Frank Gordon's "Lattice Energy Converter (LEC)" online Simposium video

  • The LENR-Forum team are proud to present the first of a new series of video discussions, where prominent LENR researchers meet to present, discuss and answer questions about their work. In this session we look at the LEC, a simple device that produces electricity directly, in a way which is not entirely understood. Such a device has the potential to be a game-changer, because although in its current form the electrical output is tiny it offers the possibility of creating silent, non-polluting and inexpensive batteries which never need recharging. Though that is at the moment a distant target.


    The content here is in two parts – Part 1 is a 20 minute video made by Frank Gordon and Harper Whitehouse in which they share views of a LEC device in action, and describe and run some basic tests. Part 2 is a panel discussion hosted by the forum team and introduced by Ruby Carat in which Frank and Harper answer questions. The panel includes well-known LENR researchers, from the USA Professor David Nagel and Andrew Erickson (LANL -Retired), Fabrice David and Professor Jean-Paul Biberian from France. All the scientists on the panel have direct hands-on experience of the LEC system, or in Fabrice David’s case the related Cold fusion Diode system.


    The discussion is moderated by Alan Smith, and the closing words of thanks are from our very own David Nygren. We wish to thank everyone who contributed for their help and support, both on camera and behind the scenes.




    Part 1 : UNDERSTANDING LENR – LATTICE ENERGY CONVERTER (LEC)

    External Content www.youtube.com
    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.



    Part 2 : UNDERSTANDING LENR - Panel Q&A about the LATTICE ENERGY CONVERTER (LEC)

    External Content www.youtube.com
    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.

  • This dedicated thread is for discussion of the videos published about the LEC. The other thread will remain open for replication efforts.

    I certainly Hope to see LENR helping humans to blossom, and I'm here to help it happen.

  • Very high quality, and informative production. Congratulations to the LF team of David, Alan S, Ruby for making it happen, and forum member Jeff for volunteering his editing skills. Many thanks go to the distinguished members of the panel for contributing their time, and expertise, and special thanks go to Gordon and Whitehouse for their invention, and commitment to open science.


    This is the kind of team effort that will help keep the LENR community interconnected between conferences and shorten the innovation process from concept to lab, to market. We anticipate many more to come.

  • What did I take away from this presentation? This is another example of the empirical development of technology... Dozens of talented engineers around the world invent their own devices, but they are not able to correctly explain the theory - they do not really understand how their device works... Once again, I have to state - you, talented engineers, framed Maxwell. By following it, you are relaying the misconceptions of 19th century physicists. It is sad.


  • Frank Gordon and Harper Whitehouse's results are arguably the most significant in years.



    Unfortunately, my old computer did not allow me to participate properly in this online conference and I apologize for that. I thank the organizers for inviting me.



    I am attaching the video presenting my poster at ICCF24 to remind you of my opinion on the Lattice Energy Converters :



    Direct Conversion : Replications - Fabrice DAVID - LRA - mai 2021
    Xiamen University23rd International Conference on Condensed Matter Nuclear Science (ICCF-23)June 9th-11th, 2021Poster session :Direct Conversion : Replicatio...
    www.youtube.com

  • So what are you suggesting - an array of photodiodes on a microchip which is then exposed to laser irradiation? This is rather like Leif Holmlid's experiments with the YAG lasers which are now doubled in frequency using green lasers at 535nm (I think) being a more effective means of starting the reaction Kaons-Pions-positive and negative muons derived from ultradense hydrogen or deuterium. His experiments are repeatable and he has also designed a time-of-flight experiment to selectively capture the negative muons to initiate further nuclear reactions. This discovery I believe is how cold fusion works, building up a critical mass of - muons which go on to catalyse further nuclear reactions releasing gamma radiation, free neutrons and protons.

  • Nice paper from Frank Gordon and Harper Whitehouse.


    Abstract

    Multiple implementations of a Lattice Energy Converter (LEC) have demonstrated the ability to self-initiate and self-sustain the production of a voltage and current over extended periods of time. A LEC converts the internal energy within the lattice of some materials, such as palladium, or of gases occluded within the lattice, such as hydrogen or deuterium, into ionizing radiation and electrical energy.

    Experiments include tests where the current-voltage (I-V) characteristics of the LEC were measured when an external voltage/current was applied, as well as other I-V tests where the spontaneous LEC voltage was measured as a function of temperature and resistance. LEC voltage and current has been shown to increase with increased temperature. The electrical power produced by a LEC is similar to that produced by a nuclear battery however, a LEC does not require radioactive materials. While the energy levels produced to date are several orders of magnitude below those required for most power sources, the calculated flux of ionizing radiation necessary to produce the experimentally measured voltage and current would require the equivalent of several curies of radiation.

    These results have been independently replicated by two individuals. A video of the Lattice Energy Converter presentation, from the 2021 LENR workshop in honor of Dr. Srinivasan, is available (below)


    External Content www.youtube.com
    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.


    © 2020 ISCMNS. All rights reserved. ISSN 2227-3123



    JCMNS vol 35 LEC I Gordon (002) (1).pdf

  • In the second video, they say that air lasts about a day, but hydrogen LECs continue to produce power much longer, possibly indefinitely. Frank points out that air has 0.5% hydrogen in it. Perhaps this is the source of the power, and it is used up after a day. It occurs to me that air has a great deal of water in it. Could it be that H2O reacts? Or could the ions fracture water molecules? There is a lot more water than free hydrogen in air.


    My second thought --


    They are looking for proof that this is a nuclear reaction, mainly by looking for radiation. That's a good idea, but I think the longevity and the total energy output is evidence that it is not a chemical battery. So, I suppose the only thing it could be is some sort of nuclear effect. The other proof is what Alan Smith points out: It shouldn't work at all. Or as Frank puts it: Something has be ionizing the gas.


    But has it actually produced energy far beyond the limits of chemistry? Probably. Harper Whitehouse was asked what is the longest run so far. He described a cell that has been running for 7 years continuously. However, it is a powered device. I suppose there is no error confusing input power without output, but I would like to know what is the most net energy from one of the devices that has no input.


    Is it cold fusion? Who knows! Honestly, who cares, as long as it works?

  • Ruby pointed out that the direct conversion to electricity would be an important breakthrough. It sure would! I asked Storms, and then Takahashi, how much of the nuclear reaction they thought was converting to electricity. They both estimated about 50%. The rest would be waste heat.


    50% conversion is excellent efficiency for a small device. A large combined cycle gas generator is better; ~60% efficient. An automobile scale heat engine could never be 50%. A handheld thermoelectric device to power something like a cell phone would be much lower. I think 10% at best. A cell phone needs about 2 W during a conversation, so it would produce 20 W of waste heat. That's unacceptable. It would be far too hot to hold. If the LEC is 50% efficient, waste heat would be 4 W, which would make the phone palpably hot, but not too hot. It would cool down as soon as you hang up.


    If the LEC can be made small enough, it could be used for a hearing aid battery, which outputs 1.4 mW. It could easily be used for a pacemaker battery (10 microwatts), because that is surrounded by liquid cooling fluid.


    Carnot efficiency with thermal cold fusion does not matter as much as it does with fossil fuel, because the heat costs nothing. But it does matter from the engineering point of view because -- as I said -- small devices would be too hot. I think even a portable computer would be too hot. You would not want to put a laptop on your lap. Thermoelectric devices might improve, but I doubt that small ones with a relatively low inner temperature will ever approach 50%. Thermoelectric batteries like all heat engines work better with a higher temperature difference compared to ambient, but you would not want a cell phone or laptop with a 200 deg C internal temperature. That would be dangerous.

  • ... It occurs to me that air has a great deal of water in it. Could it be that H2O reacts? Or could the ions fracture water molecules? There is a lot more water than free hydrogen in air.

    ...


    Is it cold fusion? Who knows! Honestly, who cares, as long as it works?

    A vital experiment would be to compare two LEC. LEC A, and LEC B. Fill them with air at various known humidities. See if there is a trend of more output proportional to the humidity. This would be a very telling experiment, IMO.


    You could even mask the humidity to eliminate experimenter bias.


    Perhaps easier would be a chamber with several LEC inside. The chamber humidity could be measured. LEC outputs measured. Then the air could be dried over time. Periodically retest LEC outputs.

  • Mini-LEC reactors would be unfeasable because of the high operating temperatures for ionization. So why not build a very large mega-scale reactor based on the same principles? Then use the electrical energy to charge, for instance, the Li-ion batteries of TESLA electric cars? :)

  • During the symposium they discussed efforts to detect radiation from the devices. So far they have seen nothing. I recommend putting x-ray film inside the cells, between the electrodes. Radiation is seldom detected outside of cold fusion cells, but x-ray film does show a reaction when it is placed next to the electrodes. When it is placed outside the anode, the shadow of the anode wire shows up on the film. Maybe you could put a small object between the inside electrode and the film to see a similar shadow.


    https://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/GozziDxrayheatex.pdf

  • Mini-LEC reactors would be unfeasable because of the high operating temperatures for ionization.

    As noted they work at room temperature. Perhaps they would work better at high temperatures. In that case, a low-powered, inefficient small LEC could be used for something like a cell phone battery, and hot, high efficiency LEC could be used to power an automobile.


    Then use the electrical energy to charge, for instance, the Li-ion batteries of TESLA electric cars?

    That would cost more than powering the car directly. Also, the car would still be limited to the range of the batteries. If the car can be powered by a LEC, it would have unlimited range, with new fuel being added every few years (when it leaks out or is contaminated). A LEC might need a few batteries or a super-capacitor as a buffer if the LEC takes time to reach full power.

  • It may be that a large installation would be self-heating, but currently there is no way of knowing that.

    If Storms and Takahashi are correct, and the devices convert about half of the nuclear reaction into electricity, then they would be self-heating. The temperature they reach would depend on the insulation. It would be interesting to find out if higher temperatures boost the reaction. I do not think high temperatures would improve the efficiency, converting more than half the reaction to electricity. If I understand the reactions that Storms and Takahashi think are happening, I do not see how increased temperature could cause more ions to produce electricity.


    Anyway, 50% electricity and 50% waste heat is very high efficiency compared to most heat engines. The waste heat would not be problem with most machines. A LEC automobile would need a grill and fan like a ICE gasoline motor automobile, but the grill would be smaller than with an ICE. Tesla cars have no grill. Only an air intake, because electric motors are so efficient they produce only a little waste heat.

  • It would be interesting to find out if higher temperatures boost the reaction.

    They certainly do. Frank Gordon has said as much. The reason is probably that higher temperatures increase ion mobility - as would a permanent magnetic field. Frank has performed tests at a wide range of temperatures.


    It is too early to even guess at what the relationship between electrical and thermal output might be, since we are at the moment talking just a few mW in these small systems it is probably beyond the reach of all but the most sophisticated calorimeters.


    Worth saying that the LEC is indeed simple to replicate - I have done it 3 or 4 times, as has Stevenson - he maybe did it more than that. But in my hands at least the strike rate was only about 50% - magicsound has found replication difficult or impossible so far, but there will be more replications for sure.

  • It is too early to even guess at what the relationship between electrical and thermal output might be

    Apparently it is not too early for Storms and Takahashi to speculate about it!

    since we are at the moment talking just a few mW in these small systems it is probably beyond the reach of all but the most sophisticated calorimeters.

    Yes, clearly this could not be measured yet. They were speculating based on their theories.

    Worth saying that the LEC is indeed simple to replicate - I have done it 3 or 4 times, as has Stevenson - he maybe did it more than that.

    I hope it really is simple. Sometimes, experiments seem simple at first but when several people try to replicate, they find it is not simple after all. Pam Boss's co-deposition experiments seemed simple but I do not know of any top-quality replications. Most replication attempts either failed or produced ambiguous results. That's not Pam's fault, but that's how it turned out.

  • Worth saying that the LEC is indeed simple to replicate - I have done it 3 or 4 times, as has Stevenson - he maybe did it more than that. But in my hands at least the strike rate was only about 50%

    Yes, I can confirm: I repeated the experiment a number of times and it worked almost 100% of the times (with slightly different performances but very similar features). This rate of success was so "unusual" for a LENR (or presumed so) experiment, that I also tried to make some intentional variations in order to verify if the effect would still be there: it wasn't. So I have a good confidence that I was measuring something real and not an artifact.


    The two videos were very interesting, and I was happy to know that also other people saw the same features that I observed. For example the fact that when using Fe the effect does not last more than a few days, and this duration is usual longer when using H2 instead of air (suggesting that the oxidation is the most likely killer of the effect, that in fact cannot be recovered by introducing H2). Also, I was very happy to hear from Harper that there is a cell that is active since 7 years! He explained that it is a externally "driven" cell and that it has been refilled with D2, but this makes no difference with reference to the ionization effect, that is the "prime mover" of the LEC.

    Also interesting the observation by Frank and Harper that the effect is not uniform over the active electrode surface: this is something that I also observed. There are some zones or spots that are more active than others, and that also oxideze faster than the average surface. This may be one of the reasons for the missing counting on the Geiger.