Mizuno reports increased excess heat

    Quote from seven_of_twenty

    And I never got the impression that Miles, McKubre, or anyone else had near the long term, consistent, reproducible high output and high out/in that you and Mizuno are claiming this time around.


    I never said they did. On the contrary, the paper concludes:


    "As far as we know, this experiment has the best reproducibility and control, and the highest power output of any cold fusion experiment on record. The output to input ratio is also one of the best on record."

    However, that has no bearing on scientific credibility. Experiments in 1990 were very difficult to replicate, and the success rate was low. But the signal to noise ratio was higher than Mizuno's present experiment, and they were replicated enough times to be sure they were real, in many different labs. By the criteria applied to scientific claims, there was no doubt cold fusion is a nuclear fusion effect. These results should have convinced every expert on earth.


    You have to understand that scientific criteria are not those of industry, and not the ones you cite: "long term, consistent, reproducible high output." Such things are never held as reasons to believe a scientific claim, nor should they be. They are irrelevant.


    The fact that a result is difficult to replicate is never taken as a reason to doubt it. If it were, no one would believe the top quark results, or any tokamak plasma fusion result.


    Irreproducibility is never taken as a reason to doubt a result. If it were, no one would believe that cloned animals are real, because the success rate is about a hundred times worse than cold fusion.


    The fact that a result is difficult to detect is never an issue. If it were, no one would believe in gravity waves, or any major astronomical discovery in the last half-century, such as the image of the black hole in the center of a galaxy, or planets orbiting other stars. Compared to cold fusion, these things are many orders of magnitude smaller, more difficult to detect, and it cost millions or billions of dollars to detect them. You will never read an article in Nature or the New York Times science section saying, "because it is so hard to detect planets, we should not believe them." That would be scientifically invalid. The only thing that counts is the signal to noise ratio.


    (Actually, as it happens, the more difficult it is to detect something, and the more money it takes, the more people are inclined to believe the result. That's psychology, not science.)

    Quote from seven_of_twenty

    Yes, you accused me of the same thing. [Not reading papers]


    You do not seem to know the basic facts in the papers, so either you have not read them or you don't recall them. I can only judge you by what you say. More to the point, you often say that you have not read the papers. The editors at Nature and muckety mucks at the DoE say they have never read the cold fusion literature. Many of them claim there is no such literature. They say the effect was never replicated and there are no papers.


    Go ahead and read the comments in Nature or Sci. Am. They say, for example, that if these results were real, the researchers would killed by gamma rays. Do you think the experimental data supports that statement? Do you think that someone who has read the literature would say that? I don't.


    Read their comments and judge this for yourself. You may have a different opinion than mine. I am not a fly on the wall and I cannot read minds, so I have no way of knowing for sure what the editors at Nature have read about cold fusion, or what they truly think of it. Perhaps they secretly believe it. I can only judge by what they say. I take their words at face value; I assume these people are sincere. Of course I could be wrong about that.

    Leaning toward this vessel. Other choices like what you have beckon Alan.


    https://www.aliexpress.com/ite…o.cart.0.0.7e5d3c009SSUV9


    Also thinking of 300mm length instead of 600mm.


    All other dimensions identical to schematic in paper. Perhaps shorter sheath heater.


    When I searched for item you listed on US Ebay I found their package with pump.


    I should underline that I still intend to keep very close if not exactly on the dimensions Mizuno specifies.

    Quote from seven_of_twenty

    But I mean something this big... there has to be someone. Your paranoia is choking you.


    There may be someone. I cannot comment on that. However there is no one at the places you listed:


    ". . . any well known test lab or government organization- also by a major university physics department where the department itself would endorse the tests."


    Those places are out of the question.


    No one at any of those places would say "something this big." They would all say this is just more of the same old fraud and lunacy from people who have been peddling this garbage for decades. They would say Mizuno and I are out to defraud gullible investors. They would never read the paper in the first place, but if they did, they would instantly dismiss it as fraud, and they would say the results are physically impossible according to the fundamental laws of science.


    I know that is what they would say because I have heard it countless times. When people repeatedly call me a criminal, it is not paranoia for me to assume they mean it. On the contrary, I would be paranoid if I thought they secretly believed me, and they were actually doing cold fusion research.


    It does not bother me that these people think I am a criminal (if they have heard of me at all, that is). It is water off a duck's back. If such things bothered Mizuno, or me, or any cold fusion researcher, we would have quit years ago. It does not bother me, but I am not going to approach these people. That's a futile waste of time.

    Quote from JedRothwell

    Some experts looking at these results feel that rubbing may be a superior method, because it pushes aside contamination and oxides. I mean literally, it scrapes them aside, putting the Pd directly on top of the Ni. The sputtering method was adventitious. People who know about sputtering tell me it might actually remove Pd at times. It was intended to produce heat at the Pd, which it may have done, but Mizuno noticed that the data pointed to heat from the Ni.


    Love that word Jed.


    ad·ven·ti·tious

    /ˌadvenˈtiSHəs/Learn to pronounce

    adjective

    1. happening or carried on according to chance rather than design or inherent nature. "my adventures were always adventitious, always thrust on me"
      synonyms: rarealeatory "he felt that the conversation was not entirely adventitious"
      • coming from outside; not native. "the adventitious population"
        synonyms: "some rural parishes recorded high adventitious populations"
      • BIOLOGY formed accidentally or in an unusual anatomical position. "propagation of sour cherries by adventitious shoots"

    Quote from seven_of_twenty

    A result of such magnitude should be replicable by any well known test lab or government organization- also by a major university physics department where the department itself would endorse the tests. And there would be no problem with Mizuno providing the equipment, even as a black box, as long as all power in and power out measurements were provided by the experimenters using their own methods and equipment. So not just replication but replication done well by the best available and especially the most credible people- people with no vested interest if possible.


    No black boxes. Mizuno is very clear and very open unlike Rossi. No one needs a pre-built black box that one is forbidden to see the insides. That is what makes this science instead of "validation of a prebuilt secret". This is science and if I guess right, at least 3 independent replicators are working right now in the LENR community. After we are sure, I am sure that a university physics or chemistry department will be brave enough, after looking at one of these things, to do it in their own lab. Mizuno experiment is too simple to not replicate -- we don't need crazy IR cameras and secret powders. This is open source science. I am having problems believing after the long drought that it is finally actually raining. I really want to clang the glasses on this one.

    • Official Post
    Quote from Shane D.

    If so, I will take back my comment about his mothers mustache.


    Or maybe not...



    External Content youtu.be
    Content embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.
    Through the activation of external content, you agree that personal data may be transferred to third party platforms. We have provided more information on this in our privacy policy.

    Quote from JedRothwell

    It does not bother me that these people think I am a criminal (if they have heard of me at all, that is). It is water off a duck's back. If such things bothered Mizuno, or me, or any cold fusion researcher, we would have quit years ago. It does not bother me, but I am not going to approach these people. That's a futile waste of time.


    Having said all of that . . . If someone from the DoE or Nature approaches me and asks questions, I will do all that I can to help. As I do for anyone interested in cold fusion. I never bear a grudge. Not because I am forgiving or magnanimous, but because I don't give a fart what anyone thinks in the first place. I couldn't care less whether the people at Nature insult me or apologize. I'll work with my worst enemy to accomplish my goals.


    Winston Churchill had the right approach. In his 1940 cabinet, he kept on many of Chamberlain's appointees. He later explained:


    "If one were dependent on the people who had been right in the last few years, what a tiny handful one would have to depend on."


    He also said:


    "If we open a quarrel between the past and the present, we shall find that we have lost the future."

    Quote from JedRothwell

    Read what happened to Miles. The same sort of thing happened to nearly every other researcher I know, except McKubre. As I said before, I do not understand why you think these results are more interesting or more compelling than those of Miles, or Storms, or the other best results. If those people were accused of crimes and kicked out, why do you think someone replicating this result will not be accused?


    Whether I consider this interesting is not the issue. The question is: What would officials at the DoE think of these results? What will university deans, or the editors at Nature think of them? I know exactly what they will think. I have heard it countless times. Suppose you could talk to an expert at the DoE right now, or the editors of Nature or Sci. Am. You ask: "What do you think of the latest report from Mizuno, uploaded at LENR-CANR.org?" They would tell you that Mizuno and Rothwell are well known con artists, liars and criminals, and that not a single report at LENR-CANR.org is credible. High officials have accused me of making up all of these papers. They said that not one of them was actually published in the literature. They will tell you that if any of these claims were true, the researchers would be killed by gamma rays.


    These people would never read this report, or any other paper at LENR-CANR.org. They say they will not. You might as well expect leading biologists to read papers at creationist websites. The people at the DoE, the universities and Nature are certain -- absolutely certain with no shadow of a doubt -- that all cold fusion claims are lunacy and criminal fraud. That is what they say, and I am sure that is what they mean. Why would they lie about this? I am also sure they have read nothing and they know nothing. You can see that from their descriptions of the experiments.


    Jed -- the difference here is the large excess power and simplicity of the Mizuno rig. No one can in their right mind dispute this if they see the rig working and it is a lot hotter with D2 (sealed off) than without D2. I will do the calculations in a few, but the difference in temperature will be significant -- enough to heat a room. It's sensible -- you don't need a thermometer to prove that 1800 watts is a LOT hotter than 300 watts. One barely makes your hand warm at 6 inches, and the other makes your hand feel like it will be burned after absorbing the IR. Rossi's test you needed an IR camera. Here, your hand is going to say ouch -- that is really really hot. This cannot be faked as the power involved is way too large and there are no hidden wires or gas supplies as Rossi had in his hidden rigs. This is not a few beakers that have a thermometer in it. The results are astounding if they can be replicated and as soon as any physicists with a lab sees one of these and realizes that they can build it in their lab in under two weeks without anyone noticing, it will be replicated and published in ... Nature! Such a just dessert for them. Let's get to work on this.

    • Official Post
    Quote from anonymous

    This is science and if I guess right, at least 3 independent replicators are working right now in the LENR community


    Be even better if they identify themselves, so we can start a replication thread. There, they could openly communicate with each other, and the forum. Much better chance of success that way. It would have some of the advantages of working as a team; less chance of reinventing the wheel, equipment, where cheapest, most effective for the task, what worked/what not. ECW has a list thread started, but their format is not as conducive to this as we are.


    This way also, when Mizuno/Rothwell answers a question from one, what is said can be instantly relayed to the others...which will ease the workload of the authors. Just a suggestion.

    Quote from anonymous

    Jed -- the difference here is the large excess power and simplicity of the Mizuno rig.


    The people at Nature and the DoE would never believe that it works in the first place. They will not read the report.



    Quote from anonymous

    No one can in their right mind dispute this if they see the rig working and it is a lot hotter with D2 (sealed off) than without D2.


    They would never look. Not unless hundreds of others replicate. That might happen. I doubt it will, but there is always hope. My point is, the people that seven_of_twenty listed at "well-known test labs" and "government organizations" will not look unless that happens. They will be the last to believe, not among the first.

    Quote from anonymous

    No black boxes. Mizuno is very clear and very open unlike Rossi.


    Also, unlike some others in this field. I don't want to name names, but a Big Name recently wrote a paper saying 'details of the materials will be provided later' (paraphrase). He has not provided such details for many years, so I wonder when "later" will be.


    Some Big Names in this field have said they don't believe a word of this. That is what Mizuno and I expected they would say. I expect they will relegate me to a poster session at ICCF22. Honestly, I prefer that. I don't like talking in front of crowds. I tend to have fits of sneezing. I have already reached a far larger audience than any ICCF conference provides. I can tell from the log files at LENR-CANR.org.



    Quote from anonymous

    This is science and if I guess right, at least 3 independent replicators are working right now in the LENR community.


    I hope so. It has to start with the people in this community. I hope it then extends beyond the community in a sort of chain reaction. Leading to an exponential increase in replications. That might happen, but only if it starts in this community. I should use the word "community" in quotes, because, as I said, there are prominent members of this so-called community who assume Mizuno is wrong and would like him to shut up and go away.



    Quote from anonymous

    This is open source science.


    I would not co-author any other kind of paper. I am opposed to people keeping secrets in fundamental scientific research. On the other hand, I encourage researchers to apply for patents. They will not get patents at first, but I hope they do eventually.

    Rob Woudenberg wrote: My own preferred theory is that D(0) (Ultra Dense Deuterium à la Holmlid) is formed which is triggered by the IR radiation of the sheath heater, generating charged particles from D(0) that are absorbed mainly by the reactor wall. Therefore the heat is created mainly in the reactor wall. Or even Helium is formed by fusion (Did Mizuno detect He?).

    Some reasoning why D(0):

    - High absorption seems not required

    - (Very) low gas pressure, Holmlid's papers show formation of D(0) at comparable gas pressures

    - No runaways observed (?) because amount of IR radiation by the sheath heater determines greatly the amount of charged particles (or fusion) released.


    Nice one Rob, this solves the mass problem of only 54g Ni mesh generating all that heat - muons generated from the Pd/Ni mesh holding UDD stimulated by the Thz far IR radiated from the internal heater then triggering fusion reactions in the R20 reactor wall! 20 Kg of stainless steel! This can all be tested by further experiments using the R20 reactor - see if XSH is increased by including Holmlid's UDD catalyst KFeO2, or there are ways of blocking muon/heavy electron fusion reactions using N2 or Neon gas. But first do the simple controls suggested by anonymous:


    We only need a "dummy" i.e. control gas in the reactor. Because of the design of the experiment, the heat has to come out somewhere from the core heater or the reaction itself. If the reactor is first loaded with say helium or nitrogen and then run, and the temperature at the reactor cylinder thermocouple(s) and the Delta-T between the input and the output airflow is measured and recorded; and then the reactor is loaded with the D2 gas to near optimal parameters and the core heater is turned on to the same power setting; if the temperature is significantly higher for both the output airflow and the cylinder thermocouples, that is proof positive for excess heat from the rig. Simple -- no extra swapping of components, just hook up the inert gas cylinder first, run the control run; and then pump it out, load it with the D2 gas for the active run, and take the data. This would end any doubt that LENR works.


    And if it can be demonstated that its all down to muons inducing fusion reactions in the stainless-steel reactor walls well, that discovery would certainly make a good Nature paper. Maybe even Holmlid could be persuaded to try replicating Mizuno's expts (using YAG IR laser instead of the heater maybe?). Certainly food for thought.

    Quote from Dr Richard

    And if it can be demonstated that its all down to muons inducing fusion reactions


    So if muons are not involved ... its not a good ****** paper?


    There are a whole bunch of LENR theories that may actually be relevant to these results.


    But which one is valid requires years of work.


    Holmlid's research was a life work and he has a well equipped laboratory

    and he seemed to have shown pi-meson involvement after laser irradiation, after years of work

    Hopefully Gundersen , using similar equipment to Holmlid is replicating Mizuno's work right now and examining

    the emissions such as gamma, kaon??

    External Content www.youtube.com
    Content embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.
    Through the activation of external content, you agree that personal data may be transferred to third party platforms. We have provided more information on this in our privacy policy.

    Quote from JedRothwell

    Relegate to a poster session at ICCF22. Honestly, I prefer that. I don't like talking in front of crowds. I tend to have fits of sneezing. I have already reached a far larger audience than any ICCF conference provides. I can tell from the log files at LENR-CANR.org.


    1) Poster session -- nonsense -- Mizuno is a very important experimentalist at this point in LENR development. What you two share is very important to the field and way too important (sorry to use the same word 3 times) to relegate to a poster session. When you present for him in English, you are the communicating face of the Mizuno/Rothwell team. You will get a full session if you give a few additional details to the jury vetting the presentations. This simple "Mizuno Rig" is new and hugely important, so I cannot understand why the presentation selection jury would not give you two a live presentation. Please take the effort to combat your podium reticence and get our gratitude for communicating a full presentation.


    2) You are an inspiring speaker -- you inspired me.


    Enough said,


    Anonymous

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.