Lower than expected H distance in metal hydrides at RT

  • https://phys.org/news/2020-02-…conductivity-ambient.html


    "An important question is whether or not the observed effect is limited specifically to zirconium vanadium hydride," said Andreas Borgschulte, group leader for hydrogen spectroscopy at Empa. "Our calculations for the material—when excluding the Switendick limit—were able to reproduce the peak, supporting the notion that in vanadium hydride, hydrogen-hydrogen pairs with distances below 2.1 angstroms do occur."


    What a (non) surprise. Back in 1989 many articles were published claiming that fusion was impossible because H-H distance cannot be lower than 2.1 A. This is now proven wrong. Though still not enough for fusion to occur, the qualitative limit is broken.


    Not saying that I would love a collaboration between the EMPA an ORNL with Holmlid with their technology applied to UDH. But here I guess I'm dreaming.


    Note: I was not able to locate the original PNAS article. Apparently the press release has been published before the original article.

  • Quote

    Back in 1989 many articles were published claiming that fusion was impossible because H-H distance cannot be lower than 2.1 A



    I guess it was primarily Piantelli's theory, that negative ionization of protons within hydrides contributes to cold fusion. I don't think, it's dominant effect for cold fusion, but it was known at the end of 18th century already, that portion of hydrogen dissolved in palladium wire migrates to anode, once DC current passes through it. It means hydrogen (i.e. protons) dissolved in palladium get negative charge and they're thus attracted closer to atom nuclei in this way.

  • Quote

    The processed constantan wires that Francesco Celani applies also show reduction of resistance as part of the phenomena Celani is reporting.

    It may well be that clusters of atomic H or D inside these wire are in fact superconductive.


    Celani was actually just a bit ahead of high temperatures superconductivity finding in 1986. Francesco Celani started to study Superconducting Tunnel Junctions (Ni-Pb; T=4.2K) and he found intriguing results using thick junctions on 1985. One of these were contaminated (by chance) from several other elements and showed behavior similar to superconductivity even at temperature as large as 77K (Ln2). It was stated a multi-disciplinary commission in order to clarify the origin of this effect. Unfortunately the results were rejected, because in disagreement with the BCS model/theory (for which the max. temperature of superconductivity stated at 32K). One year later Bednorz and Muller (from IBM, Zurich), independently (and starting from different points of view), found similar results in Cuprate oxides mixed with rare-earth metals and got Nobel Prize for it.

  • Was the formation of these compounds deemed exothermic? They probably didn't check, but this has a lot variables that would lead there. An interesting tidbit 😉⚡. In good conscience I must say, are we trying to sooth the egos of the dead F&P and those who have dived head first with all their eggs in the nuclear basket? Are we trying to find the next step up in practical safe energy density, a widely accessible nonintermitent source superior to fossil fuel combustion, regardless of the mechanism? I hope the second option is the answer. I beleive F&P had something exothermic, Thermacore and others had something too. Superconducting affects show up in a lot of tested H+transition metal excess heat phenomina.

  • Research on superconductivity in metallic hydrides is explosive at the moment.


    Paradoxically, I classify H2S as a metal hydride, because at high pressure, sulfur behaves like selenium or tellurium and the other higher chalcogens.


    The Lanthanum decahydride is very interesting: the hydrogen nuclei form sort of "clathrates" in which the protons (or deuterons) are extremely close.


    But the question formerly posed by Giuliano Preparata still remains valid: is superconductivity carried by electrons, or by deuterium?


    https://www.annualreviews.org/…-conmatphys-031218-013413

  • is superconductivity carried byelectrons, or by deuterium


    Cooper pairs (spin paired electrons) are not possible without dense matter interaction and the thus the simple, classic model has failed to fully explain SC (super conduction see also Hirsch).


    The answer is SC needs both electrons and coupling with nuclear structure. There are two situations. Large clusters with electron spin paired so called 1FC SO(4) orbits that merge to larger orbits and also explains why magnetic flux cannot enter. In dense Hydrogen (UDH) we can also have nuclear waves that share the same orbit structure but this is a special case and leads to fusion as seen in Holmlids experiments...