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

You are right about the fuel cell. But in a fuel cell, it is the chemical energy of the reaction of H⁺ and O ^- which drive the ionization process of hydrogen. (by displacement of the equilibrium of the ionization reaction)

In a fusion diode of Frank Gordon, there is no oxygen.

But we have clearly an ionization in our cells. It is unlikely that it is energetic particles that produce this ionization, otherwise it would require considerable radioactivity.

Palladium cathodes can release hydrogen atoms. We demonstrated this with John Giles by making a special paper that changes color in the presence of atomic hydrogen.

(https://www.researchgate.net/p…rium_by_palladium_cathode)

After loading with deuterium, a palladium cathode leaves a brown color on the paper.

But these atomic hydrogen atoms, while very reactive, are not charged.

In addition, this is a chemical reaction, and it does not last long. But Frank Gordon and the Sarasota team of Charles Entenman observes voltage and current for several weeks.

First, what ions can be present in hydrogen?

To answer this question, I will quote an article presented to Louis De Broglie in 1962 in the Proceeding of the French Academy of Sciences and signed by Pham-Din Hoï. (Paris-Sorbonne University)

(Mass spectrometer study of hydrogen given off by palladium, October 8, 1962, C.R. Acad. Sci. Pp. 1724-1756)

H⁺, H2⁺ and H3⁺ ions are released from a capillary in a mass spectrometer, and they are also released by a palladium tube, but only after ionization by an electron beam.

In the experiments of Frank Gordon, I suggest that the energy of ionization of the hydrogen atoms and molecules is given by the down-conversion of the LERN energy.

I happened to notice that a low voltage appeared in the spongy lead electrode cell when exposed to direct sunlight under an hydrogen atmosphere.

It appears that sunlight also increases the voltage in the cell containing the nanoparticulate palladium electrode. Here is how I explain this observation:

There is a photochemical ionization effect of the adsorbed hydrogen molecules, which give H⁺ , H₂⁺ and H₃⁺ ions, which diffuse in the gas phase and will neutralize on the counter electrode, and return and the cycle continues.

And in the cell containing the palladium, even in the dark, during the "Down-Conversion", before thermalization, the energy falls in the electron-volt range. It is the range of energy which allows the breaking of atomic bonds, the ionization of atoms and electronic excitation.

It is this energy which allows the appearance of a voltage in the diodes constructed with a palladium / semiconductor contact, and it is also this is energy which allows the appearance of a voltage and a current (therefore electric power) in the Entenman/Gordon diodes containing hydrogen gas.

In my opinion, we have a reaction ON THE SURFACE of the palladium: the nuclear energy released in the palladium undergoes a down-conversion, and in contact with the palladium we have the following reaction:

H ° (adsorbed) à H⁺ (gas) + e-

Et: H₂ (adsorbed) à H₂⁺ (gaseous) + e-

And Louis de Broglie and Pham-Dinh Hoï also noticed that hydrogen also formed trihydrogen (H₃) when released from palladium. And they have proven that you can ionize H₃ to give H₃⁺ . (Mass spectrometer study of hydrogen given off by palladium, October 8, 1962, C.R. Acad. Sci. Pp. 1724-1756)

We therefore have the possibility of the reaction:

H₂ (adsorbed) + H ° (adsorbed) à H₃ (adsorbed) à H₃⁺ (gaseous) + e-

Palladium therefore takes a negative charge, and the metal electrode located in front of it therefore takes a positive charge when the positive H⁺ and H₂⁺ ions (and the H₃⁺ ions) are neutralized on the opposite metal electrode with the reverse reaction.

fabrice DAVID , I think we propose the same, with the exception of the LENR energy source.

You propose there is a source of LENR energy within the palladium lattice that causes the conversion of H₂, where I suggest the catalytic behavior of palladium is converting H₂ into 2H⁺ + 2e^- (just like the platinum in a PEM fuel cell), probably consuming thermal energy from the environment.

Can you say more about your thinking about the suggested LENR energy source?

Quote from JedRothwell

The cost of deuterium does not matter, because it will fall if this device works. Most of the cost of deuterium goes to pay for the energy used to extract it.

I recollect that early on in this thread one of the configurations of this lattice energy device was said to work when filled with air. So, no need to use deuterium.

Quote from Bruce__H

So, no need to use deuterium.

Co-deposition with air hydrogen? appears to be needed

TM 06:26

Andrew Erickson replicated on november 23rd of 2020.

Andrew is one of the senior leaders at Los Alamos national laboratory

although this work was not done as part of the laboratory he did this at his home

he started with the eighth inch nipple which he co-deposited

and then put it inside a 3 8 inch brass nipple notice that he has cut a window into the brass nipple

because he hopes to be able to identify some of the ionizing radiation with sensors he has

when he did this the cell produced 115 millivolts into a 5 mm load in air

it increased to 170 millivolts when hot air was blown into the cell

we have observed similar things with our experiments.

https://www.lanl.gov/discover/…rickson-senior-fellow.php

fabrice DAVID , I think we propose the same, with the exception of the LENR energy source.

You propose there is a source of LENR energy within the palladium lattice that causes the conversion of H₂, where I suggest the catalytic behavior of palladium is converting H₂ into 2H⁺ + 2e^- (just like the platinum in a PEM fuel cell), probably consuming thermal energy from the environment.

Can you say more about your thinking about the suggested LENR energy source?

Edited 3 times, last by Rob Woudenberg (Friday, 12:13 am).

The self-polarization of fusion diodes was observed by Frank Gordon's team in San Diego as “Lattice Energy.”

After filling with hydrogen, a SPONTANEOUS voltage is measured.

What is the source of the ions in the palladium cells? We have undoubtly a lot of hydrogen ions in the gazeous phase but it is unlikely that it is energetic particles that produce this ionization, otherwise it would require considerable radioactivity.

In our experiments, I suggest that the energy of ionization of the hydrogen atoms and molecules is given by the down-conversion of the LERN energy.

What are these LENR? Perhaps the fusion reaction of the little amount of deuterium in hydrogen. (One deuterium atom per three thousand protium atoms.)

Perhaps a reaction between H and Li, or H and B. (There is always a little amount of Boron from the borosilicate glassware, and lithium contaminate the laboratory chemicals, if they are not ultrapure-level.)

There is also the reaction :

¹⁵N + H à ¹²C + ⁴He + 4.96 MeV

And as Peter Kalman and Dave Nagel showed in their last article “Understanding Nuclear Reactions” there is also a lot of three-body reactions like:

¹³C + H + third body à ¹⁴N + third body* + 7.54 MeV

Or this reaction:

¹⁴N+ H + third body à ¹⁵O + third body* + 7.35 MeV

This question of the origin of the nuclear energy remain open, but after down-conversion of Hagelstein, there is probably a “nucleochemical” ionization effect of the adsorbed hydrogen molecules, which give H⁺ , H₂⁺ and H₃⁺ ions, which diffuse in the gas phase and will neutralize themselves on the counter electrode, and return to the palladium and the cycle continues.

I noticed a similar “photochemical” ionization with spongious lead electrode exposed to direct sunlight in hydrogen gas. (Cf. last RNBE meeting 2020)

It is this energy which generate a voltage in the diodes. The results of Frank Gordon are very important because these reactions would provide a convenient way to convert the energy released by LENRs into electricity.

It will be important to reproduce all these results with perfectly sealed glass diodes, and to record the produced power during months, in order to prove the nuclear origin of the energy.

Взаимодействие с другими людьми

Quote from fabrice DAVID

fabrice DAVID , I think we propose the same, with the exception of the LENR energy source.

You propose there is a source of LENR energy within the palladium lattice that causes the conversion of H₂, where I suggest the catalytic behavior of palladium is converting H₂ into 2H⁺ + 2e^- (just like the platinum in a PEM fuel cell), probably consuming thermal energy from the environment.

This question of the origin of the nuclear energy remain open, but after down-conversion of Hagelstein, there is probably a “nucleochemical” ionization effect of the adsorbed hydrogen molecules, which give H⁺ , H₂⁺ and H₃⁺ ions, which diffuse in the gas phase and will neutralize themselves on the counter electrode, and return to the palladium and the cycle continues.

Display More

Boys! Physicists! Maybe it's enough to draw "plus signs" - "+" over "H"? Franklin, who invented this for you, of course, applauds, but he was forgiven - THEY did not know PHYSICS then ... And you are not forgiven! There is NO "positive charge" in nature! Have the courage to prove it!

The other side of the question - if a proton, during its rotation, generates only a magnetic field, then the question arises - "why is there no such substance in nature in which three protons are connected by magnetic forces at once?" What hinders this process ??? Have you ever thought about it ??? Another question - a very unpleasant question - Why does a free neutron decay, and a neutron that "sits" in a stable element - or in a stable nucleus, does not decay for any length of time ??? The third question - Why is the electron so far from its proton in the atom ??? The distance from an electron to a proton is a million times greater than the size of a proton ... And the other side of the question - "What FORCE does not allow an electron to come closer to a proton?" This FORCE is opposed to the convergence of a proton and an electron! I answer ... This FORCE with the code name "secondary magnetic field" - it is this force that tears the neutron apart during its decay, and it is this force that keeps the electron away from the proton ...

If the protons had a "Maxwellian electric charge", then there would be no nuclei in nature, since there would be repulsive forces ... But there is NO "Maxwellian electric charge" in nature, and therefore the nuclei are collected due to the magnetic forces that generate rotating protons.

Quote from fabrice DAVID

In our experiments, I suggest that the energy of ionization of the hydrogen atoms and molecules is given by the down-conversion of the LERN energy.

The LENR energy amounts to ~20 Mev.

if one assumes that fusion is the reaction..

Other possiblities with 7.54 ,7.35 eV

The ionisation energy of H is measured as 13.6 eV...

In this millionfold downconversion

is there any ideas on the nature of the intermediate steps ?

Quote from RobertBryant

The LENR energy amounts to ~20 Mev.

if one assumes that fusion is the reaction..

Other possiblities with 7.54 ,7.35 eV

The ionisation energy of H is measured as 13.6 eV...

In this millionfold downconversion

is there any ideas on the nature of the intermediate steps ?

Display More

Down-Conversion is an important problem for theorists.

I trust Peter Hagelstein, he says it's possible.

But the problem is even more acute in explaining the FP (excess heat) effect. Indeed, the thermal stirring energy at room temperature is just 0.0259 eV!

kT = (8.6174x10-5 eV/K) (300 K) = 1/40 eV

But what is important is that the energy required to cross the Coulomb barrier for a hydrogen nucleus is about 5 keV.

So if there is transmission of 24 MeV of the fusion energy of two deuterium to a third body by the Nagel / Kalman process, a single fusion can result in 24,000 / 5 = 4,800 other fusion events ! (This is obviously a maximum theoretical estimate)

Quote from fabrice DAVID

So if there is transmission of 24 MeV of the fusion energy of two deuterium to a third body by the Nagel / Kalman process, a single fusion can result in 24,000 / 5 = 4,800 other fusion events ! (This is obviously a maximum theoretical estimate)

This is blatant classic SM nonsense. H-H cannot fusion due to missing internal charge. No energy can replace this. There is no coulomb barrier for the D-D reaction this is fake information from kinetic experiments. D-D needs a place of low dimensionality and low pressure to reached the spin alignment state. As you see the opposite is true. Removing energy is catalyzing fusion.

Yes, of course, with an energy released of 24 MeV, I wanted to talk about the fusion of two HEAVY hydrogen nuclei.

I have a vial of heavy water in front of me, and I can testify that the Coulomb Barrier actually exists, and it is fortunate for my neighbors.

Regarding light hydrogen, I have listed some possible reactions above.

The important thing is that this fusion energy can be used by a Lattice Conversion Energy.

It's much easier to do than calorimetry. I suggest you try to replicate Frank Gordon's results.

In this regard, here is my poster that I present to ICCF 23:

http://ikkem.com/iccf23/PPT/IC…-28%20David%20Poster.pptx

Quote from fabrice DAVID

the Coulomb Barrier

this is the conventional wisdom..since around 1936

there is some barrier obviously

that stops protons fusing willy nilly

but even in 2021 we still have no exact model of the proton

or of deuterium

all 'we '.. the collective conventional physicists have is the ability to 'exactly' calculate the ~24 Mev by

looking at mass difference.... which 'we' call "binding energy"

how and why fusion happens 'we' really don't know

Hi all!

Today I completed the tests on the control devices, measuring voltages and currents with hydrogen instead of air. The results were almost the same:

• Open circuit voltage: 0 mV +- 0.025 mV, independently from metals and pressure used
• Current @ +-60V: 0 uA (+- 90 pA), independently from metals and sighly decreasing with pressure

So the results are now complete and quite robust: a device with the structure of the LEC, with an untreated electrode, does not generate a spontaneous voltage and, most important IMO, is not capable of conducting a meaningful current (in its normal working voltage range). This behaviour is not affected by the emplyed metals, by the gas (air and hydrogen tested), and gas pressure (range tested 300 to 760 Torr). The behaviour of the control device is exacly the one expected from the theory. A spontaneous voltage and the capability of conducting a current of the original LEC device, cannot be explained by galvanic or other bimetallic effects or by electrochemical potentials, since all these elements should be present also in the tested control devices.

Here attached you can find some picture of the devices: the basic brass-brass one, also disassembled, the brass-copper and the brass-aluminium.

Next (very important) step: replicating the eletroplating process and testing an "active" device!

Quote from Curbina

Stevenson , thanks for sharing these important steps with us. Are you going to do the electroplating yourself, have you done it already or you are waiting for some component or material to be delivered to you yet? Sorry for the questions, just curious.

Hi Curbina! Yes, I will make electroplating by myself, and I already have more or less all the materials and equipment needed to start. In the past month(s) I spent some time excercising with the process (I made many electrochemical experiments in the past, but not electroplating, that requires a good dose of skill or at least good thechnique...). I finally obtained quite good results, so now I'm relatively confident. I will start with iron, since it is probably simpler and for sure cheaper: I tested a "recipe" that turned out to be the same suggested by Frank. Later I will also try with nickel (I'm still waiting to receive some Ni strips).

I'm aware that in the electroplating process and in the post-treatements there are a huge number of (hidden) variables, so it will be not easy to get good results immediately. But we have to try if we want see what happen...

EDIT: the measurements on the control devices are very repeatable and the resolution I achieved allow me to see phenomena that are order of magnitudes smaller that the one reported by Frank et al. So, if there is something "unusual", some "vital sign", even very small, I will probably spot it.

I want to express my thanks an appreciation for the rigor that James Stevenson has used. Just as important as replicating our LEC results is proving experimentally that the LEC results can not be produced by bare electrodes or other means.

Also, a LEC presentation scheduled for next Wednesday morning at the ICCF-23 conference in Xiamen, China. In the San Diego time zone, the presentation is 7:20 pm on Tuesday. This morning, the conference organizers posted the 15 minute LEC presentation on the conference web site so people could watch it at a convenient time in their time zone. Harper Whitehouse and I will be online live during the 5 minute Q&A after the presentation. The conference web site is"

http://ikkem.com/iccf-23.php

and the web link to the LEC presentation on the page listing speakers and is:

http://ikkem.com/iccf23/PPT/In…0ICCF%2023%20LEC%20T5.MP4

We are also responding to a few comments by the reviewer for a paper that will be published in the JCMNS.

Thanks again to James and to all who are interested.