MIZUNO REPLICATION AND MATERIALS ONLY

    • Official Post

    Please. Yes, understandably some of the Mizuno replicators are frustrated. They put much work, and time into their own attempts, and feel that maybe something was not told them. That only partial instructions were given out. That Mizuno is hiding something from them, keeping the secrets that make his R20 work to himself. As a result of all this, they were sent on a wild goose chase...wasting their time, and money. Similar to what Rossi did, and is doing; for those who still believe he has something


    I can say that is not true. Mizuno does have a company, and is being given assistance by a major corporation. He has helped at least two other groups that I know of, try to replicate the technology he hopes to one day commercialize. Both those groups were able to replicate. At least one European team failed -twice, and is now working directly with Mizuno for another attempt.


    Those are not the actions of someone willfully trying to mislead. As Jed has mentioned many times; LENR is not easy. It seldom works, and when it does, it is difficult to duplicate. This is not anything new, as many researchers have been down this road before. They see something extraordinary, get excited and yell eureka! , only to be embarrassed, or frustrated when their colleagues are unsuccessful, or only partially successful, in replicating.


    It is to Mizuno/Rothwell/Business Manager's credit that they did get this out when they did. It was a remarkable result, and they wanted to get it out to the community ASAP. Again, that is not the action of someone with bad intent. We have had 3 successful replications so far. Mizuno is working as fast as his health allows to make sure there are more to follow. Unfortunately, he can not work directly with everyone.


    Everyone please be patient. We the staff, and Rothwell will pass along whatever we can. And in the meantime, ignore Ascoli65 's . He sees this frustration as another opportunity to seed distrust, and create a rift in the community. Do not fall for it.

    OK, everyone calm down please. If it was easy it would have already been done lots of times. A successful first attempt was not expected, and I'm really just getting started.


    The cell has finished a 100 hr soak at 0.1 Bar of H2. Before a full bake-out, I'll bleed off the hydrogen to 300 Pa and do a calibration for comparison. Who knows, it might "wake up" at the lower pressure of H2 and surprise us all.


    Just the facts...
    AlanG

    • Official Post
    Quote from magicsound

    I've added calibration at 300 Pa to the Live Doc at https://tinyurl.com/vudbmro
    Bake-out to remove H2 is done, though another pass will probably be needed tomorrow. Then some D2 on Saturday for another test.



    If it helps, the Mizuno team reaffirms that the instructions given, have worked for others. In one replication, far better than reported, and that data has been made available to an independent group. They have since made some very encouraging progress, but can not share that yet, and hope others will continue trying to replicate the R20.


    Now this is an IMO, but it appears to me, that working directly with Mizuno, ups the chances for success. That means there is an art to this, as much as a science. That is not unusual in LENR. Unfortunately, he can only work with a few replicators at a time, as he is doing now. Everyone else, including you Alan, are on your own.


    Best of luck.

    Quote from Shane D.

    Now this is an IMO, but it appears to me, that working directly with Mizuno, ups the chances for success. That means there is an art to this, as much as a science. That is not unusual in LENR. Unfortunately, he can only work with a few replicators at a time, as he is doing now.

    I have no doubt about that.


    With the pandemic Mizuno cannot possibly go elsewhere to help others. I hope he does not even travel within Japan. He is in his 70s. He cannot work as much as he used to.

    Yesterday I assembled a graph by sampling some datapoints manually from live dashboard data:



    T Optris decreased after changing thermal camera temperature range.


    Temperatures from the 40W and 80W power steps seemed to be in line with the previously provided calibration at a lower pressure level, although the thermal camera temperature range change for the 80W step makes this more difficult to determine for the reader (e.g. myself). Before the range change, the trend seemed promising, given that for this step the calibration temperature was 249 °C.




    I pointed out on the live chat that if excess heat increases exponentially with temperature as Mizuno highlights in Fig.8 in his preprint paper, increasing power in larger steps should allow to check out quicker if there is any excess heat, compared to previous active runs using small steps.


    Possibly an issue with the currently installed mesh was the limited amount of palladium transferred to it, according to Alan's EDX observations.


    If this is the main problem affecting reproducibility, I am wondering if one is "allowed" get more inventive with the burnishing method and possibly substrate in order to get more deposited Pd. The general spirit of the experiment could still be maintained (low pressure operation, simple burnishing method for depositing Pd, wide temperature range).


    On this regard, perhaps rather than immediate testing inside the reactor, a list of accessible ideas for the burnishing–burnished materials and steps performed could be compiled and tested with EDX to find out which ones could be the most promising for an actual run.

    I am still wondering about using an oxidized mesh or other support, possibly in the form of a sheet.


    After yesterday's discussions during the MR test, today I took a slightly oxidized carbon steel blade, sanded down 4/5 of it with 80grit skateboard grip tape at approximately +/− 30 degrees and tried burnishing a copper-plated coin on its entire length.


    Similarly to observations from tests performed a few months ago, I found that the oxidized portion would effortlessly get a deposited copper layer, while the sanded down, visibly scratched portion didn't get affected at all and if anything it appeared to get deposited on the coin instead. The result can be seen in this photo:



    Could something along these lines also be occurring with Ni [meshes] and Pd?


    I recall reports—although I haven't tested this personally—that Nickel oxide may form a slippery layer and make the process more difficult, though.

    I will do at least one more attempt, following the published procedure. More care and study must be given to the mesh preparation, including re-annealing the Pd just prior to use, and sample analysis of the mesh after each step. The difference between my initial tests last September, and the sample analyzed from the MR1 mesh is sobering. There's more to be learned and I have the tools and the time.

    It seems that the appearance of Calcite crystals on the treated mesh depends on the volume of water used for the one-hour soak. The MR1 mesh was processed using aabout 3 liters of tap water and no crystals appeared. For a test today I heated just 500 ml of tap water, and added about 300 ml more over the hour to replace evaporation loss. After cooling, the pH of the water had increased from 7.02 to 7.96, indicating substantial concentration of dissolved minerals.


    The mesh samples had plentiful crystal deposits after this treatment. So add this to the many unknowns in the protocol.


    Shane D. Do you know if any of the successful replications mentioned used self-prepared mesh rather than supplied by Mizuno?







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.