Yes, but one thing is Clean Planet saying it and a completely different thing is hearing Iwamura himself confirming it.
IWAHLM Conference September 25th 2022
-
-
I've just got around to watching Iwamura's presentation. And yes, it is very interesting.
Unfortunately I suspect the "commercialisation" activities will cause problems (although I do hope I am wrong).
The idea of "scaling up" a process, when the available models are still lacking, can cause problems for any industrial process. It usually means that people are relying more on luck rather than solid design principles - so the results can be disappointing.
I do feel that the whole field of CF, LENR (and now QHE) has suffered from the "gold rush effect" - with "free heat!" being the modern equivalent of how the work of honest alchemists was continually hampered by people's obsession with the possible creation of "free gold!".
It means that researchers (in any field) are pushed into trying to create the "big thing" that other people want - which becomes a distraction from the main purpose of their research, which is to get a better understanding of the way the world works. After all, once there is a more detailed understanding of the processes involved, then we should know if it is possible to create "the big thing" in a cost effective, and resource effective, manner.
Alchemy got a very bad name - as there were alchemists who claimed to be able to make gold, and there were people willing to fund them to make it. And when it turned out that those particular alchemists were unable to create the promised gold, they were accused of fraud by their backers - whose greed had allowed themselves to be seduced. Of course I'm sure that some of the old alchemists definitely were fraudsters. But there were many more who were just honest researchers who allowed themselves to be drawn into business ventures that had nothing to do with real research - and everything to do with a bunch of rich crooks wanting to make themselves richer, by any means.
-
The idea of "scaling up" a process, when the available models are still lacking, can cause problems for any industrial process. It usually means that people are relying more on luck rather than solid design principles - so the results can be disappointing.
I agree to a great extent, however we used fire for millennia before getting to know what it was.
In the particular case of Clean Planet they are banking on the results of a multi year project that achieved the basic threshold of repeatabilty and consistency. They can light the fire every time, and want to make a bigger fire. Once the repeatability threshold of an effect is met, no matter what is the underlying phenomena, it becomes more an engineering endeavor to make practical use of it.
At some point we will develop a better understanding that will make the first commercial machines look like a soot covered cauldron by comparison, or like the first mainframe computers compared to our handheld smartphones. Getting to commercialization phase is what defines innovation and sets it apart from research and development, and this is the formal definition, of innovation as I was taught it.
-
In the particular case of Clean Planet they are banking on the results of a multi year project that achieved the basic threshold of repeatabilty and consistency. They can light the fire every time, and want to make a bigger fire. Once the repeatability threshold of an effect is met, no matter what is the underlying phenomena, it becomes more an engineering endeavor to make practical use of it.
I agree - except, to me, it still looks as if the energy is obtained by fracturing (consuming) refined metal atoms - which might make any sensible EROI unfeasible.
And yes, we burned wood for millennia - but the process was amenable to easy trial and error experimentation, which allowed people to build up a reliable set of rules, even though they had no idea what fire was, and had no concept of oxidation.
I'm very fond of the aphorism that was popularised by the statistician George Box:
"All models are wrong, but some models are useful"
This applies to all physical systems, as well as statistics - although many people do not realise it. We make our decisions according to the available models, and if the results are as we expect then we tend not to care that they are wrong. e.g. Many of the early theoretical work on heat engines was was carried out using the "caloric theory of heat". But the formulae derived by people such as Sadi Carnot have proved to be very useful - and are still used to this day - even though the caloric theory was subsequently replaced by the kinetic theory of heat.
It is true that commercialisation is a major driver of technology - but development doesn't move in a straight line. There are plenty of "dead end" technologies, that have been superseded before reaching pay-back. And there are some technologies that still attract a lot of development money, but show no sign of ever reaching pay-back (such as hot fusion).
-
I agree to a great extent, however we used fire for millennia before getting to know what it was.
It might be possible to develop cold fusion by trial and error. However, it might end up being somewhat unpredictable and dangerous. I think modern society is less tolerant of danger and operating things by unknown principles than it used to be. In the 1920s, we had airplanes that frequently crashed, yet many people were willing to fly. Nowadays that would never be allowed. When radium was first discovered, people went ahead and celebrating waste drinks and radium painted watches, before they realized how dangerous this stuff is. That would never happen today.
Measured per passenger mile, self driving cars are already safer than human driven cars. But people are complaining because there have been a few accidents with them. People demand much higher safety from new products that from the existing products they replace. This makes perfect the enemy of good. It is a little irrational but I get that we want new technology to be much better in safety than the old. It is understandable. It is natural to fear new technology. I would be uneasy riding in a self driving car, even though intellectually I know it is safer than a car that I drive.
-
It might be possible to develop cold fusion by trial and error. However, it might end up being somewhat unpredictable and dangerous. I think modern society is less tolerant of danger and operating things by unknown principles than it used to be. In the 1920s, we had airplanes that frequently crashed, yet many people were willing to fly. Nowadays that would never be allowed. When radium was first discovered, people went ahead and celebrating waste drinks and radium painted watches, before they realized how dangerous this stuff is. That would never happen today.
Measured per passenger mile, self driving cars are already safer than human driven cars. But people are complaining because there have been a few accidents with them. People demand much higher safety from new products that from the existing products they replace. This makes perfect the enemy of good. It is a little irrational but I get that we want new technology to be much better in safety than the old. It is understandable. It is natural to fear new technology. I would be uneasy riding in a self driving car, even though intellectually I know it is safer than a car that I drive.
I agree with you, and we see Iwamura being very aware of this while commenting they use the Quantum Hydrogen Energy denomination to avoid the use of the not well received “Nuclear” term. Japan is also known for having a high proportion of early adopters, which is also a thing to keep in mind.
-
Bob Greenyer not only had an active participation on the Q&A sessions after the presentations at IWHALM, but he also gave a presentation, somehow I have missed it in the live feeds, but he recorded it and will share also the slides. You can see it here:
ULTR - A simple quick and repeatable demonstration of the LENR processInternational Society for Condensed Matter Nuclear Science conference 15 Sep 2022remoteview.substack.com -
I reccommend you slow down the video frame rate on YT when watching bobG - he talks too fast.
Well, he went on at full speed. I reckon he has now amassed perhaps more than 500 hours of video that are a mixture of lecture and online study with the people that tunes in during the live video sessions, all of them talking about these topics, reading papers live, analyzing samples live, and I have probably watched less than 50 of those hours, so I understand he tried to convey as much as he could in these few minutes but was impossible to get to the bottom of it.
The key take away, if one could summarize all of this in a few sentences, is that the Universe works in a way that is completely different as what we think we know, and LENR is where one starts to realize about it, and the possibilities are endless. The ULTR experiment is a way to begin to see one of the multiple facets of it.
Remember that the MFMP started by replicating the work of Celani, 10 years ago.
-
Alexandrov on constantan.. I can't find the video..
but there is something from Sofia
"On 20.09.2022 (Tuesday) at 10:30 a.m. in the conference hall of the Library and Information Center of TU-Sofia, a lecture was held by the guest lecturer Prof. Dr. Dimitar Alexandrov on the topic "Entering the hot stage of cold nuclear fusion ". Professor Dimitar Alexandrov is on a visit to TU - Sofia in connection with a project under the Erasmus+ program,
Successfully performed replicable experiments about cold nuclear fusion reactions in constantan specimens are reported. These experiments were performed successfully thanks to the initial author's research in the field of cold nuclear fusion as the corresponding results were partially published in the International Journal of Energy Research, 45(8), pp.12234-12246 (2021). Two types of experiments were performed: i) Several replicable experiments were performed at an initial temperature of 950 0C of the constantan wires. In all experiments, explosive evaporations of the wires occurred momentarily after the beginning of the interactions of these wires with deuterium gas (D) injected in the chamber. The copper metal release was observed in the experiments. The released excess momentary power was at least greater than 3400W, the density of this power was at least 2280 W/g in terms of the constantan wire and the ratio (Released Excess Power)/(Initial heating electrical power) ≈ 15 and greater. No external radiation was registered. ii) A lot of replicable experiments were performed at initial temperatures of the constantan wires in the range 660 0 C – 690 0C as the specimens were not destroyed during the experiments and they were used in other further experiments. The heated constantan wires interacted with injected deuterium gas (D) having room temperature and certain pressures for different experiments. The temperatures of the constantan wires began to increase at ~8 seconds after the beginning of injection of the deuterium gas and additional increases with 300 0 C – 316 0C for different experiments were reached at ~25 seconds. The released excess power was in the range 158W – 179W, the density of the released excess power was in the range ~105W/g – 119W/g in terms of the constantan wire and the ratio (Released Excess Power)/(Initial heating electrical power) ≈ 2.7 for different experiments. No external radiation was registered. Although no external radiation (gamma rays and neutrons) was registered, the observed released excess power was of nuclear origin due to the following proofs: a) The observed released excess power was not of electrical origin, because the parameters of the heating circuit remained unchanged during the experiments; b) The observed release of excess power of chemical origin was ~0.18% of the total released excess power; c) Significant density of the released excess power in terms of the mass of the constantan wire; and d) Registered release of helium (3He and 4He). The corresponding presentation will be based mainly on short video clips and on pictures proving the successfully performed cold nuclear fusion experiments reported in this abstract.
-
and I have probably watched less than 50 of those hours,
What observations did this exposure to EVO lure reveal to you?
-
I uploaded another IWAHLM paper:
http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/SmithAthelecdevi.pdf
Try chanting "IWAHLM, IWAHLM, IWAHLM . . ." It has a mystical feel, like eating bean jam buns in the dark, as Sanshiro said.
