MIZUNO REPLICATION AND MATERIALS ONLY

Quote from Bob#2

It would seem that Party #2 above would be an ideal candidate to forward his reactor to Deneum as they are unable to perform tests

I do not think Party #2 can do anything.

Deneum does not have a mass spectrometer. There is no point to trying to do this experiment without one. You are working blind with no idea whether sufficient purity has been achieved.

Let me restate this, as clearly as I can: People who are not skilled in the art cannot do cold fusion. People who do not have a complete set of instruments including a mass spectrometer, and who are not skilled in using these instruments, cannot do cold fusion. People who have to ask me or others how to set up the plumbing between the vacuum pump and the mass spectrometer, or what sort of plumbing to use, cannot do cold fusion. If you have to ask such things, you can't do it. That's what three top experts told me recently.

In my previous analogy I said this is like cooking an omelette compared to the 6-course meal that is the Fleischmann-Pons experiment. As you see, the latter takes months, or years, just to find a few good cathodes in a batch of 100:

https://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/StormsEhowtoprodu.pdf

(After a year you might find zero goods cathodes.)

Imagine you show up at an interview for a job cooking at a top restaurant. The head chef says, "okay, show me how you make an omelette." You say: "What temperature should I use? Should I use butter or oil? How many eggs?" You fail. You are not a cook.

Someone here noted that the reactor is black inside. I asked Mizuno about this, and about how the reactor is prepared and cleaned. He says he doesn't know about that. He buys the reactors from a company that makes high tech vacuum equipment. They prepare it and send it to him in a very clean condition. He confirms it is clean with the bake-out procedures and the mass spectrometer, but he is not an expert in preparing stainless steel vacuum equipment, so he does not know the details. People who are trying to replicate this should buy equipment from an experienced company that fabricates this sort of thing. Or they should be experts who have many years experience making similar equipment. I suppose that trying to make it yourself is a losing proposition, but I wouldn't know.

If you cannot afford to pay an expert to make a reactor for you, you shouldn't be doing this experiment . . . to continue my list of "don't try this at home" cautions from above.

I have never heard of a successful cold fusion experiment done by anyone other than a PhD level expert with years or decades of experience, and a whole lab full of stuff that he knows how to use as well as a carpenter knows how to use a saw, a tape measure, and a hammer. (Carpenters know how to use these things way better than you do. It is harder than it looks. Everything is.)

Quote from JedRothwell

I do not think Party #2 can do anything.

Deneum does not have a mass spectrometer. There is no point to trying to do this experiment without one. You are working blind with no idea whether sufficient purity has been achieved.

Let me restate this, as clearly as I can: People who are not skilled in the art cannot do cold fusion. People who do not have a complete set of instruments including a mass spectrometer, and who are not skilled in using these instruments, cannot do cold fusion. People who have to ask me or others how to set up the plumbing between the vacuum pump and the mass spectrometer, or what sort of plumbing to use, cannot do cold fusion. If you have to ask such things, you can't do it. That's what three top experts told me recently.

In my previous analogy I said this is like cooking an omelette compared to the 6-course meal that is the Fleischmann-Pons experiment. As you see, the latter takes months, or years, just to find a few good cathodes in a batch of 100:

https://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/StormsEhowtoprodu.pdf

(After a year you might find zero goods cathodes.)

Imagine you show up at an interview for a job cooking at a top restaurant. The head chef says, "okay, show me how you make an omelette." You say: "What temperature should I use? Should I use butter or oil? How many eggs?" You fail. You are not a cook.

Display More

Ok then, how about the party that confirmed it working?

Will they not write up their findings and procedure to assist others here? It seems this would be of great assistance to others as they evidently followed a working procedure. What are the chances of them coming forward?

They evidently had a mass spectrometer if it is a preemptive requirement. According to your posts above, it seems that none of the researchers posting here will have a chance of replicating. Even the likes of MagicSound, of whom I am very impressed with, does not seem to have the qualifications. While I understand that this is likely beyond almost all "garage based" hobbyist, unfortunately, there are only a couple of people in the world with "PHD's in Cold Fusion". Dr. Storms already said he was not interested in performing replications and Dr. McKubre has not reported in and is seemingly retired.

Who else is there? This seems like it is being prepped for failure.

Facts:

1. Did we measure by a mass spectrometer? No. Did we make sure that there is no H2O or other gases left in the vessel? Well,

We evacuated as low as 0.0004 Pa, which is 25 times deeper vacuum than in the article, left it for 17 hours and made sure that the pressure doesn't rise after cutting the pump off, while keeping the heating at 200C. This is clearly shown in the video. So, I would say yes.

2. The mesh is exactly the same - cells dims, weight and purity. We sourced it from Russia, I can send over the invoice if need be. I attached the hand-written weights of meshes and Pd before and after rubbing, you can see that these are within 5% tolerance of the numbers in the article. And, actually the mesh does look absolutely identical to the ones on your pictures visually. I attached another picture of one mesh before cleaning and another one after.

3. I won't be getting into comments on the skills, except for mentioning that the team is led by a researcher with almost 30 years of experience in experimental physics.

Why don't you arrange a live stream from TM's lab, btw? Oh, that would be of so much help for everyone.

Quote from Bob#2

Will they not write up their findings and procedure to assist others here? It seems this would be of great assistance to others as they evidently followed a working procedure. What are the chances of them coming forward?

I have no idea.

Quote from DENEUM

1. Did we measure by a mass spectrometer? No. Did we make sure that there is no H2O or other gases left in the vessel? Well,

We evacuated as low as 0.0004 Pa, which is 25 times deeper vacuum than in the article, left it for 17 hours and made sure that the pressure doesn't rise after cutting the pump off, while keeping the heating at 200C. This is clearly shown in the video. So, I would say yes.

Mizuno and the other experts I have spoken with say you need to use a mass spectrometer to check for water, nitrides, CO2 and other contamination. That's what they say. That's what I wrote in the paper. Take it or leave it.

Quote from Alan Smith

The spec is almost identical and is alongside the only photo I am aware of -which is a stock shot of mesh from the manufacturer's website amd comes with the link. Nothing to do with the mesh I bought. It is twill weave, 200 mesh, Ni 200 better than 98% pure 53 micron wire.

Huh. The holes looked bigger. Maybe it was a close-up photo. 200 mesh means 200 holes per inch, so it must have been the same.

Quote from Bob#2

Who else is there?

There are people who have mass spectrometers. They are skilled in the art.

Quote from Bob#2

This seems like it is being prepped for failure.

Doing it without a mass spectrometer is being prepped for failure. That's what the people who are skilled in the art tell me. I wouldn't know. I am not skilled in the art, and I do not second-guess experts.

Quote from JedRothwell

Mizuno and the other experts I have spoken with say you need to use a mass spectrometer to check for water, nitrides, CO2 and other contamination. That's what they say. That's what I wrote in the paper. Take it or leave it.

There is more than one way to make an omelet. A prolonged bake under high vacuum should be pretty good. (not sure how it tastes, though).

I think that JR has easily found a lot of arguments to exculpate himself.

Damn I become septic, just a little ...SOT seems to become well compassionate ??

Finally we return in 1989, time of Piantelli, P&F, impressive things happened therefore .... from time to time.

Quote

SOT seems to become well compassionate ??

Not a bit. I am as skeptical as ever. I just don't see the point in picking at comparatively minute things that can't possibly matter if the reported output and input parameters and calibration results of Mizuno's are valid. That is the glory of claims for very large results that some people insist on overlooking (or did in the past, anyway). They are very easy to test with the reactor as a black box (no need to know anything about it or how it works). For the test, I mean. Of course, to duplicate Mizuno's, you must know a lot, as others have amply pointed out.

About Mizuno's claimed results, the only thing I find fair to say is "I don't know." I do have doubts. It seems too good and too straightforward to be true. It's very much unlike, for example, the situation with Rossi and his "associates" starting as early as end of 2011 when Rossi's crookery was already extremely transparent. Or Steorn after around 2008. To some of us anyway. Also, I very much hope it's real. That would be way more interesting and fun than just uncovering another fraud or error.

Quote from Curbina

I do recall you being adamant to this as an absolute need to even attempt to start a replication. I think that is even written as such in the paper

It says: "To confirm the removal of impurities, the amounts of oxygen, nitrogen, water, and other substances in the evacuated gas should be measured by mass spectrometry."

I am not being adamant about anything. I asked Mizuno how to do this. He told me. I ran his description past some experts. They agreed. I am reporting what they told me. If those people thought a mass spec is not needed, or something else works just a well, or leaving it in a deep vacuum for 17 hours is bound to solve the problem, they would have told me.

Take it or leave it. If you think you know better than those people, do it your way. If it works, that's great. If it doesn't, I suggest you try again with a mass spectrometer.

Quote from Cydonia

I think that JR has easily found a lot of arguments to exculpate himself.

This is not about me. I am not the one trying to do the experiment without a mass spectrometer. If anyone has found a way to exculpate himself, it would be the person who is not following the instructions yet who assures us a deep vacuum for 17 hours solves the problem. Apparently, he considers himself an expert and he thinks he can selectively ignore parts of the recipe and it will work anyway. Maybe he right. Maybe is an expert. I wouldn't know. Perhaps the experiment is easier and more forgiving than Mizuno or I think it is is. That would be great news.

There are a number of people trying to replicate. If one succeeds even seeing 10 W, I will be thrilled. I don't care how many others fail, except that I don't like to see people waste their time, and I sure hope no one is hurt by the nickel powder.

Quote from JedRothwell

Huh. The holes looked bigger. Maybe it was a close-up photo. 200 mesh means 200 holes per inch, so it must have been the same.

Mesh is graded by the size of the items that pass through it, not by the number of wires per inch.

Market grade mesh of 180 has holes to pass items 0,0033" and

Market grade mesh of 200 has holes to pass items 0.0029"

There are different scales, but Market Grade is what we have been dealing with here.

Check the rightmost columns at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mesh_(scale)

I received mesh of both grades and the 180 has about 78.4 wires per inch and the grade 200 has about 80 wires per inch.

The size of the wires were slightly different. The 180 uses 55 micron wire and the 200 uses 50 micron wire.

I doubt that those meshes differ much unless it would be in the quality of the nickel used. Both sources claimed high grade mesh.

Burnishing them with Palladium was much easier after they were roughened up with sandpaper.

Deneum's use of Nitrogen to purge their system was impressive and very professional.

Most people probably shouldn't try this experiment without a mass spectrometer or Residual Gas Analyzer so that they can "see" what is happening.

Our team's plan is to purge using D2 and repeating the purges until the Residual Gas Analyze says that the system is clean.

We will report how many repetitions it takes so that others can gauge how long it takes if they choose to not use the mass spec. or RGA.

d

It seems to me that to get the recipe Deneum is using back on track a bit with the Mizuno method is to just keep on purging/heating and refilling a bunch of times at low D2 pressure to get the favorable absorption morphology or whatever really fluffed up or whatever it does so that it works. Without checking the out gas by mass spec (or whatever), repeating the pumping and venting will eventually clean it out perfectly unless there is a leak, which can be (un)confirmed with pressure data. And all the "unworking" runs will become well-refined calibration data.

Quote from DENEUM

1. Did we measure by a mass spectrometer? No. Did we make sure that there is no H2O or other gases left in the vessel? Well,

We evacuated as low as 0.0004 Pa, which is 25 times deeper vacuum than in the article, left it for 17 hours and made sure that the pressure doesn't rise after cutting the pump off, while keeping the heating at 200C. This is clearly shown in the video. So, I would say yes.

The removal of the NiO layer is the biggest pain. Going above 700C with excess Hydrogen does the job quickly but this possibly needs another heater. I would purify the Nickel for quite a long time at normal pressure and renew the Hydrogen after a certain time. This is the reason you should use an MS to check whether e.g. after 48 hours no more H2O will be produced. CO2 will be there from the cleaning step.

Quote from Paradigmnoia

Without checking the out gas by mass spec (or whatever), repeating the pumping and venting will eventually clean it out perfectly unless there is a leak, which can be (un)confirmed with pressure data.

Unless there is contamination in the mesh or the walls of the reactor, in which case you could purge it dozens of times but it will keep leaking out and reappearing.

If you bake the reactor before you purge some types of contamination, the contamination is baked into the walls and it is very difficult to get rid of.

You need to know what is in there.