Macor ceramic windows are another pssibility.
What is the current state of LENR?


I know that this is very difficult.
The commercial softxray measurement tool has restriction of the tool configuration so sample setting need to be designed properly.
I think there is a little bit of expertise with some Forum members.
but you may need to show more calculations..

I am not sure about the State of
LENR but this family did an investigation into it the hard way.
Good to hear they are OK.
https://www.bbc.com/news/ukenglandlondon57825759
Another unusual investigation.
External Content youtu.beContent 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. 
Macor ceramic windows are another pssibility.
Probably safer than beryllium.

Yes, biased in favour of working to make this a more sustainable world. Biased in favour of evidencebased science, biased in favour of investigation rather than kneejerk criticism. And proud of it.
That's not what I meant. But you knew that.
I expect that everyone here feels they are biased in the ways you mention. I'm sure Ascoli65 does and that is why he says what he says in his polite, evidencebased posts. Moderators should keep this in mind.
Ascoli65's account should be unlocked forthwith together with an acknowledgment that a mistake was made when temporarily banning him.


Look at it this way Bruce; the one person most responsible for making this forum the success it has become, is Alan. So he obviously knows what he is doing. Also, you just do not know the amount of work he does behind the scenes. He is the glue that keeps much of the LENR community working together. So keep that in mind on those occasions when you disagree with him.
I like Ascoli as do you. He and I go way back to the ECN's days. He has thick skin though, and knows full well when he pushes it too far. In this case with his repetitive whining about those damn test tube bubbles....over and over for years now! We have skeptics here, and somehow they learn to coexist without driving the rest of us crazy, and he will have to do the same.
We have also had to corral a few other equally smart members who are firm LENR believers who did something similar. They handled it well (except Chernopov...will you come back please?), and hopefully Ascoli will also.
Now enough of this. Lets get back to topic.

And Ascoli's ban expires on Saturday.

And Ascoli's ban expires on Saturday.
Same for rain here...

the rain is more relevant to the current state of LENR... than this thread..currently

I think there is a little bit of expertise with some Forum members.
but you may need to show more calculations..
Thanks I will check these paper later.


I think there is a little bit of expertise with some Forum members.
but you may need to show more calculations..
According to SO(4) math the maximum 3Dcoupling of a 4D wave is halve it's energy. This can easily be understood as a 4D the wave is running
simultaneously on the 3D “visible” front side and the invisible back side with opposite rigid momentum. We see the maximum at the expected
78.37keV. This is halve the energy of a neutron 4D energy hole wave. We also see peeks at the full wave energy (156.7keV) and the corresponding
(symmetric) peek of the total release of neutron 4D excess energy release at 468.9keV.
The reaction that delivers the spectrum is running with an isotope that owns one neutron 4D energy hole wave. It can accept one more neutron 4D
energy hole wave or just couple with halve the hole wave weight. In fact the spectrum shows the coupling of the proton magnetic moment with one
neutron 4D energy hole wave. The yellow and orange rectangle (Fig.2) show just the exact numbers of peeks predicted by the proton magnetic
moment model. (Also in the next 20keV interval the number is exact.) The maximal neutron wave coupling (78keV) region of the spectrum looks
2
Neutron waves
interesting and further work is needed to better understand why some energy levels seem to couple stronger than others. The second part of the
spectrum has not yet been fully explored.
We did not yet model the neutronproton coupling, because this spectrum was a huge surprise and needs an urgent communication. We think that for
the moment it is enough prove, that we see the exact amount of the expected resonance peeks and the exact energies for the coupling neutron
waves. (between 20 and 80 keV, values in table 1 above). New instruments are needed to measure the energy range between 0 and 20keV.
Above explanation we need to wait for the nest report, the spectra is spiky and it is not clear for me.
I read the original theory but it is so difficult and they use Biot–Savart law with
https://www2.math.upenn.edu/gr…ertations/ParsleyThesis.pf
We study the generalization of the BiotSavart law from electrodynamics in the presence of
curvature. We define the integral operator BS acting on all vector fields on subdomains of the threedimensional sphere, the set of points in R4
that are one unit away from the origin. By doing so, we
establish a geometric setting for electrodynamics in positive curvature. When applied to a vector
field, the BiotSavart operator behaves like a magnetic field; we display suitable electric fields so that Maxwell’s equations hold. Specifically, the BiotSavart operator applied to a “current” V is a right inverse to curl; thus BS is important in the study of curl eigenvalue energyminimization problems in geometry and physics. We show that the BiotSavart operator is selfadjoint and bounded. The helicity of a vector field, a measure of the coiling of its flow, is expressed as an inner product of BS(V) with V. We find upper bounds for helicity on the threesphere; our bounds are not sharp but we produce explicit examples within an order of magnitude. In all instances, the formulas we give are geometrically meaningful: they are preserved by orientationpreserving isometries of the three sphere.
These are theory and I do not find the experimental data to prove directly the theory is correct. This is related to the nucleus mass.so direct evidence is the mass measurement.

The helicity of a vector field, a measure of the coiling of its flow, is expressed as an inner product of BS(V) with V. We find upper bounds for helicity on the threesphere;
There are two different definitions used for helicity among physics and math/topology. A true vortex leads to a topological higher genus (e.g. 2). Such a vortex you must scissor to flatten the connected surface. The physical definition is more relaxed and implies only that action vector and flux vector do overlap in one direction. This introduces no new mathematical structure and was a kind of quick excuse to explain missing facts in SM.
The 3 sphere has no vortex in the topological sense only some fields on it show physical helicity. This is a sign that the underlying space is not suited for the generated fields and hence we have to move to a matching space = SO(4) or O.
In the total orthogonal limit in SO(4) the Biot Savart Operator is identical to the Lorenz force. So its only used to explain the startup of additional rotations.
There are no deep electron orbits in the classical sense. The "charge mass" = "internal field energy" = 1183.1eV of the electron is given by the electron gfactor. In a nuclear bond this mass doubles for two rotation coupling.

Graphene might be better than Beryllium for the last two..
Thanks for your post.... Interesting product, but only useable up to 50°C?
We are currently investigating a MACOR window with ceramic cement or vacuum soldered bonding to stainless steel frame.
Alternatively also SHAPAL M consisting of BN and AlN for better potential gamma transistion.

but only useable up to 50°C
can't find much info... in an inert atmosphere.. 500 C should be OK...
graphene transforms to fullerene at 3000K
oxygen should be excluded for both LENR and graphene
https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.3367/UFNe.0184.201410c.1045

I understand SO(4).
(PDF) About the symmetry of the deuteron structural charge density distributionPDF  Seeking collaboration: I am looking for collaboration for further developments in approaching the proposed model of the deuteron structure within... …www.researchgate.netSO(4) physics model shows how H*H* is formed. This is the basis of all LENR. It explains why there is no neutron inside 4He and also why Deuterium is a symmetric bond. Experimental proof appended.
THe belwo is the result of SO(4) symmetry.
Note that this is the same as electron orbit theory, which is on the small hydrogen theory.
neutron is not the fundamental particle but tightly bound electronproton pair.
Actually this is the original theory of neutral particle but forgotten after the introduction of neutron as a fundamental particle.
So I thint the author of this theory knows about this and developped the theory to compatible with the old correct theory of neutron.
Note that above schematics shows that neutron with electron deep orbit, and so the theoretical study of SO(4) has the hypo of electron deep orbit to explain the neutron beta decay, so the wave function has such orbit.in the below explanation from SO(4) paper.
Thus SO(4) and electron deep orbit has the same conclusion and electron deep orbit is better than SO(4) because electron deep orbit has no hypo of its orbit but purely theoretical study show the electron deep osbit of proton. Thus elesctrondeep orbit theory is better than SO(4).


D loading in D2O electrolysis condition
The current gas reactors are operating at 600K or so...
the problem with LENR now is that neutron diffraction , gamma spectroscopy
are difficult to do from outside a hot 1 cm thick metal cylinder..
capturing 'in media res' is very difficult.
and that has been a problem for a few decades..
Do everyone know about the D loading condition with D2O??
It need the special PH to load effectively from the plating paper.
https://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/jjspe/78/12/78_1049/_pdf
めっきの脆性（水素脆性）  技術情報  MISUMIVONA【ミスミ】
【図1】に各種めっきにおける水素脆化率を示しました。電気めっきにおいては、製品を陰極にして電解するため、水素脆化の可能性は容易に想像できますが、電気を使わない無電解ニッケルめっきでも中程度の水素脆化は発生します。これは直流電気の代わりに使われる還元剤の酸化により、水素が発生するためと考えられます。
Figure. 1 shows the hydrogen embrittlement rate in various platings. In electroplating, the product is used as a cathode for electrolysis, so you can easily understand the risk of hydrogen embrittlement, but even electroless nickel plating that does not use electricity causes moderate hydrogen embrittlement. This is because hydrogen is generated by the oxidation of the reducing agent used instead of DC electricity.
一般に、酸性めっき浴の陰極電流効率が非常に高く、電流の殆どが金属イオンの還元に使われるのに対して、アルカリ性めっき浴は、陰極電流効率が低く、加えられた電流の多くが水の電気分解に使われ、水素の発生が多いためと考えられます。
In general, the cathode current efficiency of the acidic plating bath is very high, and most of the current is used for the reduction of metal ions, whereas in the alkaline plating bath, the cathode current efficiency is low, and most of the applied current is water. It is used for electrolysis and is thought to be due to the large amount of hydrogen generated.
From the information of planting of Ni, it is possible to make the metal plate with nanoparticle composite.
And the proper condition change of D2O PH can make faster D laoding.
I think this is by far better heat generation efficiency due to the potential control of composite nanoparticle.

Note that this is the same as electron orbit theory, which is on the small hydrogen theory.
You should open your eyes first! Do you see any spherical distribution of mass? There are only two torus orbits that attract the mass in Deuterium. The right side of the picture is more clear. Further you can't see the inside torus flux. So basically its one half diameter plane cut in the middle.

Do everyone know about the D loading condition with D2O
Much of current LENR doesn't do electrolysis.. the temperature /pressure limitations are severe..

So I thint the author of this theory knows about this and developped the theory to compatible with the old correct theory of neutron.
there is no old correct theory of the neutron..the neutron structure is still not understood well.since 1932
just as the proton and electron are not understood well.
this is more about the current sorry state of quantum mechanics than the current state of LENR.
the author Sardin is just saying that the conventional model is wrong...and suggests
another model.. based on the 2004 charge density readings from Lljubljana...(not CERN's smasher)
This experimental data was ignored for quite awhile before George picked it up in 2018..
probably because it conflicted with the conventional 'model'..
"
Aren't the two identical peaks of Fig.5 and 6 and the symmetry of Fig.7 better explained by a nucleus
of two protons wrapped in a bonding orbital rather than a proton juxtaposed to a neutron? Will
experimental data diverging from the standard standpoint be ignored forever? The conventional
representation of deuteron based on a proton juxtaposed to a neutron cannot lead to such a total
symmetry of the structure of the deuteron since one particle is charged and the other is neutral.""Obviously, something has not been wholly suitably conceived in regard to the atomic nucleus. In
order to solve the problem, the structure of the neutron must be reconsidered. Consequently, the
deuteron model should be revised in accordance with the experimental proofs here provided,
supporting a twoproton nucleus and a cohesive shell.The yellowred bits looklike a cut torus rather than spheres
If I saw an egg like this..I'd suspect someone stole the yolk
.. but Georges has not elaborated on that
the nature of the protonelectron bond is not ventured into with any manner of calculation..

robert bryant what prove that the red yellow area represents the 2 nucleons ?
Could not they be rather the cyan color than red/yellow something not yet defined ?
there is no old correct theory of the neutron..the neutron structure is still not understood well.since 1932
just as the proton and electron are not understood well.
this is more about the current sorry state of quantum mechanics than the current state of LENR.
the author Sardin is just saying that the conventional model is wrong...and suggests
another model.. based on the 2004 charge density readings from Lljubljana...(not CERN's smasher)
This experimental data was ignored for quite awhile before George picked it up in 2018..
probably because it conflicted with the conventional 'model'..
"
Aren't the two identical peaks of Fig.5 and 6 and the symmetry of Fig.7 better explained by a nucleus
of two protons wrapped in a bonding orbital rather than a proton juxtaposed to a neutron? Will
experimental data diverging from the standard standpoint be ignored forever? The conventional
representation of deuteron based on a proton juxtaposed to a neutron cannot lead to such a total
symmetry of the structure of the deuteron since one particle is charged and the other is neutral.""Obviously, something has not been wholly suitably conceived in regard to the atomic nucleus. In
order to solve the problem, the structure of the neutron must be reconsidered. Consequently, the
deuteron model should be revised in accordance with the experimental proofs here provided,
supporting a twoproton nucleus and a cohesive shell.The yellowred bits looklike a cut torus rather than spheres
If I saw an egg like this..I'd suspect someone stole the yolk
.. but Georges has not elaborated on that
the nature of the protonelectron bond is not ventured into with any manner of calculation..
