shell and transfer energy to Fe to create Fe* which then magnetically bonds as Fe*H*.


    The model which fits the data is fusion not exothermic pico-chemistry. The fusion happens, then the pico-chemistry. The weak force is why only one isotope of iron reacts. Magnecule fusion is the weak force lowering the coulomb barrier. Elements which can receive energy into their nucleus by way of the weak force will fuse at a lower temperature. The more energy that gets into the nucleus this way, the lower the coulomb barrier between magnecules. Oxygen is likely the element most capable of receiving energy via the weak force from H*. Magnecule fusion between H* and O* is a proven reaction per my pending patent. Don't just reject my statement, because if you want to know for yourself you can read it and do the math and prove it to yourself.


    If the above explanation works to explain energy from Fe pico-hydrides, it may work to explain BLP experiments which are water dependent and probably a host of others LENR experiments where oxygen and hydrogen are present.


    There are indeed plenty of labels. The labels need to mean something specific. Magnetronite as defined above become that specific term. Specific terms help us compare models via experimental data.

  • Appologies, I wasn't intending to shut you down or anything. You have more experience and practical knowledge in this field then me. I'm just sharing my observations and educated guesses cause you seem willing to engage and this forum seems to be one of the few places I can discuss this productively. I don't even have a masters yet and I'm talking to a doctorate. But what I have posited maybe still possible, speaking in absolutes without a working prototype and/or extensive math is unwise! You make some sense though.

  • I am sorry. I don't mean to make you feel inferior in any way. I want you to engage. I want to you to question why I think a certain way. I hadn't considered an explanation of Fe pico hydrides until you pushed me to derive one. I am grateful for that. I am grateful that W could see that an ejected electron could be a flaw and that Co was identified as a product. I didn't expect that. Without both those responses, I wouldn't have began the work and wouldn't have realized I needed to dig deeper. I wouldn't have discovered the weak force specificity (specific reaction of one isotope over another). I think this is really a big deal because the specific reaction of one isotope over another can't be accounted by chemical theory as we use it. Rather such specificity requires introduction of a weak force interaction. Thank-you.