The recent post from RobertBryant appears to complain that some of the words "is an invention of NEPS rather than of Sears and Zemansky", whereas what was written by NEPS is actually consistent with what is stated in the text. Clearly, the force on a charged particle in electric (E) and magnetic (B) fields is given by: F = q (E + v X B).
Randy Davis Patents/Marathon, and New Energy Power Systems
-
-
Clearly, the force on a charged particle in electric (E) and magnetic (B) fields is given by: F = q (E + v X B)
These words are not in contention. F = q (E + v X B) is in most school physics textbooks
It is these words that are contentious
""Due to symmetry of the circular magnetic field lines, a point charge (e.g., a second deuterium ion) lying on the line of the velocity should not be deflected."
these words are not in Sears and Zemansky. and are an invention of NEPS
These are words of a humble genius.. Can NEPS please take credit for them?
-
The field of the magnetic moment is >>>>> than the field produced by the relative movement....
-
As part of item “b” (inner workings of gaseous cold fusion systems), the use of microwaves was mentioned as a possible method during start-up to enable ions to move between the anode and cathode. A microwave antenna (or coupler) would be used to irradiate the volume of hydrogen and/or deuterium gas between the anode and cathode with (e.g. 2.54 gigahertz) microwave radiation, so as to increase the electron to gas molecule collision frequency, partially ionizing the gas and enabling polarized movement of gas ions toward the cathode. Reference “The Large Volume Microwave Plasma Generator: A New Tool for Research and Industrial Processing,” by R.G. Bosisio, Journal of Microwave Power, vol.7. no.4, 1972, and “Microwave Discharges: Generation and Diagnosis,” by Yu.A. Lebedev, 25th Summer School and International Symposium on the Physics of Ionized Gases (SPIG 2010), Journal of Physics: Conference Series 257 (2010), January 2010.
-
Now consider item “j”, the need for sufficient number of reaction sites in the cathode, i.e., from the above list of system concepts/parameters. (Readers continue to be encouraged to suggest their own “one liner" engineering concepts/parameters.) Deuterium and/or hydrogen flux (the number of atoms per unit area per second) through reaction material in the cathode is affected by drift due to an electric field and diffusion due to a temperature gradient. An electric field is produced by a potential (e.g., 1000 volts, direct current) supplied between the anode and cathode, but is reduced in magnitude within the reaction material, in the same manner as for dielectrics used in capacitors. The electric field in the reaction material is expected to decrease with loading. The temperature gradient is produced by heating one of the cathode surfaces and cooling the other surface. Another consideration is that some deuterium or hydrogen can be expected to leak out of the cathode, and the amount of loading achieved will depend to a large extent on how well leakage can be prevented. The localized concentration of deuterium or hydrogen can, therefore, be expected to move about in the reaction material, and reaction rate will not be uniform across the volume of the reaction material (or the cathode). As a result, a long cathode with a large surface area is expected to be much better than a thick one.
-
For item j , some related technical references are, for example: “Hydrogen in Metals II, Application Oriented Properties,” by G. Alefeld and J. Volkl (ed), Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1978. See pages 166-169 and 180-182 in paper on “Metal-Hydrogen Systems at High Pressures,” by B. Baranowski, and pages 274-5, 277, and 300 in paper on “Electro- and Thermotransport of Hydrogen in Metals,” by H. Wipf; and, “Fast Ion Transport in Solids,” by W. van Gool (ed), North Holland Publishing Company, 1973. See pages 249-262 in paper on “Cation Diffusion and Conductivity in Solid Electrolytes,” by Ryoichi Kikuchi.
-
With regard to (WRT) item “j” on sufficient reaction sites in the cathode, another important consideration is that helium produced by the cold fusion process must be able to be extracted, or at least leak out, for a practical industrial system. This will probably be necessary to allow additional hydrogen and/or deuterium to be added. Cold fusion scientists have been able since the early 1990s to demonstrate experimentally that 0.6 x 1012 to 4 x 1012 helium atoms produced per second correlate with a watt of excess power (ref. “Correlation of Excess Power and Helium Production during D2O and H2O Electrolysis using Palladium Cathodes,” by M.H. Miles et al., Journal of Electroanalytical Chemistry, vol. 346, page 99+, 1993; and “Correlation of Excess Enthalpy and Helium-4 Production: A Review,” by M.H. Miles, 10th International Conference of Cold Fusion, 2003). Additional amounts of helium may have been produced but not measured if trapped inside their cathodes. Another consideration is that cooling mentioned above for one of the cathode surfaces must be controlled accurately so that the cathode is not cooled below its Debye temperature.
-
the cathode surfaces must be controlled accurately
NASA LCF "hot and cold fusion"
This leads me to understand, NASA Bushnell 2016
work on thermal management is ongoing
Now I understand this means 'in system' on a perhaps on a nano scale, including engineering thermal gradients as in a thermoelectric service's substrates.
-
Consider
What if helium plays a role in reaction sequences somewhere along the line of nano atomic events?
Hydrogen is considered...
Why not
Metallic Helium?
Ultra dense Helium?
Odd short lived Isotopes or crystalline forms of helium perhaps?
A layman's ponderigs...
Superfluid Helium-3 Has a Metallic Partner - Science
by M Rice · 2004 · Cited by 18 — In an experimental tour de force, the authors confirm that this ruthenate metal is the long-sought metallic analog of superfluid helium-3 (3He) In a superconductor, electron pairs move through the material without encountering any electrical resistance. The electrons move both as a pair and relative to each other.
-
The above post posits an idea for practical industrial systems that helium-4 and helium-3 produced by the cold fusion process must be able to be extracted from, or at least leak out of, the cathode, enabling the system to operate for much greater periods of time than systems where helium is not removed. Systems that produce kilowatts of energy must enable greater than 1016 nuclear reactions per second, assuming that each reaction nets several MeVs. Helium gas molecules can be anticipated to be produced at approximately this rate. Helium permeable materials (zirconia, fused silica and silica glass) have been investigated in other applications to enable extraction and recovery of helium from a mixture including other gases, such as hydrogen and deuterium. Sufficiently high diffusion rates are possible due to helium’s small, monoatomic molecule diameter. Reference, for example, “The Diffusion of Hydrogen and Helium through Silica Glass and Other Glasses,” by G.S. Williams and J.B. Ferguson, Journal of the American Chemical Society, vol. 44, pages 2160-2167 (1922), that discusses gas permeability through these materials versus its pressure and temperature.
-
About 2 x 1017 helium atoms per second might be anticipated from 200 kW. These need to be removed so that additional hydrogen and/or deuterium gas can be added, and operation of the system continued for long periods of time. A year of continuous operation at 2 x 1017 nuclear reactions per second would produce 6 x 1024 helium atoms (10 moles) that occupy about 200 liters at standard temperature and pressure. A capability to remove incremental and pre-determined quantities of helium might also help balance pressure-related, variable operating conditions within the reactor. Helium is also an irreplaceable natural resource of limited extent. Collection and storage of helium can result in a profitable resource due to its commercial uses.
-
WRT item “j”, (need for sufficient number of reaction sites), it is also necessary to consider the different “types” of nuclear reactions that might be possible in the cathode, along with their individual probabilities. For example, some cold fusion researchers have assumed that helium and energy produced may be due to lithium in the electrolyte of liquid electrolysis experiments. The idea is that the helium and energy could be from neutrons (or protons neutralized with electrons) transmuting lithium into beryllium that then could break apart into helium. Otherwise, at least nine (9) different reactions need to be considered as potentially operative in a cold fusion generator. The (p, d) fusion reaction is a commonly recognized step in the proton-proton solar fuel cycle. Energy is provided by gamma radiation developed in forming helium-3. Then, (d,d) fusion can be described by three competing paths producing energy along with protons, neutrons, tritium, helium-3 and helium-4. The (d, T) fusion reaction produces energy along with neutrons and helium-4. Gamma radiation with energy greater than 2.22 MeV from these fusion reactions can cause deuterium to disintegrate back into protons and neutrons. Neutron capture by protons (e.g., in hydrogen gas or water) can produce deuterons and gamma radiation. Neutron scattering from deuterium, by comparison, has a low probability for neutron absorption. Neutron velocity can be moderated in the scattering process. And, neutron absorption in helium-3 can produce energy along with tritium and protons.
-
The (p, d) fusion reaction is a commonly recognized step in the proton-proton solar fuel cycle. Energy is provided by gamma radiation developed in forming helium-3. Then, (d,d) fusion can be described by three competing paths producing energy along with protons, neutrons, tritium, helium-3 and helium-4. The (d, T) fusion reaction produces energy along with neutrons and helium-4. Gamma radiation with energy greater than 2.22 MeV from these fusion reactions can cause deuterium to disintegrate back into protons and neutrons.
The postulated solar cycle is based on high energy kinetic collision..Hot fusion
Cold fusion reactions show little evidence of significant 2.2 Mev Gamma photons ..or neutrons.
there is no 'ash' as they sayand they expect from a supposedly 'hot' fire.
Attempts to explain cold fusion with hot fusion thinking have failed repeatedly..
-
A reason for including the (p, d) reaction is that it should occur more easily in a cold fusion environment than (d, d) reactions. This is discussed in "Radiative Proton-Capture Nuclear Processes in Metallic Hydrogen," by Setauo Ichimaru, Physics of Plasmas, vol. 8, no.10, pages 4284-4291, October 2001.
-
A reviewer indicated above that in cold fusion experiments there was "little evidence of significant 2.2 Mev Gamma photons ..or neutrons". Gamma rays with an energy of 2.22 MeV could be expected from (n, p) reactions, i.e., from neutron capture by protons (e.g., in hydrogen gas or water). But, heavy water used in cold fusion experiments is also a neutron moderator for some other applications. Neutrons, if they were produced by (d, d) fusion, might have been slowed down or moderated by heavy water near the center of the cold fusion experiments. The lower-velocity neutrons may not have been able to traverse the internal container containing heavy water to reach water (H2O, containing protons) in the calorimeter.
-
This is discussed in "Radiative Proton-Capture Nuclear Processes in Metallic Hydrogen," by Setauo Ichimaru, Physics of Plasmas, vol. 8, no.10, pages 4284-4291, October 2001.
dinosaur stuff from a colliision scientist not "new energy"
Setsuo Ichimaru wrote in 1991
"The nuclear fusion rates may reach a power production level on the order of kW/cm 3 at a temperature and a mass density of 600 K (550 K) and 3.9 g/cm 3 (6.8 g/cm 3 ) for D-H (Li-H). The detection of such a nuclear reaction at a density near 2-4 g/cm 3 will make a first laboratory demonstration for the reaction processes in supernova."
stiil waiting for 31 years after 1991 for that lab demo.
Setauo
zero relevance for LENR.. copy and paste in error
-
zero relevance for LENR
I am certainly considering disagreeing with you on this important point.
Collision scientist thinking.
On a nano scale?
Why belabor your view?
Every relevant aspect of an atomic energy event in the lattice is relevant... an atom is a lattice of course. No?
-
zero relevance for LENR
Ichimaru2001
"Protons being the lightest nuclei, metallic hydrogen may exhibit the features of quantum liquids most relevant to enormous enhancement of nuclear reactions; thermonuclear and pycnonuclear rates and associated enhancement factors of radiative proton captures of high-Z nuclei as well as of deuterons are evaluated. Atomic states of high-Z impurities are determined in a way consistent with the equations of state and screening characteristics of the metallic hydrogen. Rates of pycnonuclear p-d reactions are prodigiously high at densities ⩾20 g/cm3, pressures ⩾1 Gbar, and temperatures ⩾950 K near the conditions of solidification. It is also predicted that proton captures of nuclei such as C, N, O, and F may take place at considerable rates, owing to strong screening by K-shell electrons, if the densities ⩾60–80 g/cm3, the pressures ⩾7–12 Gbar, and the temperatures just above solidification. The possibilities and significance of pycnonuclear p-d fusion experiments are specifically remarked.
"the pressures ⩾7–12 Gbar, and the temperatures just above solidification. "
Is there a lattice? Is 7-12 Gbar realisable for a LENR reactor?
-
NEPS*NewEnergy unfortunately these are all circular arguments with well-known physics parameters. Please read @Wyttenbach's new S(O)4 physics articles and patents to gain a deeper understanding of exactly what we are up against.
-
A recent post (#234) indicated that "A reason for including the (p, d) reaction is that it should occur more easily in a cold fusion environment than (d, d) reactions. This is discussed in "Radiative Proton-Capture Nuclear Processes in Metallic Hydrogen," by Setauo Ichimaru, Physics of Plasmas, vol. 8, no.10, pages 4284-4291, October 2001." This was followed by another post (#238) that indicated "owing to strong screening by K-shell electrons, if the densities ⩾60–80 g/cm3, the pressures ⩾7–12 Gbar, and the temperatures just above solidification." Please note that such high densities and pressures might not be required if screening were caused for other reasons, such as what is described in “A Theoretical Model for Low-Energy Nuclear Reactions,” by K.P. Sinha, Infinite Energy, vol. 29, pages 54-57, January/February 2000.
