Randy Davis Patents/Marathon, and New Energy Power Systems

Quote from NEPS*NewEnergy

Posts #116 and 117 are interested in the term "lochon".

This term is explained as follows in "A Theoretical Model for Low-Energy Nuclear Reactions in a Solid Matrix," published in Infinite Energy Magazine: The central idea of the model is that an electron, or electron pairs, located on the proton or deuteron and interacting with high frequency modes of the solid material (phonons or ionic plasmons) can acquire heavy effective mass, and the corresponding atoms or ions are squeezed to much smaller size. Such tightly bound electron pairs will have integral spin (S=0) and behave like local charged bosons (acronym "lochons"). The small ions can be called bosonic ions and the composite boson (electron pair) can pull towards it another proton or deuteron, overcoming Coulomb barrier and taking advantage of the attractive nuclear forces leading to fusion.

Nice how you connect the past to the present, bringing it all together in the Mallove tradition.

Hopefully our members are taking notice of what you say.

Professor Sinha's technical background is highly important: Dr. Krityunjai Prasad (K.P.) Sinha received an M.Sc. from Allahabad University in 1950, a Ph.D.in Solid-State Physics in 1956 from Poona University, and a Ph.D. in Theoretical Physics in 1959 from Bristol University in the U.K. He began his career as a scientist at the National Chemical Laboratory in Pune, India in 1959. From 1969 to 1970, he was a member of the technical staff at Bell Laboratories, Murry Hill, New Jersey. From 1970 to 1989, he began his stay at the Indian Institute of Science as Senior Professor in the Physics Department. In 1990, Sinha became a senior scientist with the INSA for four years. From 1991 to 1994, he served as the Director of the Institute on Complex Systems, located in Shilling, India. Sinha is the recipient of numerous honors and awards. He is author of over 225 papers and books. He established schools of research activity in condensed matter, theoretical studies and complex systems at many institutions in India.

Leif Holmlid's work has shown (in Rydberg Matter) that equal negative and positive muons are created in his experimental set-up. Harnessing -muons purely for generating LENR's has been the technical problem - which one hopes will be solved by the remnants of Norront Fusion.

It may be helpful if we stepped back a moment to discuss our conventional view of nuclear reactions, as this seems to differ a little from some recent writings by others attempting to explain cold fusion. Physics books that discuss nuclear particle scattering go through steps of elastic scattering, inelastic scattering, exchange reactions, and capture, with each assumed to involve higher and higher energy of the incident particle. Deuterons are viewed as loose structures (low binding energy) with internal and external regions. We view d-d reactions that produce He3 and T3 as examples of exchange reactions, but a d-d reaction that produces He4 as an example of capture reactions. A p-d reaction that produces He3 is considered as an example of capture reactions, but is also considered a “radiative transition”. We, therefore, think that “fragmentation” sometimes used in the literature is just a way of describing d-d exchange reactions that strip a neutron or proton away to produce He3 and T3, not as fragmentation of He4 already formed. In this case, energy of the incoming, incident deuteron is not quite high enough for us to consider it as a capture type of reaction. A nucleus (such as He4) formed in an excited state (e.g., due to energy of the incoming deuteron and mass difference between the nucleus and the incoming deuterons), can transition to a lower energy state by emitting gamma rays and also by transferring some of its energy to electrons surrounding the nucleus. Gamma radiation is not produced with high probability in the case of He4 formed by d-d fusion. The transition to a lower state is then connected with the ejection of an electron or electrons from a bound orbit in a process of “internal conversion”. The total transition probability to a lower energy state is the sum of the probability for emitting gamma rays and the probability for internal conversion. Internal conversion is discussed on pages 614-622 of “Theoretical Nuclear Physics” by Blatt and Weisskopf, John Wiley and Sons, 1952, and pages 122-135 of “Elements of Nuclear Physics,” by Meyerhof, McGraw-Hill, 1967. We, therefore, think that p+d +(e) à He3 + (e) found several times in cold fusion literature since 2004, and called “solid state internal conversion”, should not be used as an example of internal conversion. The effect of near-by electrons should not be confused with internal conversion (see a similar comment in “Observation of Electron Emission in the Nuclear Reaction Between Protons and Deuterons,” by M. Lipoglavsek et al., Physics Letters B, vol. 773, pages 553-556, 2017).

This discussion is critically important as only eight (8) years are available to develop a robust energy solution to global warming/climate change. The drop-dead date is 2032 (see “As Climate Change Worsens, A Cascade of Tipping Points Looms,” by Fred Pearce, Yale Environment 360, December 5, 2019. Commercial cold fusion systems may be the only realistic option since nuclear power plants are very expensive to build and operate. Nuclear fission plants are also not acceptable due to radioactive pollution they produce. Hot fusion cannot be seriously considered since it is many decades from being commercialized. For commercial systems to be developed in this short time, scientists in this community must be more willing to collaborate and become part of engineering development efforts within their countries. Rather than continuing solely with individual laboratory research efforts, the scientists must bring their current knowledge into focused systems engineering activities and then perform directed research to address areas supporting engineering processes. Financial support must be provided by national and state governments with greater emphasis on the importance of cold fusion as a solution to climate change. International support can also be expected for the best commercial system concepts.

Information discussed at the recent 23rd International Conference on Condensed Matter Nuclear Science (ICCF-23) in June 2021 has provided even greater encouragement for pursuing the goal of commercialization. In a briefing on “The Nature of the D+D Fusion Reaction in Palladium and Nickel,” Dr. Edmund Storms (previously Los Alamos National Laboratory) verified that deuterium (D) gas loading in gaseous systems can be just as operative as electrolytic loading for liquid systems. This understanding is highly important, as scale-up from liquid electrolysis experiments to industrial systems would be difficult. Liquids produce problems, such as boiling and evaporation of the liquid, build-up of contaminants, and limited operating temperature. Cold fusion reactions are now believed to occur in microscopic crevices and channels of the system’s cathode reaction material. This briefing also showed that the amount of output power can be increased by increasing deuterium diffusion rate into these voids and by increasing temperature of the reaction material with a built-in electric heater. Several scientists discussed positive experimental results using consolidated metal powder as cathode reaction material.

The parallel is striking between the climate crisis and Netflix's movie, "Don't Look Up". After trying unsuccessfully to get U.S. government attention over a large incoming comet, the astronomer shouts on the news channel, "Don't you understand? We're all going to die!!" The key finding of the latest scientific report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Chage (IPCC), "Climate Chage 2021: The Physical Science Basis," August 9, 2021 is that this immediate threat is widespread, rapid and intensifying. The IPCC is the United Nation's body for assessing the science related to climate change. The IPCC report describes changes in the earth's climate in every region of the earth and across the whole climate system. Many changes are unprecedented in thousands, if not hundreds-of-thousands of years. The report points to the need for strong and sustained reductions in emission of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases to limit climate change. Columnist Eugene Robinson writes in "Opinion: The U.N.'s Dire Climate Report Confirms: We're Out of Time," (The Washington Post, August 9, 2021): "We're out of time. It's as simple as that.... If the world immediately takes bold, coordinated action to curb climate change, we face a future of punishing heat waves, deadly wildfires and devastating floods - and that's the optimistic scenario, according to an alarming new U.N. report. If, on the other hand, we continue down the road of half-measures and denial that we've been stuck on since scientists first raised the alarm, the hellscape we leave to our grandchildren will be unrecognizable."

Quote from NEPS*NewEnergy

The parallel is striking between the climate crisis and Netflix's movie, "Don't Look Up". After trying unsuccessfully to get U.S. government attention over a large incoming comet, the astronomer shouts on the news channel, "Don't you understand? We're all going to die!!" The key finding of the latest scientific report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Chage (IPCC), "Climate Chage 2021: The Physical Science Basis," August 9, 2021 is that this immediate threat is widespread, rapid and intensifying. The IPCC is the United Nation's body for assessing the science related to climate change. The IPCC report describes changes in the earth's climate in every region of the earth and across the whole climate system. Many changes are unprecedented in thousands, if not hundreds-of-thousands of years. The report points to the need for strong and sustained reductions in emission of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases to limit climate change. Columnist Eugene Robinson writes in "Opinion: The U.N.'s Dire Climate Report Confirms: We're Out of Time," (The Washington Post, August 9, 2021): "We're out of time. It's as simple as that.... If the world immediately takes bold, coordinated action to curb climate change, we face a future of punishing heat waves, deadly wildfires and devastating floods - and that's the optimistic scenario, according to an alarming new U.N. report. If, on the other hand, we continue down the road of half-measures and denial that we've been stuck on since scientists first raised the alarm, the hellscape we leave to our grandchildren will be unrecognizable."

Hello NEPS*NewEnergy , I am just returning to the forum slowly after Covid took me out of combat for almost a full month, but I need to remind you of our forum policy that is being breached here: we avoid global warming discussion at LENR-Forum, as it is a topic too loaded with politics. I know you mean well but please focus on the LENR science side of things, we all know that it is much needed.

Also thanks for your interesting inputs.

Quote from Curbina

we avoid global warming discussion at LENR-Forum, as it is a topic too loaded with politics.

We do LENR research to stop global warming....This is not so political but costs $$$$$.

Cold fusion looks like the best option to address climate change. But this will require significant government support in rapid program development, much like the Manhattan Project (though not as technically complex). The development process must focus upon new energy concepts that are different from those for nuclear fission, and many areas of expertise are involved. It requires scientists and engineers with advanced knowledge and understanding of physics and engineering and committed to further innovation. Industrial partners will be technically advanced research and development companies, highly interested in solving the climate crisis and committed to advancing scientific discovery and technical innovation. Many technical companies and institutions today, by comparison, are specialized and limited in the required areas of expertise. A type of large, joint development program will be required to integrate work of the team members. The program can begin with previously discussed system concepts and parameters, e.g.:

- scaling-up from liquid electrolysis experiments to industrial systems would be difficult.

- deuterium gas loading in gaseous systems can be just as operative as electrolytic loading for liquid systems.

- the role of microscopic crevices and channels of the system’s cathode reaction material.

- reasons for consolidated metal powder as cathode reaction material.

- the role of deuterium diffusion rate.

- the role of reaction material (cathode) temperature (e.g., from a built-in electric heater).

- the requirement to remove the additional heat produced by cold fusion.

- the need to remove helium produced by cold fusion.

Quote from NEPS*NewEnergy

much like the Manhattan Project

No one considers the Manhattan Project to be a "conspiracy".

It enacted to refine the science of dense nuclear energetics in fission technologies. Over time historians have accessed, analyzed and written about this, the most secretive and largest research and applied engineering effort to date. Interviews with key people were eventually allowed.

The early direct predecessor of the Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA) was charged with developing the Manhattan Project.

I am of the strong opinion that a multi level/under the radar, differently structured, continuously ongoing and well studied... cold fusion manhattan project within the DTRA or perhaps elsewhere within the DoD exists. These agencies would be negligent if they did not lead in advanced market entry in defence and space applications regarding CMNS energy technologies. The DTRA LENR reports show that they know this.

A "no conspiracy hypotheses" of mine... Only future historians will know the whole story.

DTRA Wikipedia

Preceding agencies

•Defense Special Weapons Agency, (1996–1998)

•Defense Nuclear Agency, (1971–1996)

•Defense Atomic Support Agency, (1959–1971)

•Armed Forces Special Weapons Project, (1947–1959)

•Manhattan Project (1942–1946)

If somebody gives you 5 millions for a CF project then you can do 100% useless things like the google P&F like repro. Or you could do somethi8ng very useful?!

But who knows what is useful?

- There is no accepted theory

- There is a lot of guess work from people like Storms with no experimentally proven details

- There are excellent experiments like Swarz&George&Brillouin&Stringham that so far could not convince anybody to heavily invest.

So there is a large mind gap between investors and also among experimenters due to missing theory.

We will try to fill this gap with a 100% reproducible approach and a model we have to refine in parallel. So after this may be CF is ready for takeoff.

But today even with 200 million you would waste at least 199 for people that have no clue of the real model for dense matter physics and the methods that are inadequate.

So to be honest we could need a few 100k$ to enhance the quality of the research but not so much for speeding it up. A Manhatten project simply would not be feasible at the current point in time.

And most important: Money makes you dependent what we don't like at all....

Quote from Wyttenbach

But who knows what is useful?

This is an overview of what is useful. From an engineering perspective you begin with the lattice. Theory is presented as a stepwise process as I understand it, to be used to better design the lattice. Afterwards to explain unknowns... something like that.

The folks I study are already doing this... have been for a number of years now with good success I assume.

Quote from teppo

ARPA-E slides presented by F. Metzler:

"Toward a LENR reference experiment"

External Content m.youtube.com

Content embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.

Display all external content

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.

In saying "in rapid program development, much like the Manhattan Project (though not as technically complex)", the most important factor is how well management can crack the whip. This is possible with very high priority programs, where exceptionally bright people are employed, standard management methods are by-passed, and all work 80-hour weeks.

Wyttenbach

Quote

I am very device-oriented and I do not generate theories of the usual type; a viewpoint that is reflected in this writing. However, from time to time an attempt will be made to generate a theory in order to cover gaps in the observations.

The measurements will always be senior to the theories generated; the theories should be thought of as a railing to guide us from one isolated observation to another,

in the full knowledge that there are any number of railings available for guidance, and not all of them can be real. - end quotes

From a highly recommended reading in its entirety.

Thanks Alan Smith for his posting on the Useful Book Thread, which set me to studying it once again...

Quote from Alan Smith

Ken Shoulders Book on EVO technology.

EV A Tale of Discovery - Kenneth R. Shoulders-OCRs.pdf

Quote from Gregory Byron Goble

The measurements will always be senior to the theories generated;

LENR is a box with about 10 more or less independent variables. Even you do measure 4 you wont get the others as long as you don't understand the connections.

Shoulders is just about smart triggers. But then you need to sustain a reaction, remove the energy, stabilize the energy flux.

Quote from Wyttenbach

LENR is a box with about 10 more or less independent variables.

...excellent description for an interested studied layman like me.

The ARPA-E presentation by F. Metzler discusses paths to understand energetic phenomena sequencies through the lattice system. As I understand it, improved understanding of these individual phenomena is then applied to different materials selected for designing improved nano engineered/constructing of the lattice for improved performance.

Thermal dynamics and thermoelectric phenomena have always interested me as presented by Harold Aspden. I'll post links on the important papers thread when compiled.

Complex set of variables for consideration. Many approaches for additive energetics to the system, and accompanying research data sets to correlate are touched on by Metzler. As

I understand it, fine tune the lattice and understand the various energetics sequences alongside additive energetics changes to/effect on the base system...

Which is lattice energetics and structure.

Previous post indicated the most important factor in a cold fusion program is how well management can crack the whip (as was done in the Manhattan project and some others since then). The Pentagon is the only agency able to do this and serve effectively as program manager. DOE should be involved under the Atomic Energy Act, but (inc. ARPA-E) has a conflict of interest from managing hot fusion. A joint development program will be needed with about three hundred million dollars ($300,000,000), divided between the DOE, DoD and NASA over 5 years. The DoD and, for example, its systems engineering and technical assessments contractor should serve as Program Manager due to its technical insight developed previously. NASA could serve as coordinator with industry and the scientific community for manufacturing and applications development. The DOE could provide quality control and peer review, to include nuclear theory development in support of the program. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) will also need to be involved from a nuclear health and safety standpoint.