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

  • Has anyone tried to test for this effect?


    Electrets, like magnets, are dipoles. Another similarity is the radiant fields: they produce an electrostatic field (as opposed to a magnetic field) around their perimeter. When a magnet and an electret are near one another, a rather unusual phenomenon occurs: while stationary, neither has any effect on one another. However, when an electret is moved with respect to a magnetic pole, a force is felt which acts perpendicular to the magnetic field, pushing the electret along a path 90 degrees to the expected direction of "push" as would be felt with another magnet.


    Wikipedia- Electret

  • dry' the lead anode is 45mm away from the terbium chips in the stainless cup at the bottom, suggesting that a closer spacing might give a much higher voltage

    Wow! 45 mm! It is an enormous distance! I would love to see fraction of mA flowing in that 45 mm of air under an external small voltage! I think this will astonish a lot of people... :D

    Can you confirm that after flushing the air inside the cell with fresh air, it will take some time to rebuild-up the voltage? This would be an interesting measure of the ionization flux and ionization dynamics.

  • How far are we from someone incorporating Storms method of inserting inert calcium oxide particles into LENR fuel into the material of the LEC?

    Working on that at some point.


    Stevenson. Recovery from a direct short circuit is very quick for the terbium, I can do the 'blow' test tomorrow, I left it with a dribble of acetone overnight to reduce oxidation - which addition incidentally put the voltage up to 300mA. As you say, 45mm is a huge gap, I always had a hunch that terbium might be interesting, and the fact that this is chips with a large surface area rather than solid - and backed up by the s/steel 'cup' they are in (which it occurs to me has had many any hours of being used as a cathode in the past) the ionisation is obviously very large.


    ETA- a magnetic field has no effect on this cell, despite terbium being a lanthanide and weakly magnetic (or possibly paramagnetic).

  • Did you once ground the terbium. Does the field build up again?

    I short circuited the two electrodes - the voltage drops to zero immediately, and recovers quite quickly - in less than one minute - no matter if you do it several times in succession. This is not typical of a battery., but typical of a current source rather than a voltage source.

  • Recovery from a direct short circuit is very quick for the terbium, I can do the 'blow' test tomorrow,

    As I wrote before, the LEC does not behave as an ordinary chemical battery: a short circuit does not hurt in any ways its life and performance. This is because the "source of energy" is somewhat independent from the voltage generation stage. The blow test instead should "upset" it a little bit more, since the ionized gas is removed and it will take some time to regenerate. This will provide two very important answers: 1) a direct evidence that the gas is actually ionised inside the cell; 2) measuring the recovery curve (that should be way slower than the short circuit), it will provide some numbers to calculate the ionization flux.

    Both this kind of experiments have already been done (more or less), but your latest cell seem to be particularly well suited for them (and others).


    and the fact that this is chips with a large surface area rather than solid

    Yes, using chips to extend the surface area was a very good idea.

    BTW, since the ionizing flux seems to be quite large, you can try to do some radiation measurement inside the cell or just putting some fluorescent plastic in it, just to see (again) if something can be detected...

  • A standard AA battery cell is rated at a total energy of about 4 Watt hours.


    How much energy can a LEC cell deliver that has a similar weight?


    1/10000 or more ?

    Probably 10,000 times more. Or a million times more. But it would be impossible to test one because power is so low. The LECs now in existence produce only microwatts, about as much as a watch battery. They are far larger than a watch battery. I think they have ~100 times more mass? A watch battery lasts a year or two. So you would have to run a LEC for 200 years to equal one watch battery.


    If the power from a LEC can be boosted up to milliwatts or watts, then we can do a comparison by weight. That would be great! I would love to see that. However, there is already proof that a LEC is nuclear, and not chemical. See the discussions of the spontaneous ionization without input power. I would love to see the comparison to a battery because it would convince some people who do not understand the evidence we now have for a nuclear reaction, and it would show that the LEC may well become a practical source of energy. There are many forms of cold fusion which probably cannot be made practical, such as the original experiment with bulk Pd-D electrolysis. They are definitely nuclear fusion, but they have problems that preclude their use as a practical source.

  • They are definitely nuclear fusion, but they have problems that preclude their use as a practical source.

    There is the possibility that it's the first "macroscopic" example of second law violation, i.e. energy from a single thermal bath. Does the output energy increase with ambient temperature?


    "The "energy localization" of Ahern might therefore “a fortiori” be used to explain the ability to split the
    hydrogen molecule by some special nanostructured alloys [3], even at temperatures much lower than those normally
    required by the 4.5 eV binding energy of the hydrogen molecule (H 2 ). Our work, among others, was based, for
    several aspects, on the calculations reported in the paper [3] of S. Romanowski (1999)."


    https://www.researchgate.net/publication/254257359_Further_progressdevelopments_on_surfacebulk_treated_constantan_wires_for_anomalous_heat_generation_by_H2D2_interaction


    see also:


  • This is what i try to highlight to Wyttenbach , the heterogeneity of dimensions number and its influence according to an external reference (the place where one is).

    In the Celani's case, going from 3D to a pseudo 1D (wire) and vice versa necessarily has an impact on the phonons and their "behavior".


  • There is the possibility that it's the first "macroscopic" example of second law violation, i.e. energy from a single thermal bath. Does the output energy increase with ambient temperature?

    Yes, because the ionised gas molecules that bridge the gap between electrodes carry more energy. Frank and Harper have tested it up to around 200C. But it isn't thermal energy conversion 'as we know it' since the device is isothermal- no hot-cold junction.

  • There is the possibility that it's the first "macroscopic" example of second law violation, i.e. energy from a single thermal bath.

    The bulk Pd-D experiments produce helium in the same ratio to the heat as one D-D plasma fusion path, so it is definitely fusion. It also sometimes produces tritium, which is also proof of a nuclear reaction.


    I do not think there are any violations of the second law, macroscopic or microscopic. Anyway, all cold fusion experiments are predicated on the second law being true. The results from a calorimeter would be meaningless if the second law can be violated. You would not know whether there is energy or not. It could be heat magically going from the surroundings to the inside I suppose, like with a heat pump. A heat pump does not violate the second law, which is: "heat cannot of itself go from one body to a hotter body." With a heat pump it does not go of itself. It gets pushed, by compressing and decompressing the gas.


    As far as I know, no one has ever observed the surroundings get colder in a cold fusion experiment, but I suppose the effect would be too small in most experiments. Lately there have been several with ~16 W, which should make things palpably colder. You would see condensation or frost somewhere in the calorimetry cooling loop. On the outside of the cell, or the cooler for a flow calorimeter. A flow calorimeter constant temperature water bath usually has a thermoelectric device has to remove heat to keep the input water temperature constant. It can run in reverse to add heat when an experiment needs that. If there was a second law violation it would start adding heat. That would be strange!


    Does the output energy increase with ambient temperature?

    Not with ambient temperature. It increases with the cell temperature. If ambient is warm enough that raises the cell temperature, I suppose. Like if you were operating a cell in the engine room of a ship.

  • The bulk Pd-D experiments produce helium in the same ratio to the heat as one D-D plasma fusion path, so it is definitely fusion. It also sometimes produces tritium, which is also proof of a nuclear reaction.

    Obviously I was referring exclusively to LEC.

    "Energy localization" just helps H2 dissociation in Celani wire but cannot explain the excess heat.

    It's an important concept in heterogeneous catalysis.

    The concept of "lowering activation energy" does not explain really how catalysis works!

  • What kind of percentage would you give to the chemistry hypothesis to explain the LEC case ?

    Almost 0%. I tested "dummy" devices that were identical to the active one either mechanically and chemically, and they didn't generate voltage and current. You could explain the voltage with some very involuted chemical process involving the interaction of gas with the electrodes, but it doesn't hold against experimental data. And in any cases, as I wrote multiple times, in the LEC you have a meaningful current flowing trough air at atmospheric pressure with only a small voltage applied: no way this can be achieved by chemical means!


    Obviously I was referring exclusively to LEC.

    "Energy localization" just helps H2 dissociation in Celani wire but cannot explain the excess heat.

    It's an important concept in heterogeneous catalysis.

    The concept of "lowering activation energy" does not explain really how catalysis works!

    From what we observed I think we can exclude a catalytic effect: apparently the gas is ionised in the entire volume, not only in contact with the surface (Alan's last cell is a good example). Also, it is not only H2 that is ionised, but even air (N2 requires > 15 eV) and other gases and vapors. No known (normal) catalyzers allow for this level of "energy gains".

    Energy localization could be an explanation (as it could be for many LENR systems), but it is a bit too "qualitative" and generic to be considered and experimentally verified at this stage: how big is the localized energy peak (in eV)? Are we talking of eV, keV, MeV? Apart from the energy availability, what are the mechanism that ionize the gas employing that energy (does it exists theoretically and is it compatible with the experimental conditions)? Is it via phonons? Via electromagnetic emission? Via ballistic particles? Via byproduct of localized fusion reactions? Too many questions without answers currently... :D I prefer sticking to the experimental evidences and moving step by step, little but steady.

  • According to my understanding this is the axil daily postulate which is involved , the surface plasmon inducted by IRs.

    By " activation energy" we should understand a big hole or an electron excess locally, very similar to P/N junction but onto the entire surface and playing at Thz frequency ( IRs).

    The concept of "lowering activation energy" does not explain really how catalysis works!

  • Bad news today. My Terbium cell with the 45mm spacing was still producing voltage this morning, but down to 189mV. I reduced the spacing between electrodes to 10mm and the voltage went back up to 280 mV. This was running in a mix if air/acetone vapour.


    Then I caught one of the wires on my sleeve and knocked it all onto the floor. But I did retrieve the Terbium chips, so I can reload it properly. You may remember that initially it was only electrolysed for 3 hours- I will probably run it in electrolyser mode over the weekend for a much longer period.


    I'm building another dedicated cell for more precise experiments now - photos tomorrow.