ICCF21 Thread

  • I am often puzzled that Bill Gates support for LENR, if it exists, should be secret. Why? I am sure Mr. Gates can withstand criticism from mainline scientists, if that is the concern. And he already gets thousands of requests for his staff to screen so it can't be to avoid more LENR proposals. What's the current conspiracy theory that explains why Bill Gates would be secretive, had he decided to support Duncan or anyone else looking at LENR.


    SOT,


    There is no current conspiracy theory, and I do not believe there was one when this was first reported 2 years ago. BTW, not *everything* revolving around LENR is spun into a conspiracy as you try to portray. Maybe the Rossi believers still resort to that out of necessity, but mainstream LENR research stands on it's own merits. It does not need propping up with conspiracies.


    That said, it probably is Gates signature, and someone other than him probably felt the need to block it. Maybe it was someone from Seashore Research, or maybe some university secretary who felt it was prudent. Who knows and who cares?


    If you want to continue on with this, bring it over to the Playground.

  • IH is well represented at Ft. Collins. I see Miley and the IH University of Illinois UC Lab Team, Letts and Bob Higgins. Any others from IH I missed? So far Miley, and Letts are reporting excess heat. If that holds up to scrutiny, IH will be well rewarded eventually.


    After Rossi ran him through the mud at Doral, Darden also must be enjoying working with true professionals. Not a worry about being ripped off...how refreshing! Darden deserves cudos for sticking with LENR after what he had to go through. Most others would have taken their money elsewhere and lick their wounds.


    I wish he, Dewey and the IH team the best.

  • Quote

    Not a worry about being ripped off...how refreshing!


    Maybe so but Mr. Darden still has plenty to worry about. Nobody he supports has yet shown persuasively that they have the goods. He could be following one failure with many more. His problem I guess, depending on who is actually funding the ventures.



    Quote

    Darden deserves cudos for sticking with LENR after what he had to go through. Most others would have taken their money elsewhere and lick their wounds.


    I think that completely misses the point. Darden failed to vet Rossi properly despite the large number of internet and other resources which could have helped him. What he needed to do next was to review all his projects and to ask reliable (read main line scientists) about how to test those. Not whether or not to fund them but how to properly test them. There is no evidence he has done that.


    Quote

    I wish he, Dewey and the IH team the best.


    Me too. And I suspect they will need more than wishes to succeed, if history is any sort of guide.

  • This was marvelous:


    E. Beiting, “Investigation of the nickel-hydrogen anomalous heat effect,” Aerospace Report No. ATR-2017-01760, The Aerospace Corporation, El Segundo CA, USA, May 15, 2017.


    http://coldfusioncommunity.net…8/05/Beiting-Edward-1.pdf


    In my opinion, this is one of the best reports in the history of cold fusion. Great calorimetry -- IRREFUTABLE results. I now fully believe the ZrO2NiPd material works. Kudos to Brian Ahern.


    The response to this from Richard Garwin was hilarious. I shall describe it later, when I get a chance.


    I can't wait to read the full report listed at the end of the abstract. I hope I can upload the full report to LENR-CANR.org soon.

  • Jed,


    I looked on LENR-CANR, and I see neither this Edward Beiting, or "The Aerospace Corporation" he is a Senior Scientist of, linked to LENR before this. Am I wrong? If not, do you know what attracted him to start experimenting with LENR?


    That aside, it is an interesting connection, as Beitings employer "The Aerospace Corporation" does some work for NASA, along with some other space related agencies. And we also know -thanks to Ahlfors investigative skills, that NASA is now coordinating with GEC/JWK, and the former talent of SPAWAR. It is also a well established fact that NASA has been involved with CF/LENR since FP's time.


    On a slightly different, but related matter...in my search of your library just now, I also stumbled upon this: http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/NiedraJMreplicatio.pdf It caught my attention because last year there was a discussion about NASA's "success" in replicating Randy Mills early work, and someone claimed that was untrue. That NASA did not replicate, and were not successful. Anyway, the summary says they (NASA) were successful.

  • JedRothwell


    Quote

    I can't wait to read the full report listed at the end of the abstract.

    Same here. The first thing that strikes me is that they calibrate with nitrogen in both cells and then compare a nitrogen filled cell with a hydrogen filled cell during their active run. Hopefully, they make their calibration method more clear in the full paper.


    Quote

    In my opinion, this is one of the best reports in the history of cold fusion. Great calorimetry -- IRREFUTABLE results.

    Do you derive this opinion solely from that abstract?


    Quote

    I suggest you wait until you read the papers from the people I.H. are supporting before you decide whether they have the goods or not.

    Sure. But you must forgive me if I do not simply take your word for it.

  • Edward J. Beiting, Dean Romein

    Generation of High-Temperature Samples and Calorimetric Measurement of Thermal Power for the Study of Ni/H2 Exothermic Reactions


    [Dean Romein: Dean.Romein Beginner. Member since Dec 30th 2015]


    [... "first demonstrated in Japan and later reproduced in the U.S. by a solitary investigator ..."]

  • It is difficult for me to communicate with just this itty-bitty computer, so I will probably not say much more. But anyway --


    Overall, I would say the people selected to give oral presentations have upped their game. The quality is better than most previous conferences. Several other experimental papers impressed me. I will list them below. Here are all the abstracts:


    https://www.dropbox.com/sh/sp7…uUL0v3NrkY7BPYPKDA_a?dl=0


    Letts & Cravens

    Mizuno (if I do say so myself)


    Takahashi

    Hioki - These two describe different aspects of the same project. Unfortunately, the funding for it ended last year


    Tanzella

    Staker

    Beiting

    Biberian


    Olafsson

    Zeiner-Gunderson - Both about Holmlid. Not exactly cold fusion, but good.


    That's just the first two days. Impressive.


    Note that I cannot judge theory papers and I have nothing to say about them.

  • We know Letts is on the IH team, so does that mean Dennis Craven is also? New twist if so. Opens up many interesting angles.


    And no way you have a "itty-bitty computer" as a lame excuse. My gosh, you are the computer expert. Give me a break. :)

  • Like I thought..lame excuse on the computer power thing. :) Nice try though, but there is the bigger picture we can all read between the lines. Craven's still at it, and more importantly working with IH.


    I smell Dewey at work. BTW, how is he?

  • I agree with Jed that the Beiting talk was one of the best so far. I do not have any of his documents, but here are my rough notes from his talk. There are likely some errors below from my rapid note taking as the slides went by.


    E. J. Beiting

    TrusTech, Redando Beach CA

    Expertise in OAMP at Aerospace Corp think tank

    Idea was for AHE to eliminate solar panels for space applications

    NASA has 38% efficient Sterling engine at 850C

    20 KW power busses can drive several 5KW thrusters

    ZrNiPd ribbon prepared by Ames. Arata/Ahern prep

    2/3 Zr, 1/3 Ni + 3% Pd

    Mixed in ground SmCo magnets to one of the cells

    Cell with magnet material has much more excess heat. That one was used for long term tests.

    Heating wire. Control cell N2, active H2

    Embedded type K theromocouples

    Ran test for 2 months

    42 days of excess power integration

    Cal curves for 2 active and control cells at different pressures

    Excess power around 1 W for 12W in

    173 MJ/kg including all fuel

    635 MJ/kg for just active part of fuel (Ni+Pd?)

    Greater energy density that the most dense chemical fuel which is around 100 MJ/kg

    Possible errors due to embedded thermocouples above 600C but if it happens, it would lower the measurement of excess making results even more conservative.

  • Possible errors due to embedded thermocouples above 600C but if it happens, it would lower the measurement of excess making results even more conservative.

    Good summary, but that last sentence is the hilarious part about Garwin. I was planning to write it up. From my notes:


    Richard Garwin of the Jasons was brought in to evaluate the experiment. He said there is a problem because it uses K-type thermocouples which are susceptible to errors from exposure to hydrogen. Beiting pointed out three problems with this hypothesis:

    1. The thermocouples were shielded.
    2. The damage only happens at ~600°C and these cells were run at 300°C.
    3. The damage causes the thermocouples to show a lower temperature. It would reduce the estimate of excess heat, not increase it.

    Garwin is grasping at straws, trying to find an excuse to dismiss the results. He said the first thing that popped into his head, which could not have happened and would have had the opposite effect if it could. Soon after cold fusion began, Garwin was called in to evaluate SRI. The gist of his report was: "I could not find an error but I am sure something must be wrong."

  • .......The damage causes the thermocouples to show a lower temperature. It would reduce the estimate of excess heat, not increase it.

    .

    Hear hear! I have fought this corner many times - I have never ever known a damaged S or K type thermocouple read high. And considering that most gas furnaces use K-type thermocouples as flame-failure devices I would think that if they were in the habit of reading high when broken there would be many many more gas explosions.

  • I have reread the Day 1 repor of Ruby carat, and either I missed most yesterday, or it was updated

    http://coldfusionnow.org/iccf-21-day-1-on-heat-and-theory/


    A key story accross that day seems to be the replications.


    He also supports a multi-laboratory approach where reproductions are conducted. Verification of this science has already occurred in the 90s, with the confirmation of tritium, and the heat-helium correlation. He believes that all the many variables must be correlated to move forward. Unfortunately, he believes the same thing he said in 1996, according to a Jed Rothwell article, that “acceptance of this field will only come about when a viable technology is achieved.”

    To make progress, a procedure for replication must be codified, and a set of papers should be packaged for newbies to the field. A demonstration cell is third important effort to pursue.

    ...


    Letts/cravens seems to have controls through H2 injection.

    Mizuno protocol is detailed and should be replicated.

    Miley experimen use 12nm thin-film, with load-deload cycles make me think of Nicolas Armanet presentation of Pd hydride metallurgy... Key seems to be defects, and he worl on PdZrO2 nanoparticles...

    Takahashi's experiments continue, and he observed what remind me a heat after deaths (desoption) much above chemistry.

    Iwamura's work looks great for me because it is involving many actors, and replications. (Tohoku's experiment, replicated at Kobe).

    Hioki talk of a protocll involving nanopalladium in zeolite....


    A replication of Storms for a material is evocated, based on palladium from Takahashi in 90...


    Replications, metallurgy... questions and results...


    Papers will be great to read I expect.

    Teams seems to work more in replications...

  • After the talk, he was asked this question (about nitrogen calibration). He quickly described how he made a correction to account for that, but I did not completely follow it. Once someone gets a copy of his report, they could let us know more.

  • After the talk, he was asked this question (about nitrogen calibration). He quickly described how he made a correction to account for that, but I did not completely follow it. Once someone gets a copy of his report, they could let us know more.


    Didn't the speaker give the error bars on his measured numbers? You said they measure 1W excess on 12 W in, that suggests to me their error must be <1W, maybe <0.5W, to consider 1W significant. Did they explain how they determined their 1W signal wasn't just noise?

  • Ruby made a report for Day 2:

    http://coldfusionnow.org/iccf2…on-rydberg-matter-theory/


    • Tanzella presented 4th gen Brillouin HT results...
    • Mitchell Swartz talk of a theory and a news light water NiH system. Massive heat, controlled heat after death. COP 2.5, 12x depending on version...
    • Celani presented some results on constantan wires
    • MR Staker talk of Pd phase diagram and calorimetry
    • EJ Beiting talk of BiH investigations at The Aerospace Corporation. He obtaines heat above chemistry with Arata/Ahern style of experiment adding small magnetic material
    • JP Biberian presented SIMS analysis from an ICARUS9 electrode given by Fleischmann (remember RNBE2018 report). AG107 found un 1µm layer.
    • Max Fomatchev-Zamilov talk of lantanide synthesis, but it was negative. He reproduced Sternglass experiment, but negatively. no neutrons.
    • Vladimir Vysoskii representing G. Lu and W Zhang presented on biological transmutation.
    • A Nkitin continued on same theme.
    • Sveinn Olafsson presented work with Svein Olafsson on ultradense hydrogen
    • Sindre Zeiner-Gundersen continued on that theme
    • few more, but Ruby could not attend.
  • I found it interesting that Swartz is getting funding now from the DTRA (Defense Threat Reduction Agency). Also that The Aerospace Corporations upper management resisted giving Beiting authorization to do the experiment. They gave him "one shot". His report is on their website, but I could not find it.


    On another note; I hope Ruby's health is good. She made some comments that make me worry about her.

  • Thermal conductivity of hydrogen gas 0.168 W/mK

    Thermal conductivity of nitrogen gas 0.024 W/mK

    Beiting knows that, and took it into account. More to the point, Garwin knows that, but he did not try to use that as an excuse to dismiss the results, so even he realizes it is a losing argument. You, on the other hand, will still be saying this years from now, unless cold fusion becomes generally recognized.


    Didn't the speaker give the error bars on his measured numbers?

    Of course he did.

  • Plenty of others there in a position to report on every aspect of the conference. I see BG, Ruby is obviously there since she provided the photos, Jed Rothwell, and then of course Abd. My guess is that this will the best covered, and reported on of all ICCF's.


    I hope Ruby will have the opportunity to snag some interview opportunities for the Cold Fusion Now! -podcast series. I hear she has USB-sticks in there with all the current episodes and some of the documentaries she has created and some papers in PDF format contained within them, too? Has anyone seen one?

  • Beiting knows that, and took it into account.


    Good. I'd like to see how he does it.


    More to the point, Garwin knows that, but he did not try to use that as an excuse to dismiss the results, so even he realizes it is a losing argument.


    Why would I care what Garwin knows/thinks/says?


    You, on the other hand, will still be saying this years from now, unless cold fusion becomes generally recognized.


    Well, it's true, now and in the future (unless the universe changes...) And I'll still say the thermal conductivity of hydrogen is significantly higher than nitrogen, even if someone finally proves LENRs exist.


    Of course he did.


    Of course. I only ask becasue the CF community as a whole has a very bad habit of not accurately estimating error bars. Take McKubre's post in the Mizuno bucket thread where he claims '90sigma'. That is true if and only if the only important noise factor in these experiments comes from instrument baseline noise. Unfortunately that's rarely true. And, in the case of Ed Storms' data that I reanalyzed for my 2002 paper, he claimed an ~80mW baseline noise and thus claimed an ~10X signal (780mW peak) (aka COP=10), when I showed that a 1-3% change in cal. constants flatlined his signal, which means he was at 3sigma, at best. McKubre's 90sigma is another example of this. So of course I wondered how Beiting did it, as there was no info in the abstract, and of course you failed to even mention what he claimed the error bar was, let alone explaining how he got it.