Michael Staker and Post-2012 FP replications

  • Michael Staker https://www.loyola.edu/academi…ring/faculty-staff/staker

    a materials engineering professor at Loyola Uni, Maryland presented

    at ICCF 2018 mid year.

    The published work is from several yrs of research.

    He replicates the Fleischmann-Pons excess heat effect with good precision.

    He also investigates phase changes in the strained PdD lattice


    "The excess heat condition supports portions of the cathode being in the ordered δ phase (Pd3VacD4 - octahedral),

    while a drop in resistance of the Pd cathode during increasing temperature

    and excess heat production strongly indicates portions of the cathode also transformed

    to the ordered δ’ phase (Pd3VacD4 - tetrahedral).

    A dislocation mechanism is presented for creation of vacancies and mobilizing them by electromigration

    because of their attraction to D+ ions which aids the formation of SAV phases. Extending SAV unit cells

    to the periodic lattice epiphanates δ as the nuclear active state.

    The lattice of the decreased resistance phase, δ’,

    reveals extensive pathways of low resistance and a potential connection to the superconductivity phase of PdH/PdD."


    The link to the technical paper is


    http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/StakerMRpreprintco.pdf



    .

  • presented at ICCF 2018 mid year.

    The video is here,, portions of transcripts will follow

    STAKER-1

    \.6512-ffffuntitled-png

    Time mark 23.31

    "if you think this is good, this is my data and this data is NOT a line that I drew through the data

    .this is just a series of dots that were taken by the data acquisition card, put in an Excel file,

    and plotted automatically on the curve and

    to get a new data point you just move the electrolysis current up a little bit,

    or the electromigration current up a little bit, to a new set point, and let it come too too steady state

    and acquire a new data set.
    so you could move it every 15 or 20 minutes, three or four times the time constant, and get a new data set.
    so you just bump this thing around, until we acquired all the data that you see here, on the curve,

    and I was delighted when I saw this. I was ecstatic.
    the precision in the power could be measured to plus or minus a half a milliwatt and the delta T to 0.05 degrees C,

    so the power out had a plus or minus fifteen milliwatt precision.

    overall precision for the experiment is a half a percent. "



  • "so the factors that enabled this are . data acquisition, where I didn’t have take data by hand

    .

    there was no human bias. [it] could gather thousand data points a minute average them,

    and that helped with the precision.
    enclosing the the cell itself into an air sealed chamber was really a key,

    but the biggest and single most important one was the use of

    the medical syringe which allowed approach to steady-state.
    this is a data set, again the same data set, the calibration curve

    but at the end of the experiment, where we had seen excess heat,
    and then I said to myself, “am I still on the calibration curve
    ?”

    STAKER-3"so the large crosses here that you see were taken after the experiment

    to confirm that we’re still on the calibration curve.

    timemark 25.52"







  • Staker mentions about silver via Liu( 2014)


    "transmission electron microscopy HRTEM to document images at tips of cracks in silver Ag, a low stacking fault metal.

    Pd is a higher staking fault metal (approximately 10 times higher)."


    Silver also affects the saturation with hydrogen..


    Adding silver to MH lattices to increase magnetism should be done in moderation

  • This is a fascinating well documented replication of F&P style experiments, showing results that would be expected from CCS, and a system that is very possibly susceptible to that.


    Approximate headline data:


    1. 5% average excess heat
    2. Heat spikes (not relevant here due to the options for chemical storage and release of energy)


    Details (I hope I've got this right, please correct me if not):

    • excess heat measured as difference between cell and control cell temperature difference from isothermal calorimeter casing.
    • cells are test tubes with two TCs inside
    • cells are susceptible to differential effective thermal resistance to casing, based on temperature distribution within cell, because some parts (e.g. electrode wires) have different thermal resistance from others.
    • temperature distributions within cell could be affected by ATER or some other electrode reaction dependent effect that alters physical conditions inside the cell


    What would make this data more secure?


    A thorough investigation of how differing in-cell conditions affect temperature for known fixed input and (clearly) inactive cell.

    Enough TCs inside cell to measure all significant differential temperature variations between control and active, combined with an analysis that bounded thermal conductivity changes around cells and established what differential change could result in the given 5% results.


    Regards, THH

  • Gallium isotopes appear to have no metastable states above ground state. Titanium?


    unlike Pd109, Ag107/109 Sn117.Cd111 advised by Wyttenbach.

    I;m using a mix of aluminum and gallium mixed with hematite around 3000 degrees for hydrogen gas at a focus point with other ingredient. its just a step..

  • I;m using a mix of aluminum and gallium mixed with hematite around 3000 degrees for hydrogen gas


    This is a big topic... interesting.

    Hematite has phase changes at high T ( but huge pressures as in the earth mantle)).Maybe Al/Ga influence?

    Iron has metastable isotope Fe 54-m but huge transition..6500 Kev.

    So you maybe get quite a few counts?

    If there are neutrons emitted perhaps they form metastable isotopes.

  • I'm going with sea water for the other isotopes, I need time to get away from it..The best way I think is to add them last.

    4 stage mix

    I'm waiting for ribbon and its show time.

    If its anything it will be around the 11th when I get everything together. I have mixed feeling.... my lifes work will be under it.

  • Thankyou THH .. Could you elaborate on how CCS affects the accuracy or precision and what MS might do to mitigate it.


    Robert: you I guess realise that I cannot answer that in terms of particulars, specifically I can't say whether in this case it would be significant.


    Kirk Shanahan coined the acronym (conditional calibration shift or something - I forget). But the idea, as I understand it, is simple. deltaT in calorimetry is related to power by a calibration curve experimentally derived from the tested system, or rather from a similar control, under conditions where power in is known.


    In the case of LENR this is the system with similar but thought non-LENR active components.


    If, however, the effective average thermal resistance between inner and outer TCs changes between active and control hat will shift the cal curve. Changing conditions in the inner chamber (e.g. temperature gradients different from control) can do this unless the thermal resistance is identical everywhere - an impossibility. For example electrodes can give additional thermal conductivity as the go though the inner/outer chamber barrier. A well enough designed system can mimimise this but it is difficult to do it well. So a necessary validation is to check that ant such effect is sufficiently bounded.


    The key point here is that a Thermal resistance shift of say 5% will change the input power temperature difference by 5%. That is equivalent to an apparent excess power (if the thermal resistance is higher in active than control) of 5%.


    KS argues that this shift could be always positive in F&P cells. (In the case of cells with in-cell recombiner there is a plausible mechanism - in other it is unclear why shifts would always be positive).


    Of course we don't know that shifts are always positive. They are systematic and dependent on experimental design. It can be argued that apparatus leading to null and negative shifts would be viewed as non-working experiments and corrected without wider reporting, unconsciously via Darwinian survival and replication of good setups if in no other way.


    As another possibility. Especially in systems using H or D, TCs can be contaminated and shift voltage though a test. Therefore unless, as another check, calibration is done both before and after the active test, it is necessary to be very sure that the TCs are properly sealed. In some cases (notable Dennis Letts famous hot balls experiment) this was not done. Was it done here? You would not expect Pt vs Pd to affect this one, but H vs D certainly would affect it, because H is much more diffusive through solids than D.


    I sometimes think that LENR experiments are specially designed to make false positives likely: but rather it is the other way round: experiments with non-obvious false positives get classed as LENR anomalies easily, because LENR papers generally have a much lower standard of critique than normal science.

  • conditional calibration shift or something - I forget)


    Thanks for that THH.. I am sure we will investigate the CCSos ...further in the fullness of time..perhaps MS will have some interest.


    i think he did some "calibration is done both before and after the active test," but in time we may sure...perhaps by the Feast of Dedication..

  • This is a fascinating well documented replication of F&P style experiments, showing results that would be expected from CCS, and a system that is very possibly susceptible to that.

    A significant CCS effect does not exist, so in that sense all calorimetry is equally "susceptible" to it, just as all calorimetry is susceptible to the effects of invisible unicorn farts. In this case, however, calibrations show it is not susceptible to this imaginary effect or to actual effects. That's the whole point of calibrations!

  • A significant CCS effect does not exist, so in that sense all calorimetry is equally "susceptible" to it, just as all calorimetry is susceptible to the effects of invisible unicorn farts. In this case, however, calibrations show it is not susceptible to this imaginary effect or to actual effects. That's the whole point of calibrations!


    Jed: do you have any evidence for such a sweeping negative statement? When anomalous results exist we must check and recheck all old -school assumptions. And how about the TC contamination effect, which certainly does exist...

  • I do not understand why people continue fake-discussions with known LENR denier-trolls!


    From Kirk we know that he has certain skills that are useful for the field from others I would say they just troll.


    It would be far more interesting to ask why Staker only sees about 10% excess heat, where there could be much more (in a sustained reaction - not a boil off.).


    Why is Staker not adding traces of some isotopes with long living magnetic states, that can store the field for some seconds? Why did people miss this effect for about 30 years? Some believe that silver is poisoning in Pd, what might be a misperception, because it is always produced by Pd-D fusions. In fact it could be that this caused some run aways!

  • Jed: do you have any evidence for such a sweeping negative statement?

    Read the paper, look at the calibrations, and judge for yourself.


    When anomalous results exist we must check and recheck all old -school assumptions. And how about the TC contamination effect, which certainly does exist...

    On the other hand, we do not need to entertain impossible theories put forth by crackpot who thinks that a bucket of water placed in a room will evaporate overnight -- theories which have been definitely blown out of the water by experts in the Marwan paper. Discussing the CSS is like discussing phlogiston theory.


    TC contamination has nothing to do with the CSS. It would show up during calibrations, producing the wrong answer. Or do you doubt that for some reason?


    Do you know of a better way to test or TC contamination, other than calibrating? Oh do tell us what it is. If calibration does not work, then are you saying this problem cannot be detected, tested for, or falsified?


    I suppose your next gambit will be to say there might be an undetected error. Yes indeed, and by that logic we can't be sure Lavoisier and Krebs were right, and metabolism really is CO2 production. It might be animal spirits! It might be energy beaming in from Mars. Let's spend months discussing these and other crackpot theories instead of science that has been well established for 230 years.


    You can never reach a conclusion if you ignore the fundamentals of the experimental method, such as when you pretend that replications are not replications, and that calibrations do not work, and problems they would clearly show up might be hiding instead. Because some nutcake has a theory . . .