Parkhomov: LENR as a Manifestation of Weak Interactions

    There is only one word for this: EXASPERATING - its irrelevant whether a different heater was used because its input power was accurately measured. TM and JR are both very experienced in making these measurements so would be very unlikely to make such simple errors. Maybe consider novel CF theories instead of wasting time on this? Like Parkhomov's new theory that low energy neutrinos/antineutrinos are involved in low temp D fusion reactions.



    Thanks to Bob Greenyer for bringing attention to a new paper published by Alexander Parkhomov in the Journal of Unconventional Science titled “LENR as a Manifestation of Weak Interactions”.

    The article is in Russian here: http://www.unconv-science.org/pdf/23/parkhomov1.pdf

    Bob has published a rough English translation here: https://drive.google.com/open?…LhiJBBdPbhagQQSWLkmazzJLz

    Here is the English translated abstract:

    The small neutrino (antineutrino) mass makes it possible to generate them intensively as a result of collisions of particles of matter during thermal motion. The resulting neutrinos (antineutrinos) have an energy of about 0.1 eV. With such an energy, the De Broglie wavelength is about 5 microns. This means that a huge number of atoms are involved in nuclear weak interactions, which makes the effects of nuclear transformations involving neutrinos (anti-neutrinoes) really observable. Considering the thermal generation of neutrinos as the basis for nuclear transformations in the LENR process allows us to explain a number of features of this phenomenon.
    Quote from Max Nozin

    Last word that he got some funding and has a lab somewhere. Before he was running reactor placed on top of his kitchen stove in small flat.

    Wondering if he still uses Rossi original NiLiH formula that Ed thinks was thrown in by Rossi as a distrction for competition.

    Well, Rossi put Li and LAH in his patent so that would invalidate it if he does not use it.

    • Official Post
    Quote from Max Nozin

    Last word that he got some funding and has a lab somewhere. Before he was running reactor placed on top of his kitchen stove in small flat.

    Wondering if he still uses Rossi original NiLiH formula that Ed thinks was thrown in by Rossi as a distrction for competition.

    The fuel is called PNK-OT2 powdered Nickel, so the answer would be no, he is no longer using the recipe from the Italian whose name I shall not pronounce.


    http://aloro.net/grades/su/gr-pnk-0t2, which is named as a Carbonyl Nickel powder.

    • Official Post
    Quote from Max Nozin

    Curbina I need to read his recent paper despite his neutrinio stuff.

    You can ignore his theoretical paper as it has nothing to do with the nickel powder experiment. Wether neutrinos, EVOs or time space quantum dislocations are involved, he worked with pure nickel and a tungsten heater. The calorimetry approach used, however, is of the kind that can be discussed ad nauseam and never agree it was appropriate. The possibility of transmutation is interesting but the analysis provided is focused in the high bulk changes that are less impressive than the detection of initially absent elements, which was scantly mentioned and for me is way more interesting as the calcium could be product of migration.

    • Official Post

    The way I understood it, they got 2 tests from Uppsala and Synteztec. None of them detected changes in fuel itself. All changes were in the surface of the reactor.

    They also suspect so irregularities with Uppsala test since when they tested fuel before the isotopic composition of it was way of that according to the reference book. Synteztech before test was close to expected distribution.

    • Official Post

    This always keep coming back in connection with Rossi and parkhomov New USPTO Patent Applications


    http://appft.uspto.gov/netacgi…0323692&RS=DN/20170323692


    Also during conference in Sochi there were discussions between Zarkhomov and Zatelepin. Zatelepin claimed he also saw some excess heat in NiH systems but never when using chemical source of heat.


    They also experimentally proved existence of microplasmoids inside of the Ni powder. Zatelepin speculated they could work as a micro resonators.

    • Official Post
    Quote from John Littlemist

    Why isn't anyone promoting this Parkhomov experiment for Google:
    Nickel-hydrogen heat generator continuously working for 7 months

    Much more simple experiment than Mizuno's.

    No palladium nor deuterium needed.

    Pharkhomov calorimetry is the weakest point. I reckon it is a rather simple set up and to a certain extent it has already been replicated by the MFMP with some unusual and very punctual results, given their much more accurate calorimetry, so it might be said that it has already been replicated without the magnitude reported but replicated nevertheless. Problem is the excess heat is low and with 10% excess heat even if the calorimetry is impecable this kind of results are mostly ignored by mainstream. Same with Celani’s, he also was replicated, also with a 10% or so excess heat by the MFMP, and also the gamma emission of Biberian while loading H has been replicated by the MFMP but those results are not spectacular so no one thinks much of them.

    • Official Post
    Quote from John Littlemist

    According to Parkhomov's measurements and the graph below, the excess heat is varying somewhere between 60 - 80% from December to February.


    Yes, I read the paper translation, but I am talking about how he calculated that based only in thermocouple readings and a custom made equation. That kind of energy input vs output estimation method will be shred to pieces as useless by anyone who does not think LENR is possible.

    Quote from Curbina

    Yes, I read the paper translation, but I am talking about how he calculated that based only in thermocouple readings and a custom made equation. That kind of energy input vs output estimation method will be shred to pieces as useless by anyone who does not think LENR is possible.

    Even those who believe LENR is possible should shun and “shred as useless” single point thermometry as a substitute for calorimetry. Temperature is not heat.


    Thermocouples are incredibly useful, and a fairly reliable instrument, but there a lot of ways something can have a higher temperature in one area than at another time. There are practical limits to what a thermocouple can reliably indicate about what it is measuring other than the temperature at one location.


    How well does a barbecue thermometer represent the temperature of the barbecue interior? If it reads higher one day at the same gas setting, is that evidence of LENR?

    • Official Post
    Quote from Paradigmnoia

    Even those who believe LENR is possible should shun and “shred as useless” single point thermometry as a substitute for calorimetry. Temperature is not heat.


    Thermocouples are incredibly useful, and a fairly reliable instrument, but there a lot of ways something can have a higher temperature in one area than at another time. There are practical limits to what a thermocouple can reliably indicate about what it is measuring other than the temperature at one location.


    How well does a barbecue thermometer represent the temperature of the barbecue interior? If it reads higher one day at the same gas setting, is that evidence of LENR?

    I meant in the context of the Google Team request of finding an experiment. Of course this calorimetry is insufficient and Pharkomov routinely makes the same mistake, I hope he gets around to do a good calorimetry, however his analytical results are far more interesting for me at this time.