Frank Gordon's "Lattice Energy Converter (LEC)"...replicators workshop

  • Stevenson is asking a good question with regard to the separation distance and the short answer is "no" we have not verified the effect. However, it is a question that we would like to answer because it could provide information to help identify the nature of the ionizing radiation being produced. We have mostly used two separation distances of approximately 6 mm, the difference between the id of a 3/4 inch pipe and the od of a 1/4 inch Cu tube (View graph 11 in the presentation), and approximately 1 to 2 mm which is the difference between the od of a 1/8 inch brass nipple and the id of a 3/8 inch brass nipple (view graph 5 in the presentation.) We have also conducted a few experiments using a larger separation distance as shown in vg 37 which was an attempt to locate the electrodes with different work functions at the separation distance where most of the ions would be produced based on the Bragg curves if the ionizing radiation is particulate. Most of our early experiments were conducted with the 6 mm spacing where we applied an external voltage to produce an electric field between the electrodes. Based on the voltages/electric field we applied, we calculated that the ions being produced would be swept out in less than 1 mS so at the sample rate of 512 samples per second, we were measuring the flux of ions being produced. When we remove the external voltage/electric field, the ion velocity is greatly reduced. Since the electric field is basically the result of the difference in work functions, our calculations indicated that it could take several seconds for the gaseous ions to transit the separation distance and during this time, the ions would be recombining at a rate of approximately 10^-6 cubic centimeters per second. With the limited amount of data and the number of variables involved, our results are not conclusive at this point.

    We are currently preparing a paper to submit to the JCMNS by 31 March which documents the presentation that was given at the workshop in honor of Dr. Srinivasan. In this paper, we hope to add an appendix based on our experimental measurements that includes an analysis of LEC performance and draws some conclusions.

  • I've used several methods to clean the surface before codeposition including lightly sanding if the surface has residue from a price sticker or something. Also placing the electrode in a solution of vinegar and salt water for a few minutes to remove oxidation. Rinse in distilled or deionized water.

    • Official Post


    Whether Cold Fusion or Low-Energy Nuclear Reactions, U.S. Navy Researchers Reopen Case

    Spurred on by continued anomalous nuclear results, multiple labs now working to get to bottom of story

    After more than three decades of simmering debate in specialized physics groups and fringe research circles, the controversy over cold fusion (sometimes called low-energy nuclear reactions or LENRs) refuses to go away. On one hand, ardent supporters have lacked the consistent, reproducible results and the theoretical underpinning needed to court mainstream acceptance. On the other, vehement detractors cannot fully ignore the anomalous results that have continued to crop up, like the evidence for so-called “lattice-confinement fusion” adduced last year by a group at NASA’s Glenn Research Center.

    Scientists at the Naval Surface Warfare Center, Indian Head Division have pulled together a group of Navy, Army, and National Institute of Science and Technology (NIST) labs to try and settle the debate. Together, the labs will conduct experiments in an effort to establish if there’s really something to the cold fusion idea, if it’s just odd chemical interactions, or if some other phenomenon entirely is taking place in these controversial experiments.


    • Official Post

    Good find Alain. It seems this LENR thing just will not go away. Many thanks to all the government scientists who have played a large role in keeping it on life support all these years. For good reason too, as they all have seen something in the lab they can not explain. As said in the article, because of their unique protected position in the science community they:

    "had a little more freedom to pursue a controversial topic".

    Good to see there are still many smart people pursuing LENR, both publicly (which we wish there were more of), and some quietly out of the spotlight...including here on the forum.

    • Official Post

    Thanks for posting this here AlainCo , I was thinking on starting a thread for commenting these very good news, but, as I was also wondering if this new initiative would be interested in replicating and studying the LEC, I think we can follow up the discussion here.

    I think this is very significative, and I really hope this doesn´t become a Google 2 history of failure to replicate the Fleischmann Pons Effect, and that they consider reaching to the LENR community and pay attention to the suggestions of the people with decades of experience on the field.

    Do we have anyone known in this team? is there a way to reach out to them? Would Frank Gordon be interested in this new team to research the LEC? Just posing the questions to kick the ball forward.

  • I realize that there is an error in the figure of my presentation at the RNBE 2020 meeting (slide 62)

    Here is how I interpret the effect observed by Frank Gordon:

    In my opinion, there is no emission of ionizing particles. There is an ionization effect of the hydrogen molecules adsorbed on the surface of the palladium, which give ions H +, H2 + and H3 + ions which diffuse in the gas phase and will be neutralized on the counter-electrode, and return and the cycle continues .

    Ionization energy is provided by down-conversion of the energy given off by LENRs.

    This is a surface reaction, with diffusion in the gas phase.

    I am not a theorist and I will not discuss the nature of these LERNs. I refer you to the excellent article by Kalman & Nagel. This is probably the best theoretical article to date. It shows that there is a whole panel of possible reactions.…_energy_nuclear_reactions

    I joint a new sketch

  • In my opinion, there is no emission of ionizing particles. There is an ionization effect of the hydrogen molecules adsorbed on the surface of the palladium, which give ions H +, H2 + and H3 + ions which diffuse in the gas phase and will be neutralized on the counter-electrode, and return and the cycle continues .

    This is one of the candidate hypoteses. And actually it is not too difficult to test: the mean free path of H+ ions from the working electrode is strongly dependent from the gas pressure. Ionizing radiation (either high energy particles or photons) have a less pronounced dependence from the pressure. A plot of the current vs gas pressure would provide a lot of valuable insight. A similar test can be done by changing the electrode distance instead of the gas pressure (I mentioned this earlier), but it would be for sure less practical.

  • I too believe in the simpler explanation. I am above all an experimenter. (Although I think experiments should be guided by assumptions)

    So, I have a reluctance to come up with new particles and new radiations.

    In the face of the amazing wonders that the universe offers to our sagacity every day (and praised be the Lord for these daily gifts) I try to find a simple explanation.

    Here, I just read an article about "Puffy Planets" in the excellent French popular science magazine "Science & Vie".…planetes-vaporeuses-61982

    These are planets larger than Jupiter, but weighing ten times less. I thought until now that these were planets with rocky cores with just enough weight to capture helium (i.e. a mass around 4 earth masses)

    We would therefore have a planet probably covered with a salty ocean and a very thick atmosphere consisting mainly of helium with a little hydrogen, the upper atmosphere of hydrogen extending to several diameters of the planet.

    But the planet KELT-11b is even stranger: its density is only 0.093 g / cm3 and this could not even be explained if the planet was made of 100% hydrogen, without a rocky core!

    Still imagine a small rocky core, agitated by intense volcanism. Every once in a while, a comet would crash into the thick atmosphere, and the dust released would then act as a catalyst for the deuterium / deuterium reaction. The energy released by the LENRs would greatly heat the atmosphere, causing turbulence that would greatly slow down the fall of dust towards the rock core. The hot atmosphere would thus swell in a disproportionate way, producing this appearance of "puffy planet".

    It is paradoxical to find in the depths of space a confirmation of our hypotheses. Closer to home, dwarf planets or moons like Ceres, Enceladus or Pluto shows signs of internal activity that are difficult to explain without involving LENRs.

    That’s why our universe is so exciting.

    • Official Post

    Here's something similar....

    What's It Like Inside Jupiter?

    It's really hot inside Jupiter! No one knows exactly how hot, but scientists think it could be about 43,000°F (24,000°C) near Jupiter's center, or core.

    An image of Jupiter, showing the great red storm.

    The reddish brown and white stripes of Jupiter are made up of swirling clouds. The well-known Red Spot is a huge, long-lasting storm. Image credit: NASA/JPL/Space Science Institute

    Jupiter is made up almost entirely of hydrogen and helium. On the surface of Jupiter–and on Earth–those elements are gases. However inside Jupiter, hydrogen can be a liquid, or even a kind of metal.

    These changes happen because of the tremendous temperatures and pressures found at the core.

  • the amazing wonders that the universe offers to our sagacity every day

    Psalm 19.2.."Day after day they pour forth speech; night after night they reveal knowledge"

    Jessica Libby Roberts

    TM 13.37" what was so surprising about these masses is that they are jupiter-sized planets but they had 1/100 the mass of Jupiter these planets are in order of say 4 or 5 earth masses instead of 300 Earth masses which is just weird"


    " we sat down we measured the mass and the the size of the cotton candy .. of course we ate the cotton candy afterwards so science is both very exciting and tasty"

    External Content
    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.

    • Official Post

    Jokes apart, Shane D. , have you heard anything new from Frank Gordon ? Enquiring minds want to know!

    Frank is finalizing his report. A couple members will review before he submits. So understandably, he has been quiet for about 2 weeks. Other than that, I have not heard about any other new replications, and those we lined up seem to prefer anonymity until their work is completed.

    Been busy with family matters, but starting tomorrow will have more time to devote to the love of my life (LF).