NASA’s updated Lattice Assisted Nuclear Fusion revamped site (Have Fleischmann and Pons been finally vindicated?)

  • On November 18, at the seminar "Klimov-Zatelepin" an overview report of Anatoly Ivanovich Klimov was presented

    Video recording of the webinar Klimov Zatelepina №1 autumn session of 18 November 2020. - https://us02web.zoom.us/rec/pl…1e091ee2&_x_zm_rhtaid=545

    In the wake of Anatoly Ivanovich Klimov's speech, my article appeared in Russian -

    NASA discovered thermonuclear fusion of gratings - https://cloud.mail.ru/public/2tr9/5etECot3M

    NASA discovered fusion of gratings - https://drive.google.com/file/…av-gFdsE/view?usp=sharing

    In it, I express my critical remarks.


    edit by Curbina: moved this post here from a new thread, no need for opening new threads on this subject.

    • Official Post

    Published 20 dec 2020,

    81,000 views 2020 12 25


    External Content www.youtube.com
    Content embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.
    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.


    Lattice Confinement Fusion was recently announced by NASA's Glenn research Centre.

    It looks like there's more than one way to get at the problem of Fusion.

    When scientists saturated metal with Deuterons and bombarded them with Gamma Rays, they found two types nuclear reactions occuring.

    • Official Post

    I have been posting comments on some of the videos of that channel since the past week, but had not seen this Lattice confinement fusion video, thanks for posting it David Nygren . The owner of the Channel is skeptic of ITER so it’s a good place to have an open discussion and increase awareness. I have posted a comment asking the channel to cover the work of Leif Holmlid, they are not ready for LENR just yet, the idea of Ultra-dense hydrogen might be easier to digest.

  • At 2:57 an interesting (NASA) statement was emphesized: density of absorbed Deuterium higher than solid D.
    This could be another indicator that Ultra Dense Deuterium is formed within the Erbium lattice.

    I would be very much surprised if Lawrence Forsley (NASA) is not aware of Holmlid´s work.

    • Official Post

    At 2:57 an interesting (NASA) statement was emphesized: density of absorbed Deuterium higher than solid D.
    This could be another indicator that Ultra Dense Deuterium is formed within the Erbium lattice.

    I would be very much surprised if Lawrence Forsley (NASA) is not aware of Holmlid´s work.

    It is indeed mentioned, but also rapidly the narrator puts some doubts about it. In the comments section some comments also dismiss the notion.

    • Official Post

    Forsley et al. are aware from 2009 with no consequences

    Much thanks for bringing this to our attention. Had no idea Holmlid had collaborated with both Miley and Forsley. This was even published, and reading the paper you can see where Forsley got the idea of the high density attained in the lattice (the quote of Forsley on the Tech for luddites video).


    https://www.researchgate.net/p…U5KfyWgVhLKsDmyECw&_iepl=

    • Official Post

    Forsley et al. are aware from 2009 with no consequences

    I would disagree with the “no consequences”. Forsley clearly mentions a high density of Deuterium Can be formed in the lattice, and that notion might have its roots in the collaboration with Holmlid. The 2009 paper of Holmlid, Miley and Yang talks about 1029clusters /cm3, Miley and Yang published the same year a paper where they talked about achieving 1024 clusters/cm3 so I think they got some influence after all, even if they parted ways since their collaboration with Holmlid, it left a mark.

    • Official Post

    NASA has been adding new papers in the "publications" section of the Lattice Confinement Fusion Project (all of them very interesting, so, highly recommended to go take a look), but there's one that IMHO could be taken as a sort of independent confirmation of Holmlid's work of generating fusion with a Laser:


    https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/cita…downloads/20170002584.pdf


    Experimental Observations of Nuclear Activity in Deuterated Materials Subjected to a Low-Energy Photon Beam


    Summary Exposure of highly deuterated materials to a low-energy (nom. 2 MeV) photon beam resulted in nuclear activity of both the parent metals of hafnium and erbium and a witness material (molybdenum) mixed with the reactants. Gamma spectral analysis of all deuterated materials, ErD2.8+C36D74+Mo and HfD2+C36D74+Mo, showed that nuclear processes had occurred as shown by unique gamma signatures. For the deuterated erbium specimens, posttest gamma spectra showed evidence of radioisotopes of erbium (163Er and 171Er) and of molybdenum (99Mo and 101Mo) and by beta decay, technetium (99mTc and 101Tc). For the deuterated hafnium specimens, posttest gamma spectra showed evidence of radioisotopes of hafnium (180mHf and 181Hf) and molybdenum (99Mo and 101Mo), and by beta decay, technetium (99mTc and 101Tc). In contrast, when either the hydrogenated or non-gas-loaded erbium or hafnium materials were exposed to the gamma flux, the gamma spectra revealed no new isotopes. Neutron activation materials showed evidence of thermal and epithermal neutrons. CR–39 solid-state nuclear track detectors showed evidence of fast neutrons with energies between 1.4 and 2.5 MeV and several instances of triple tracks, indicating >10 MeV neutrons. Further study is required to determine the mechanism causing the nuclear activity.


    I am a bit speechless that NASA is going "full monty" with these results. This is IMHO excellent news for the LENR field.

  • NASA has been adding new papers in the "publications" section of the Lattice Confinement Fusion Project (all of them very interesting, so, highly recommended to go take a look), but there's one that IMHO could be taken as a sort of independent confirmation of Holmlid's work of generating fusion with a Laser

    NASA does not mention Ultra Dense Deuterium however.
    You could be right that there is a correlation with Holmlid´s work, but it´s not directly shown in this NASA paper IMHO.

    Ultra Dense Hydrogen could be formed at the surface of Deuterated metals in case there is an equilibrium of Deuterium that is absorbed and desorbed simultaneously.


    I am a bit speechless that NASA is going "full monty" with these results. This is IMHO excellent news for the LENR field.

    NASA spends quite a bit of US tax money. Isn´t that why results are made public?

    • Official Post

    NASA does not mention Ultra Dense Deuterium however.
    You could be right that there is a correlation with Holmlid´s work, but it´s not directly shown in this NASA paper IMHO.

    Ultra Dense Hydrogen could be formed at the surface of Deuterated metals in case there is an equilibrium of Deuterium that is absorbed and desorbed simultaneously.


    NASA spends quite a bit of US tax money. Isn´t that why results are made public?

    Rob Woudenberg , you are correct UDD is not expressly called, but Forsley has said in interviews that the densities reached by the deuterium in the lattice is superior to the density of metallic hydrogen and also, Forsley knows about the concept at least since 2009 (he was con author of Holmlid and also of Miley that year in papers that talked about ultra dense hydrogen in metallic lattices as a way to create nuclear fuel for fusion). This is a connection that Ahlfors showed to us recently in some of his comments.


    Now, what surprises me is not the publication per se, but the acknowledgment that nuclear reactions can happen in a way completely ignored by mainstream, in other words, they are confirming LENR openly.

  • Now, what surprises me is not the publication per se, but the acknowledgment that nuclear reactions can happen in a way completely ignored by mainstream, in other words, they are confirming LENR openly.

    It will only become mainstream once a real certified commercial application will become available.

    We have seen this with so many other examples, e.g. the start of Internet (around 1994), the start of cryptocurrencies (around 2009). Only insiders could see the potential, but it takes many years to mature to a wider audience.


    With LENR we are not even at the start of the hype cycle.

    Be patient and invest timely :)

  • That's deuterium and unstable elements for you!

    NASA does not mention Ultra Dense Deuterium however.
    You could be right that there is a correlation with Holmlid´s work, but it´s not directly shown in this NASA paper IMHO.

    Ultra Dense Hydrogen could be formed at the surface of Deuterated metals in case there is an equilibrium of Deuterium that is absorbed and desorbed simultaneously.


    NASA spends quite a bit of US tax money. Isn´t that why results are made public?

    This particular less widespread isotope of hydrogen produces more genuine nuclear events including gamma and high energy neutrons than regular protium based systems. At least that's the pattern I'm getting from research papers. Wasn't there a Japanese one clearly stating the differences of the result between protium (regular hydrogen) and deuterium in reactor tests. I would suspect protium based set up would have significantly different results, heat, current and light, and that is the source many would prefer. Protium should still induce beta decay without proton capture etc. The stuff in most methane, water and ammonia you know! Would presume some of the neutrons are miscalculated atomic dense hydrogen either way?

  • That's deuterium and unstable elements for you!

    This particular less widespread isotope of hydrogen produces more genuine nuclear events including gamma and high energy neutrons than regular protium based systems. At least that's the pattern I'm getting from research papers. Wasn't there a Japanese one clearly stating the differences of the result between protium (regular hydrogen) and deuterium in reactor tests. I would suspect protium based set up would have significantly different results, heat, current and light, and that is the source many would prefer. Protium should still induce beta decay without proton capture etc. The stuff in most methane, water and ammonia you know! Would presume some of the neutrons are miscalculated atomic dense hydrogen either way?

    You may have missed the points made by Curbina and myself.
    This is not about ordinary Deuterium or Protium but the dense form of (in particular) Deuterium. This is what Holmlid´s work is about.


    Deuterium is often key in many LENR papers because the ultra dense form of Deuterium (when triggered) allows for the release of high energy particles that could cause transmutations and/or muon catalysed D-D fusion. Transmutations may also be caused by the high energy neutrons released from D-D fusion.

  • Wasn't there a Japanese one clearly stating the differences of the result between protium (regular hydrogen) and deuterium in reactor tests.

    You probably refer to the Japanese NEDO project. (requires a ResearchGate account and login).

    In particular this publication (accessible without account, without using VPN).


    Takahashi et al paper, submittal to Proceedings of JCF20 of JCFRS, 2020 1 Enhancement of Excess Thermal Power in Interaction of Nano-Metal and H(D)-Gas

    (PDF) Enhancement of Excess Thermal Power in Interaction of Nano-Metal and H(D)-Gas. Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/p…_of_Nano-Metal_and_HD-Gas [accessed Jan 11 2021].

  • You probably refer to the Japanese NEDO project. (requires a ResearchGate account and login).

    In particular this publication (accessible without account, without using VPN).


    Takahashi et al paper, submittal to Proceedings of JCF20 of JCFRS, 2020 1 Enhancement of Excess Thermal Power in Interaction of Nano-Metal and H(D)-Gas

    (PDF) Enhancement of Excess Thermal Power in Interaction of Nano-Metal and H(D)-Gas. Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/p…_of_Nano-Metal_and_HD-Gas [accessed Jan 11 2021].

    Ok thanks, that is it now! Ancient truths ever true.

    • Official Post

    Dr. Robitaille (Sky Scholar) references V.Pines paper and links lattice-assisted reactions to Sun

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

  • Tech for Luddites

    106K subscribers


    NASA Scientists recently discovered a way to conduct Fusion that bears some resemblance to the Cold Fusion Experiments of 1989. Is this the real thing, or another hoax?

    Quote

    "Solid Deuterium.... "
    "Unlimited space travel... "
    "Continuous high impulse thrust to the Stars... "
    -end quotes
    "Did NASA Just Discover Clean Unlimited Energy?" YouTube Dec. 20 2020

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



    Hmmmm...

    Just discovered?
    Credit goes elsewhere IMHO!

    http://disq.us/p/2ehua6k

    also

    http://disq.us/p/2ehj03w

  • The latest paper posted by the JWK/SPAWAR GEC/NASA PineScie LENR energy tech group at the Glenn Research Center Lattice Confinement Fusion project. This seems to be the only energy project at play at GRC.

    Not sure if this provides real time neutron spectroscopy for control or if this simply provides needed improvement for experiment analysis.

    The authors include Gustav Fralick (LENR expert) theoreticians from PineScie essential to the Advanced Energy Conversion Project for reactor design and a new company, HX5.

    From their website: http://hxfive.com/about

    Quote- History

    HX5, LLC (an ISO 9001:2015 Certified Company) has specialized in providing professional support services to meet the needs of Federal Government organizations since its incorporation in 2004. We have earned an outstanding reputation for providing exceptional quality and customer service to our customers, which include the Army, Navy, Air Force, NASA, and General Services Administration.

    Our employees are well-educated, experienced, and trained. HX5 has been entrusted by Government customers to support Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E) Projects; Weather Operations; Software and Hardware Engineering; Information Technology (IT); Missions Operations Support; and Program Management and Logistics.

    HX5 is a Service-Disabled Veteran, Woman-Owned Small Business (SDVOSB, WOSB) currently performing across 32 states and 60 government locations, including Alaska and Hawaii. -end quotes Also note HX5 Performance http://hxfive.com/performance

    It is also interesting to see C.E. Sandifer II as author. He has been an executive at Global Energy Corporation for years. Now he seems to be an employee of Glenn Research Center. Anyways it's the first time seeing him listed. Lawrence Forsley often lists himself as being with JWK or GEC and infrequently as being with NASA. Not sure what to make of it yet.


    The Paper


    "Fast Neutron Spectroscopy With Organic Scintillation Detectors in a High-Radiation Environment" December 2020 NASA/TM-20205008493

    https://www1.grc.nasa.gov/wp-c…-High-Radiation-Field.pdf

    B. Baramsai - HX5, LLC, Brook Park, Ohio

    B.M. Steinetz - Glenn Research Center, Cleveland, Ohio

    L. Forsley - JWK Corporation, Annandale, Virginia

    R.E. Martin - Cleveland State University, Cleveland, Ohio

    P.B. Ugorowski and M.D. Becks - HX5, LLC, Brook Park, Ohio

    T.L. Benyo, A. Chait, R.C. Hendricks, and G.C. Fralick - Glenn Research Center, Cleveland, Ohio

    N. Penney - Ohio Aerospace Institute, Brook Park, Ohio

    V. Pines and M. Pines - PineSci Consulting, Avon Lake, Ohio

    C.E. Sandifer II - Glenn Research Center, Cleveland, Ohio

    Abstract Organic scintillators with pulse shape discrimination capability are widely used in both research and practical applications of neutron detection. The neutron and γ-ray identification performance of the detector depends on the classification algorithms, noise filters and pileup rejection criteria in a high-flux bremsstrahlung radiation environment. In this paper, a technique has been developed and implemented for the neutron detection with multiple filter and discrimination steps, which to a high confidence level eliminates counting of γ-ray pulses. Such a technique is merited when making measurements in a high-flux bremsstrahlung and secondary fluorescence environment. The EJ-309 and stilbene detectors coupled to the digital data acquisition system were used for the calibration assessments with standard γ-ray and neutron sources such as 137Cs, 60Co, 252Cf, and Am-Be. The MCNPX-PoliMi and GEANT4 toolkits were used to simulate the light output and the optical photon transport in the scintillators and create detector response functions for each type of detector. The neutron spectrum unfolding algorithm, GRAVELW, was used to recreate and calibrate with the Am-Be as the final step before applying the neutron detection system to extract fusion neutron spectra generated in an intense bremsstrahlung radiation environment. This new technique described offers the user the ability to measure neutron spectra in a high-flux γ-ray field and tune the parameters to meet required filtering needs.

    Acknowledgments

    The authors gratefully acknowledge the assistance of many people that supported this effort: IBA Industrial, Inc., for providing beam time and generous technical support and consultation; Dr. Christopher Daniels for Statistical support and consultation; Dr. Chuck Hurlbut (Eljen) and Mr. George Murray and Dr. Candace Lynch (Inrad Optics) for neutron spectrometer technical consultation; Jenice Budner and staff at Frontier Technology Corporation for providing extensive access to their 252Cf test sources. We gratefully acknowledge input and stimulating discussions from Dr. Matthew Forsbacka (NASA HQ), Dr. Christopher Iannello (NASA KSC), Dr. Ron Litchford (NASA MSFC), Dr. John Scott (NASA JSC), as well as Mr. Leonard Dudzinski (Planetary Sciences Division, NASA HQ). We are also grateful for Ms. Laura Becker’s patient editorial attention, and Ms. Lorie Passe’s careful manuscript preparation. Funding for this work was provided by NASA Headquarters Planetary Sciences Division, Science Mission Directorate.